HowlingBAPGroyper ⨀⨁

Collection of my 🧵s on metaphysics, wherein I explore our philosophical inheritance as well as detail my own work on metaphysics:

Joke is that it's normal to enjoy benefit and not enjoy detriment. Almost feels like bait but maybe he genuinely thinks in-group preference is evil (a nonexistent thing). I doubt he enjoys jokes at his own expense, yet does enjoy making jokes at someone elses

"So which is it?"

@LisanAlMarlboro Second sentence of the post; if there are valid matters pertaining to racial interest—they should be prioritized. Sadly, optics cannot be micromanaged and efforts to do so are impotent, so your choices are a barrage of disavowals or critically focusing on real issues that surface

@metamundanity That guys retarded and he will make white ideology look stupid in the public eye, fuentes is also retarded because he's doing the same thing by constantly saying retarded shit and never taking a serious step in any direction.

Sorry but at this point I'm not sure that this endless autoimmune attack strategy is effective. Relevant matters of racial interest in the situation take priority over (valid) objections to conduct.

@Anarseldain Detractors feel more strongly about their tastes than the racial interests you get at here. Sad!

No White man should ever be subject to some third-worlder’s chimp rage for just saying some magic no-no slur, and even the most retarded, chimpish racist on the planet shouldn’t be legally raped because he defended himself from a murderous thug. That’s ALL this is about.

Where there are relevant matters of racial interest and your instinct is to assert your tastes (exclusively, though neither excludes the other by necessity), you're just indulgent.

This isn't just a matter of blacks being violently reactive to magic words (nıɡɡеr), it's a matter of legal jeopardy. We cannot accept a legal landscape in which we cannot defends ourselves from black violence.

You can be against Chuds behavior, think it's unbecoming etc, but if you fail to identify accompanying facts that are relevant to White interests, such as black licensure to harm us over sounds, and elevate those matters over your high-browing—then you're not a racialist.

@ImperiumFirst When a situation presents valid pro-White points that can be taken, and you choose to high-brow instead (unproven strategy), people get mad. The reframe is crazy, it's not about high-browing as such, but high-browing *instead*

Nick Fuentes calls out the double standard of wignats and Chud the Builder "How many out and proud White people are saying 'indians are јееtѕ' and 'blacks are ո*ggеrѕ'—and they don't want to hear anything negative about Whites!"

There is a spiritual conflict taking place between people who are so mindraped by the last six decades that they view the violent animals who walk among us as an immutable fact of life around whom every facet of life must be centered vs those who refuse to accept that Whites are forever to live one unlucky encounter away from taking a knife to the neck or being kicked to death by changing consumer habits Everyone White pushing the idea that Dalton got what he “deserved” because he was “looking for trouble” has abdicated whatever spirit of greatness they once had. And every black pushing that idea belongs in a cage—or worse I never consented to the presence of animals in my nation, much less sacred animals with special rights who blight everything they touch and who wouldn’t even survive without parasitically draining the wealth created by Whites. None of us did. We have been made into second-class citizens, subservient to the noble Negroes, tax cattle to support a world which none of us want I never consented to the requirement that I tiptoe around the niggers lest I get what I “deserve”. Let me tell you, if people are to get what they deserve, it will begin with blacks. And they’re not going to like it

@GenZPatriotz Despite other commenters (correctly) correcting you, the sentiment is nonetheless accurate

I just had to watch my co-racials fail in reading apprehension under a black guys post

@Aliathewhite I don't understand where this reframe is coming from (presumably a rhetorical convenience), expressing discontent with being held hostage by the magic word (nıgger) ≠ proclaiming that Chud is an activist.

The Chud incident really seems to have brought all the retards out of the woodwork too. Look, it’s fine if you enjoy the obnoxious, antagonizing antics of the redneck Johnny Somali. But let’s not kid ourselves and pretend he’s some kind of free speech hero. Do I think Chud should’ve been attacked by blacks and even Whites over a word? Absolutely not. But he knew exactly what he was walking into when he signed up for this. He's lucky he's not dead.

@FeelsGuy2003 Prove evil exists without resorting to faith deference

If he was an actual martyr and was getting hate for doing the right thing, I would have nothing but empathy for him. But going up to random people on the stream and antagonizing them isn’t heroic, it’s foolish and evil. You reap what you sow.

@FeelsGuy2003 You can say it dude it won't spawn one in behind you

Throwing your life away to call people the n-word isn’t brave actually.

@CBHeresy Support for defending yourself with deadly force when the threat is commensurate is a pretty popular opinion actually. No reasonable person would say, "you just have to let them assault and possibly kill you dude, you said 'faggot'."

No you cannot attack someone for calling you a ‘n*gger,’ but I also know for a fact that if I went to the rural western town my wife is from and started calling the cowboys in town there ‘f*ggots’ they would kick my ass and I wouldn’t be looked at favorably if I shot one back.

@captive_dreamer This is reducibly an affirmation of willingness to defend himself with deadly force. It's unacceptable that the course of our lives can be determined by emotional appeals to blacks. Not that I disagree necessarily, he may well suffer that fate.

What do you think a prosecutor is going to do with this? C'mon

On chud the builder since people are seething in my replies: No, blacks shouldnt be able to assault you over a word and they shouldn't be allowed to shoot your dog. Given chuds history of posting about violence towards black people, it's very stupid for him to go out and instigate fights for donations on streams. If he was assaulted and defended himself, he deserves to be exonerated. You people are trying to make him into Rosa Parks for white people and it's just a fundamental misunderstanding of how the Civil Rights revolution worked. It's not going to work like that, this isn't how things change. People are trying to make this into some statement of political activism when it's just garbage tier entertainment like Johnny Somali and nobody thinks he's some political Savant. Multiple things can be true and you need to understand how these things will be framed. This isn't some guy who yelled a slur at a black dude and got attacked, he's got a long history of violent threats and prosecution will point to that. And of course saying a slur should not be something that justifies people assaulting you.

When you can't decide which superstitions you should use to substantiate your feelings on a matter so you just use both for good measure

@CBHeresy Hello, maybe you can clear this up for me - if I say the word "nıgger" and one such a nıgger decides to attack me, do I have to just let that happen orrrr?

Good luck explaining a self defense shooting when you walk around calling black people “n*ggers” for clicks.

@planefag @imtweetn "If you assault me for saying magical bad words (legal) I will shoot you (legal)" "ERM. Premeditated murder much???"

@imtweetn y'all ain't too fucking bright

That Chud guy handled the prosecutors office an awful lot of evidence for premeditation. If you're doing everything in your power to instigate a fistfight so you can end it with a gun, have said as much outright, and have documented your repeated history of doing so, you're hosed