#1 Linder Thread

[Alex Linder]

https://alinderblog.blogspot.com/201...edia-cant.html

[Robbie Key]

What's 'brave' about partaking in a media-induced hysteria where you portray yourself as a victim? (legit rapes notwithstanding)

Always this word. 'Brave'.

[Alex Linder]

Originally Posted by Robbie Key

What's 'brave' about partaking in a media-induced hysteria where you portray yourself as a victim? (legit rapes notwithstanding)

Always this word. 'Brave'.

it's like marginalized or coming out. all pushed by MSM, the boss pretending to be a 'brave' 'marginalized' 'voice' daring to speak out

the left can only conceive of itself as an outsider/rebel. it's a tactic for jews but a psychological thing with white leftists

[Sean Gruber]

For obvious reasons, low types like to see themselves as "the underdog," no matter their objective status financially etc.

"When I look into the eyes of that poor black juvenile delinquent who was convicted of rape and murder, I see myself when I was fifteen years old, working for my father's movie theater and sneaking free reads of the comic books in Mr. Horowitz's drugstore. That young man grew up on the street, I grew up on the street...we will always rebel against the power!"

[Alex Linder]

posting some on blog. spent couple hours talking to an academic writing a study on alt-right. going to record with Jan tomorrow. shifted some equipment, so i'll be starting a new audio series soon, i have tested the new recorder, seems to work.

[Robbie Key]

[saw that you gabbed Griffin's article on alleged Trump accomplishments. I remember when you debated him back in 2012 iirc, he's matured a lot since then. let's just say that. one of the best commenters on the alt-right nowadays.]

- Illegal immigration is way down.

Illegal immigration plunged in the first half of 2017. This wasn’t due to any major policy change. It was a temporary change in behavior on the part of illegal aliens. It seems their initial fear of the Trump administration has abated because illegal immigration has since returned to Obama levels.

Am I the only one who thinks that 'illegal immigration' is sort of a catch phrase that sounds bad (in the sense that you'd get worried or the like) and captures a lot of attention but completely fails to point out the real problem? Really feels like something that has been trotted out by a certain (((someone)))... It is supposed to make the naive public believe that all the evil people are here due to 'illegal immigration' when that is not the truth at all. They are here both due to illegal and legal immigration and they are a detriment to our society because that is in their biology. Nothing with being 'illegal' or 'legal'.

[Alex Linder]

made a decision last night. i'm going to refocus my blog entirely on christianity vs racialism. for general news, i will make comments on threads here. lately i've been listening to a lot of jones on youtube; it furthers my instinct that all the mentation devoted to IQ among racialists should have been directed at christianity, and the effects it has on our race, particularly on our self-conception, our ability to perceive enemies, grasp their nature, and the ways we defend ourselves.

christianity is not The enemy, that is jews, but it is a powerful, long running, extremely sophisticated set of beliefs that is more extensive and long lasting among our people than any other way of looking at the world. i believe it is the reason we are unable to defend ourselves.

[Alex Linder]

Am I the only one who thinks that 'illegal immigration' is sort of a catch phrase that sounds bad (in the sense that you'd get worried or the like) and captures a lot of attention but completely fails to point out the real problem? Really feels like something that has been trotted out by a certain (((someone)))... It is supposed to make the naive public believe that all the evil people are here due to 'illegal immigration' when that is not the truth at all. They are here both due to illegal and legal immigration and they are a detriment to our society because that is in their biology. Nothing with being 'illegal' or 'legal'.

if it's illegal, it's not immigration. so as a term, it's dishonest. like every other term commonly employed in jewsmedia. like shit people invading a country is some minor technical problem, like missing a rubber stamp in your entry book.

the cucks have long promoted in the mind of Joe Middle Class this bogus distinction, as you note, between illegal and legal. "I'm not a against immigration, just illegal immigration." But the law change in 1965 made 90% of legal immigration colored. That changes the racial nature of the country, and everything else along with it. That's the real objection. How did a law the majority of people don't want get passed? Because politicians are owned not by the people but by the contents of jewish wallets.

White America is what we want. Colored America is what we don't want. How did we go from one toward the other? That's an answer only white nationalism can provide.

[notmenomore]

Originally Posted by Alex Linder

...all the mentation devoted to IQ among racialists should have been directed at christianity, and the effects it has on our race, particularly on our self-conception, our ability to perceive enemies, grasp their nature, and the ways we defend ourselves.

christianity is not The enemy, that is jews, but it is a powerful, long running, extremely sophisticated set of beliefs that is more extensive and long lasting among our people than any other way of looking at the world. i believe it is the reason we are unable to defend ourselves.

Simpson dealt with this issue extensively (and well) in WWWM. Also the old Marcus Eli Ravage pieces, although they are much more visceral and less academic:

https://archive.org/details/MarcusEl...AgainstTheJews

https://archive.org/details/CommisaryToTheGentiles

The Ravage pieces are just for starters, of course, whereas Simpson's essays drill down to the ultimate basis of Christianity's poison for the West: its failure to involve the dual code, its exclusive insistence on individualism, and its total refusal to acknowledge the final and primary importance of the NATION. Simpson has pretty much covered the subject, but review in the contemporary tongue and times will be good, too. Go for it.

[littlefieldjohn]

Alex Linder

If it's illegal, it's not immigration. so as a term, it's dishonest.

Great ; a few honest words explode the myths of the nation-killers.

[Robbie Key]

Originally Posted by littlefieldjohn

Alex Linder

Great ; a few honest words explode the myths of the nation-killers.

Yes, if 'immigration' is to be a meaningful term it should be about somebody lawfully and legally entering another country for the purpose of settling there for a long time, possibly for life, with all with that entails, including having a job, paying taxes and so on.

If these requirements are not met, it is invasion.

Atleast in a sensible world, but our countries let in scum by the standards (the supposed legality) I just set up and they're posing a danger to us so it is all futile, really. It's not about fulfilling some technicalities that are written in some law, as Mr. Linder correctly points out.

[Alex Linder]

Originally Posted by notmenomore

Simpson dealt with this issue extensively (and well) in WWWM. Also the old Marcus Eli Ravage pieces, although they are much more visceral and less academic:

https://archive.org/details/MarcusEl...AgainstTheJews

https://archive.org/details/CommisaryToTheGentiles

The Ravage pieces are just for starters, of course, whereas Simpson's essays drill down to the ultimate basis of Christianity's poison for the West: its failure to involve the dual code, its exclusive insistence on individualism, and its total refusal to acknowledge the final and primary importance of the NATION. Simpson has pretty much covered the subject, but review in the contemporary tongue and times will be good, too. Go for it.

Good points, I've read them both. There's a lot more than can be said, re dispensationalism and biology denial. There are multiple levels at which christianity perverts the white mind out of healthy channels.

[RickHolland]

The right-wing libertarians and anarcho-capitalists are almost all on these digital money driven platforms and making some good quick bucks at it but I never see any "hate"or some divisive political opinions in it. It is something artificial, filtered, inclusive and "lovely". If you don't play their "friendly" game right there are no big shekels for you. Only by using the search function can you dig some WN stuff from obscurity.

https://d.tube//

https://steemit.com

https://www.dlive.io/#/

https://d.tube/#!/v/jeffberwick/6gucut8v

[RickHolland]

I am a cis, mostly straight Ashkenazi Jewish man from Israel, which is the local equivalent of being a white dude. So I know whereof I speak when I say this: #banmen. Because we're trash.

If the past couple of years have shown us anything, they have shown us this: Men will take advantage of their power in a plethora of vile ways, from the subtle to the extremely unsubtle. Because we're trash.

At this point, some of you may want to call me a "self hating man." I'm not. Despite anxiety and occasional bouts of depression, I like me. But if you were gonna write that? I probably don't like you. Because why? Because you're trash.

Now let's get this out of the way. #notallmen. Okay? Does anyone still need to be told that when someone says "men are trash" they don't mean "every single man on the planet is trash"? If you do. Here it is.

It is at this point that you may want to write about how if someone wrote "women are trash," I'd be there to condemn them, and doesn't that say I'm sexist? Well, no. Because criticizing the privileged and making fun of them (us) for being trash is not the same as criticizing the marginalized and making fun of them. Because structures of power exist in society, and we don't live in a vacuum. Which is good, as we would all die.

That sure was a lot of caveats, huh?

Here's the thing. Due to being physically stronger, on average, men have established a dominant position is most societies a long time ago, and haven't relinquished them. Most CEOs are men. Most high ranking politicians are men. And it's not because of a gap in ability. It's because of a gap in opportunity, both overt and covert.

Let's talk about the covert stuff, because if you're not aware of the overt part I really don't think we can have a productive discussion.

If a man harasses a woman and faces no repercussion, the result will often be that the woman will walk away. From the company, from the industry. Because when you've experienced that a system is rigged against you, you are likely to decide not to participate in that system. When people say "oh, but we'll lose that dude's great talent," they're ignoring the great talents of women who were never given a shot because of that dude.

And so I return to my previous modest proposal: Ban men. Not from society as a whole. Not from any industry. Just from positions of power. And not forever. Let's give it 5 years and see where it goes, okay?

Or we could try, collectively, to not be trash. But I'm not gonna hold my breath for that one.

https://steemit.com/life/@didic/ban-men

[Alex Linder]

very interesting, have learned a boatload last couple weeks. my impression is we're going to see the same thing with cryptocurrency we saw with the internet generally. the feds/jews are going to watch it grow wild and free and making people lots of money, and then when they're all used to it, they'll pass rules, put out their own coins, and try to rein it in, just as they're doing with internet the last couple years. that's the arc of the next fifteen years, say

[Alex Linder]

the new technologies make government obsolete. i said that probably back in 2000. but they also make seamless control possible.

it comes back to human nature: the tech liberates them, gives them freedom, proves transactions, but it can also be used to track people down to the atoms.

it's like i also been saying for decades, decentralized government is inherently pro-white and centralized government is inherently anti-white

libertarian is fully racist but only at the level of the individual. it makes for the stronger individual, because he doesn't look to others (non-losers) to do what he should be able to do for himself. but when a race is under attack by other races, it must come together to defend itself, there's no other way. and that truth the libertarians refuse to acknowledge

[RickHolland]

YouTube's Days Are Numbered - D.Tube Is THE Blockchain Solution To Censorship!

YouTube's Days Are Numbered - D.Tube Is THE Blockchain Solution To Censorship!

What Is DTube? - Why It Can Replace YouTube!

What Is DTube? - Why It Can Replace YouTube!

[Robbie Key]

Have you ever heard or seen a woman being engaged in a long and sincere discussion on something serious without having to throw in a laugh or a giggle every tenth minute? (and that's being more than equitable)

I listen to a ton of podcasts, both political and non-political, and there is a distinct difference between how men and women carry themselves in that aspect. I realize it is probably something hard-wired. Some kind of defense. Men laugh when there's been a joke told whereas a lot of women can start giggling right after saying something supposedly really serious.

[Emily Henderson]

Originally Posted by Robbie Key

Have you ever heard or seen a woman being engaged in a long and sincere discussion on something serious without having to throw in a laugh or a giggle every tenth minute? (and that's being more than equitable)

I listen to a ton of podcasts, both political and non-political, and there is a distinct difference between how men and women carry themselves in that aspect. I realize it is probably something hard-wired. Some kind of defense. Men laugh when there's been a joke told whereas a lot of women can start giggling right after saying something supposedly really serious.

There used to be a sketch on a comedy show called 'MadTV' about this. It had a woman who was a Dr. named I believe 'Dr. Kylie', and she had a furry pink bow in her hair, and a sparkly pen, and she would tell her patients how she was going to, "like, operate on your brian, mmkay? giggle, giggle" and they would look dubious as to Kylie's ability to, like, operate.

There is a psychological reason, but different in different instances.

With women, they feel like they have to cushion whatever they're saying, lest someone not like them.

With men, it's lack of confidence, which makes them do the same thing. Nervous laugh after a strong statement.

And then of course regardless of sex, laughing in-between words can also indicate dishonesty, same as constant gaze-shifting.

Watch Pat Robertson for a full hour if you can tolerate it and you'll see copious amounts of nervous cackling.

[Robbie Key]

Yeah, insecurity is definitely part of it. I don't really blame women for it, it is very endearing a lot of times. Useful tool to be sure. A beautiful smile is perhaps the best part of women.

It just annoys me when an otherwise intelligent and serious woman starts giggling randomly. Definitely lowers the the perceived value of what you just said.