Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old June 26th, 2017 #401
George Witzgall
Senior Member
 
George Witzgall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,645
Default

I see religion as being the crux of the matter.

Christianity is the biggest obstacle to ethno-nationalism for our peoples. You cannot see your people as being distinct from all others if they derive their religion from a foreign source (the Bible).

For a people to see themselves as distinct from all others, they need to have their own 'religion' (profoundest, most trusted, precepts/sensibilities guiding them), deriving from, and inseparable from, their own heritage, their own ancestors. That's what Aryanism is for our peoples.

And that's what Judaism is for the Jewish people. It was their own ancestors who composed the Bible (and other teachings and interpretations that their ancestors worked on up until the present). Their religion is part and parcel of their heritage. So they trusted themselves over all other peoples when it came to their understanding of how to follow their God. That's what held them together as a people.

Unless and until we have that same confidence in our own peoples, in Aryan peoples, when it comes to our own 'religion', Aryanism, we will not hold against the forces of globalism.
__________________
Blood & Soul Aryan
 
Old June 26th, 2017 #402
Emily Henderson
Intellijintly Dezined
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Pre-Rapture, USA ⚛️
Posts: 3,871
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
"..For a people to see themselves as distinct from all others, they need to have their own 'religion' (profoundest, most trusted, precepts/sensibilities guiding them), deriving from, and inseparable from, their own heritage, their own ancestors. That's what Aryanism is for our peoples.."
The Greeks were so awesome the Jews who wanted to copy/obtain some of that awesomeness were murdered by their fellow Jews (Chanukah story).

I think the Mediterraneans were the greatest Whites who ever existed-should get more attention than they do, as most favor Nordics and British.

First to evolve the capacity to throw away religion.

https://www.thoughtco.com/atheism-an...sophers-248345
__________________
"Inquiry and doubt are essential checks against deception."--Richard Carrier
 
Old June 26th, 2017 #403
George Witzgall
Senior Member
 
George Witzgall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,645
Default

Emily, when I use the term 'religion', I mean a framework of values and beliefs that folks rely on, even if subconsciously (see e.g. Merriam-Webster: "a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith"). I'm not talking about belief in a man-in-the-sky who created the universe (although I applaud folks who don't believe in a man-in-the-sky, and extra bonus points if they don't believe in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny).

In this larger sense of the word, atheists/agnostics are still 'religious'. What I'm saying is it's not possible to "throw away religion" in the larger sense of the word.

Lots of Jews consider themselves to be atheistic/agnostic, but they are still 'religious' in their appreciation of their heritage when it comes to figuring out how to be good, kind, just, righteous. Many describe themselves as 'spiritual'.

This is the context in which I understand Aryanism. It's not enough to say we are atheist, to say we don't believe in the Easter Bunny. Aryanism goes beyond that.

Ancient Greek atheists dared to question the existence of their gods, while Indo-Aryan skeptics were skewering their gods over 3000 years ago; Nietzsche and Huxley and countless others did their best to kill off a resurgent man-in-the-sky cult in modern times. But they weren't killing off 'religion'. They were establishing Aryanism.
__________________
Blood & Soul Aryan

Last edited by George Witzgall; June 26th, 2017 at 05:34 PM.
 
Old June 26th, 2017 #404
Emily Henderson
Intellijintly Dezined
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Pre-Rapture, USA ⚛️
Posts: 3,871
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
Emily, when I use the term 'religion', I mean a framework of values and beliefs that folks rely on, even if subconsciously (see e.g. Merriam-Webster: "a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith"). I'm not talking about belief in a man-in-the-sky who created the universe (although I applaud folks who don't believe in a man-in-the-sky, and extra bonus points if they don't believe in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny).

In this larger sense of the word, atheists/agnostics are still 'religious'. What I'm saying is it's not possible to "throw away religion" in the larger sense of the word.

Lots of Jews consider themselves to be atheistic/agnostic, but they are still 'religious' in their appreciation of their heritage when it comes to figuring out how to be good, kind, just, righteous. Many describe themselves as 'spiritual'.

This is the context in which I understand Aryanism. It's not enough to say we are atheist, to say we don't believe in the Easter Bunny. Aryanism goes beyond that.

Ancient Greek atheists dared to question the existence of their gods, while Indo-Aryan skeptics were skewering their gods over 3000 years ago; Nietzsche and Huxley and countless others did their best to kill off a resurgent man-in-the-sky cult in modern times. But they weren't killing off 'religion'. They were establishing Aryanism.
I don't have a problem with any of that. I don't call it religion, I call it philosophy. But in the sense of holding your philosophy 'sacred', you could think of it as religion in that sense. A set of beliefs one thinks should be adhered to is, I guess, a religion if anything else is.

When I hear the word 'religion' I instantly conjure up an image of an ignorant person who believes in something in spite of the facts--hence why the aversion. So the right to question everything would have to be included in a 'religion' fer mah tastes-as it was with the Greeks.

Aldous Huxley--I find fault with him, but really liked him as an early adult. I think it was 'Brave New World' where he said that if there were no god, why did all cultures have one--at the time this kind of thing always re-affirmed my belief there must be one (a god).

I think Michael Shermer explains it better, and I wish I'd heard him when I was 17 or so, would've saved some time, lol. He attributes our need for a diety to our 'snake in the grass' thinking. It's a glitch in our brain that evolution hasn't yet overcome. We are wired to look outside ourselves for a 'reason' for things. So when we hear the wind hit the grass, we think 'snake!' instead of wind. It's why, when a series of bad things happen, we look for a 'why'. Or good things we attribute to a 'reward' that 'god' is giving us. Makes you feel safer and explains the things that just happen because life is a series of chances and risks--a scarier thing to face.
__________________
"Inquiry and doubt are essential checks against deception."--Richard Carrier
 
Old June 30th, 2017 #405
George Witzgall
Senior Member
 
George Witzgall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,645
Default

There is, in my opinion, healthy and unhealthy nationalism.

Healthy nationalism combines one's 'religion' (profoundest values, morals, beliefs) and one's heritage, such that the religion is distinctive to one's own people, singles one's own people out from all other peoples.

Judaism is the prime example. Jews survived as a nation-religion for 2000 years without a homeland because their religion was part and parcel of their heritage. What motivates Jews, what holds them together, is their desire to obey God as expressed in their teachings and traditions (which are constantly being interpreted and re-interpreted by their rabbis, keeping the religion alive and relevant).

Islam almost could have been another example. It's really close. The Quran is written in Classical Arabic, making it a sacred language; and just as Jews pray toward Jerusalem, Muslims pray toward Mecca. So Islam combines a sacred Arabic language and heritage with a sacred Arabic geography. The fatal flaw is the universality of Islam: Islam doesn't really single out Arabs, it is for all humans.

This universality also plagues Christianity, making it incompatible with nationalism. Of course Christianity is all the more unsuitable for European nationalism since its basis is almost wholly foreign (the New Testament was written by Hellenized Jews, but Jews nonetheless).

Ancient Romans were constantly modifying their religious views and borrowing from other peoples, first and foremost the Greeks, but later on from Syria and elsewhere. As the empire expanded, religion served less and less to distinguish them as a people; instead it was whether or not you were a Roman citizen that mattered, and the citizens were of a wide range of ethnicities and religious views. Romans started ceasing to exist as a people/ethnicity when they started realizing their imperial ambitions.

Apparently a nationalism to survive the ages requires a 'religion' that emerges from, and is part and parcel of, the heritage of one's own people, serving to single one's own people out from all other peoples. When a religion is tied to a people, it is self-reinforcing: the religion helps the people to survive by giving them a raison d'etre; and the survival of the people ensures fidelity to the religion.

So healthy nationalism is a 'religion' or 'soul' (beliefs/values) bound up in a people, which is how I view Aryanism (denominations) for Aryan peoples; to emphasize the Aryan race is bound up with our racial soul, use the combined term "race-soul".

Then there is what I call unhealthy nationalism (which I believe to be a form of slave morality). Unhealthy nationalism focuses on the "other", and attempts to unify folks by denigrating the "other". These folks tend to be divisive and spiteful, and often allow their emotions to cloud their judgment.

They also tend to believe in some pretty wacky theories; like WN's who believe the trade towers were brought down by controlled demolition; or this example from NOI's teachings on race:
Quote:
Wallace Fard Muhammad taught that the original peoples of the world were black and that white people were a race of "devils" created by a scientist named Yakub (the Biblical and Qur'anic Jacob) on the Greek island of Patmos. According to the supreme wisdom lessons, Fard taught that whites were devils because of a culture of lies and murder that Yakub instituted on the island to ensure the creation of his new people. Fard taught that Yakub established a secret eugenics policy among the ruling class on the island. They were to kill all dark babies at birth and lie to the parents about the child's fate. Further, they were to ensure that lighter-skinned children thrived in society. This policy encouraged a general preference for light skin. It was necessary to allow the process of grafting or making of a lighter-skinned race of people who would be different. The idea was that if the light-skinned people were allowed to mate freely with the dark-skinned people, the population would remain dark-skinned due to the genetic dominance of the original dark-skinned people. This process took approximately 600 years to produce a blond-haired, blue-eyed group of people.
__________________
Blood & Soul Aryan

Last edited by George Witzgall; July 4th, 2017 at 03:59 AM.
 
Old June 30th, 2017 #406
Emily Henderson
Intellijintly Dezined
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Pre-Rapture, USA ⚛️
Posts: 3,871
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
There is, in my opinion, a healthy and an unhealthy nationalism.

Healthy nationalism combines one's 'religion' (profoundest values, morals, beliefs) and one's heritage, such that the religion is distinctive to one's own people, singles one's own people out from all other peoples.
I'll explain why I don't agree with that after your next section--secular nationalism is superior.

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
Judaism is the prime example. Jews survived as a nation-religion for 2000 years without a homeland because their religion was part and parcel of their heritage. What motivates Jews, what holds them together, is their desire to obey God as expressed in their teachings and traditions (which are constantly being interpreted and re-interpreted by their rabbis, keeping the religion alive and relevant).
Exactly what's wrong with it, in bold.

Wasting time 're-interpreting' bullshit from a non-existent g-d. Their god is one they selected out of all their pagan bullshit. They don't like to talk about that, it's points to it's fakeness.

Baal is Satan, the Xtians took that one as the Jews threw that one away (you certainly can 'throw away' religion and texts come and go all the time), and you do know that 'Yaweh' and 'Jehova' are in pagan texts in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, right? It's as real as the imaginary dolphin I used to pretend lived in the corner of my bedroom when I was 3. The light would hit the room in such a way where it kind of looked like sparkly water, and my 'dolphin' was floating in it. Not real, tho.

Once you realize something is not real, it ceases to be a thing of value.

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
Islam almost could have been another example. It's really close. The Quran is written in Classical Arabic, making it a sacred language; and just as Jews pray toward Jerusalem, Muslims pray toward Mecca. So Islam combines a sacred Arabic language and heritage with a sacred Arabic geography. The fatal flaw is the universality of Islam: Islam doesn't really single out Arabs, it is for all humans.
What is sacred is what one makes sacred. Arabic is not sacred to me, it's neither my native tongue (from ancient times or today), nor is it sacred because Muhammad (peace be up his ass) spoke it.

There is a historicity project regarding Muhammad (pbuha), and he may be yet another Euhemerized mythical figure, like our ol' buddy Jesus.

Re Islam being more 'universal' than Judaism: they claim that, but talk to some converts who married into Islamic families, and find out what their experience was. They may be real friendly during the conversion process, but the Whites who have become Muslim have almost exclusively been at the receiving end of 'less than' treatment. They don't consider you a descendant of the 'people of the book' and treat their own better than converts. Same as all ethnicities do, while claiming otherwise.

Reform Jews also claim any and all can become Jewish, and they too treat converts like crud compared to biological Jews, generally speaking. Drew Barrymore just divorced her Jewish husband, and I remember seeing her referring to herself as a 'shiksa' and I thought, 'this is bad--nobody can be okay with calling themselves that' and I figured the (((family))) was treating her like a 'shiksa'-unclean meat. She had two children with him which is a shame.

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
This universality also plagues Christianity, making it incompatible with nationalism. Of course Christianity is all the more unsuitable for European nationalism since its basis is almost wholly foreign (the New Testament was written by Hellenized Jews, but Jews nonetheless).
100% agree on that.


Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
So apparently a nationalism to survive the ages requires a 'religion' that emerges from, and is part and parcel of, the heritage of one's own people, thereby singling one's own people out from all other peoples.

Then there is what I call unhealthy nationalism (which I believe to be a form of slave morality). Unhealthy nationalism focuses on the "other", and attempts to unify folks by denigrating the "other", thereby allowing them to feel good about themselves. These folks tend to be divisive and spiteful, and often allow their emotions to cloud their judgment.
To explain nefarious activity, you have to focus to some degree on negative things.

I would agree that people need uplifting material, and to shift their focus on things that make them happy some of the time-you will become sick physically and emotionally if you don't shift your focus some of the time and take care of yourself. But when you're talking about reality, it get 'ugly' and that's just the way it is. Everything can't be a parade, as my mom said when I was a kid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
They also tend to believe in some pretty whacky theories; like WN's who believe the trade towers were brought down by controlled demolition; or this example from NOI's teachings on race:
I guess Peter Jennings and Emily Henderson are wacky, cuz he brought up building 7, which could not have come down in the manner we have been told it was.
Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth are not a pack of dumb dumbs or wackos, and they know that the official story is flawed. Nothing wacky about asking questions, which is what's wrong with 'sacred' religious texts.

If you 'understand and do not understand', you should shed the arrogance re alternate theories on these events.

I like that you're non-violent and whatnot, that's just personally something I am rubbed the wrong way by often in WNism--but you are practically an infomercial for Jewish religious copy-catism, and we already have that, and it sucks.

Making it Aryan won't fix it. We don't need our people to get a wall to wail at like backward hut dwellers, we need science and secularism.
You specifically pointed in this post to their 'god' and his rules and 'desires' for these 'apples of his eye' being a reason for the 'religion' being helpful and good. So in this post you defy your prior definition of 'religion'. A religion with a fake god is like saying 2+2=5. Ultimately nothing good comes out of a lie, it's counterproductive to all real 'progress' that matters. One look at how Jews live in their 'holy land' shows you that. And they also will turn on each other if the Jew in question rejects the religion--which shows how religion works AGAINST racial cohesion.

An sheit. I'm having insomnia. Tell someone who god finds favor with to pray fer me.
__________________
"Inquiry and doubt are essential checks against deception."--Richard Carrier

Last edited by Emily Henderson; July 1st, 2017 at 01:51 AM. Reason: add some 'shizznit'
 
Old July 5th, 2017 #407
George Witzgall
Senior Member
 
George Witzgall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,645
Default

This thread on stormfront pitting Poles and their sympathizers against Western European folks illustrates the pitfalls of unhealthy nationalism. Here's a post mid-thread by a Polish-American:

Quote:
Maybe I'm just fed up with Germanic chauvinism here displayed against Poles here for years.

Every time I see Western Europeans bash Poles here, or else where, I become increasingly tired of these people, especially considering how Multicultural they tend to be.

It's clear that a sizable amount of Western Europeans don't like Poles, so why should Poles like you guys?

I don't have Stockholm syndrome, nor am I a masochist.

In fact, I think it's in the best interest of Poles to distance ourselves from Western Europeans, why should our people get lumped in with your peoples Colonialism, or Imperialism, and get lumped in with your White guilt?

As far as I'm concerned, we're so different, in all aspects, that I'm not even so sure we should all be considered the same "Race"
More like distant relatives, rather than close relatives.
It's real easy for ethno-nationalists to be at each others' throats. The tendency is to want to de-legitimize and distance oneself from the "other", with feelings of mistrust, fear, hatred serving to unify the nation. But nationalism isn't a competition about who has the biggest chip on their shoulder when it comes to the "other".

I also want to say, however, that nationalism isn't about who has the strongest love towards one's own people, either. It's not that simple. In a large extended family, there will be folks you don't know very well, or whose views you find distasteful, or who treat you badly; even moreso when it comes to your nation, your people. You're not going to love, or even like, everyone.

In Aryanism, what matters most is being Aryan. How that actually plays out is a function of the folks who raised you, the cultural setting, and, of course, your genetic heritage; nature and nurture both play a role, and it's impossible to separate out the influences. That's why Aryanism combines a 'people' ('race') with a 'religion' ('soul'); these are bound up in each other and inseparable, which is why I like to use the term "race-soul" to represent the combined concept: 'race' and 'soul' as one.

Being Aryan doesn't mean loving your own people, nor does it mean having a chip on your shoulder when it comes to the "other"; it means following/advancing your race-soul.
__________________
Blood & Soul Aryan
 
Old July 12th, 2017 #408
George Witzgall
Senior Member
 
George Witzgall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,645
Default

The next big leap for civilization will not be interstellar colonization and exploitation (a very slow and energetically costly enterprise), but creating habitats in our own solar system aka Dysoning up our Sun.

The Sun is essentially a huge fusion reactor, with the Earth seeing only a billionth of its power, the rest being wasted. We have the materials (especially if we ultimately convert the hydrogen and helium of the gas giants to heavier elements) and capability to tap into much of this power, thereby creating more habitat than is currently available in all of the remotely habitable planets of the Milky Way. Ultimately trillions of Dyson habitats (defined as a self-sufficient habitat that gets its power from the Sun, perhaps ranging in size from several kilometers to many tens or even hundreds of kilometers) could orbit our Sun, some as close as Mercury's orbit, some as far as Mars's orbit, or even farther. Each Dyson habitat would ultimately evolve its own ecosystem, although habitats that share an orbit (each orbit is circular around the Sun, albeit at its own unique radius and in its own unique plane, and many habitats can be located on any given orbit, where they maintain a fixed distance wrt each other) are readily accessible to each other, so the inhabitants and ecosystems will be relatively closely related.

To repeat: we have an entire galaxy's worth of habitat at our fingertips.

Creating Dyson habitats goes hand-in-hand with "trans-humanism", the notion that human evolution will proceed exponentially faster due to technological advances in genetics and artificial intelligence. Human (and non-human) life will evolve so as to better adapt to a particular Dyson habitat; but the habitats, too, will be modified and "evolve", with failed or obsolete habitats being junked and recycled into new habitats.

Note that as asteroids and planets and moons (other than the Earth and our Moon) are mined out, materials for constructing Dyson habitats (e.g. carbon, iron, oxygen) will become increasingly scarce, probably leading to radical changes in designs. Slow-rotating "low-G" habitats might well become the norm, since these structures lack the stresses of fast-rotating "normal-G" structures and therefore require far less material to construct. Another trend might be toward low-pressure environments, which also would require far less material in the design. But these types of Dyson habitats would require dramatic evolutionary leaps for the inhabitants.

And there might be a trend toward artificial life, only requiring electrical power and no food/water/oxygen, with even the human brain being supplanted, more and more, by computer circuitry.

It's pretty obvious we are at an evolutionary threshold. Very quickly, in the span of a few millennia, "humans" will evolve into a large diversity of life forms. The challenge, in the face of this, is how do Aryans, whom I expect to be at the forefront of these technological revolutions, hold onto our Aryan-ness.

---------------------------------------------------------
Here's a good vid on Dyson Swarms and the Fermi Paradox (we haven't yet detected any stars in our galaxy showing the tell-tale signs of being Dysoned, implying perhaps advanced alien civilizations are very rare):
__________________
Blood & Soul Aryan

Last edited by George Witzgall; July 12th, 2017 at 03:22 PM.
 
Old July 12th, 2017 #409
Emily Henderson
Intellijintly Dezined
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Pre-Rapture, USA ⚛️
Posts: 3,871
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
The next big leap for civilization will not be interstellar colonization and exploitation (a very slow and energetically costly enterprise), but creating habitats in our own solar system aka Dysoning up our Sun.

The Sun is essentially a huge fusion reactor, with the Earth seeing only a billionth of its power, the rest being wasted. We have the materials (especially if we ultimately convert the hydrogen and helium of the gas giants to heavier elements) and capability to tap into much of this power, thereby creating more habitat than is currently available in all of the remotely habitable planets of the Milky Way. Ultimately trillions of Dyson habitats (defined as a self-sufficient habitat that gets its power from the Sun, perhaps ranging in size from several kilometers to many tens or even hundreds of kilometers) could orbit our Sun, some as close as Mercury's orbit, some as far as Mars's orbit, or even farther. Each Dyson habitat would ultimately evolve its own ecosystem, although habitats that share an orbit (each orbit is circular around the Sun, albeit at its own unique radius and in its own unique plane, and many habitats can be located on any given orbit, where they maintain a fixed distance wrt each other) are readily accessible to each other, so the inhabitants and ecosystems will be relatively closely related.

To repeat: we have an entire galaxy's worth of habitat at our fingertips.
^^^That's very interesting.

We can also 'make' oxygen on another planet, such as Mars:

"..the Mars Oxygen ISRU Experiment (MOXIE), one of seven science instruments that NASA's next Mars rover will carry toward the Red Planet when it blasts off in 2020.

MOXIE will pull carbon dioxide from the thin Martian atmosphere and turn it into pure oxygen and carbon monoxide, demonstrating technology that could keep settlers alive on the Red Planet —*and help them blast off the surface when it's time to go home. (Oxygen can be used as an oxidizer, helping to burn rocket fuel.).."

We'll be trying it out in 2020:

https://mars.nasa.gov/mars2020/missi...or-scientists/

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
Creating Dyson habitats goes hand-in-hand with "trans-humanism", the notion that human evolution will proceed exponentially faster due to technological advances in genetics and artificial intelligence. Human (and non-human) life will evolve so as to better adapt to a particular Dyson habitat; but the habitats, too, will be modified and "evolve", with failed or obsolete habitats being junked and recycled into new habitats.

Note that as asteroids and planets and moons (other than the Earth and our Moon) are mined out, materials for constructing Dyson habitats (e.g. carbon, iron, oxygen) will become increasingly scarce, probably leading to radical changes in designs. Slow-rotating "low-G" habitats might well become the norm, since these structures lack the stresses of fast-rotating "normal-G" structures and therefore require far less material to construct. Another trend might be toward low-pressure environments, which also would require far less material in the design. But these types of Dyson habitats would require dramatic evolutionary leaps for the inhabitants.

And there might be a trend toward artificial life, only requiring electrical power and no food/water/oxygen, with even the human brain being supplanted, more and more, by computer circuitry.

It's pretty obvious we are at an evolutionary threshold. Very quickly, in the span of a few millennia, "humans" will evolve into a large diversity of life forms. The challenge, in the face of this, is how do Aryans, whom I expect to be at the forefront of these technological revolutions, hold onto our Aryan-ness.."
The part in bold--if these nano bots, who do not need food or oxygen and have intelligence that surpasses ours (speed-of-light) ever gain the upper hand-and they would-there would be no 'diversity of life', they don't need us.

That's why we don't want to make them smarter than us. It would be like giving a baby super-human strength while possessing the IQ and temperament of a baby-outcome would be real bad, lol.

I like nature and progress both--it's a matter of some foresight being applied. The nano bots are bad, imo. I'd go full 'Luddite' over them thar bots. I don't even like the fact that Siri tries to sound like she's got 'feelings'-not foolin' me!

I do think the robo surgeries are great, as are the vacuum cleaners that the cat can 'ride' while other cleaning is done. I just don't want them talking to me, or acting like we are 'diverse' buddies/fam. Something about that screams 'get away'.
__________________
"Inquiry and doubt are essential checks against deception."--Richard Carrier
 
Old July 12th, 2017 #410
George Witzgall
Senior Member
 
George Witzgall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emily Henderson View Post
^^^That's very interesting.

We can also 'make' oxygen on another planet, such as Mars:

"..the Mars Oxygen ISRU Experiment (MOXIE), one of seven science instruments that NASA's next Mars rover will carry toward the Red Planet when it blasts off in 2020.

MOXIE will pull carbon dioxide from the thin Martian atmosphere and turn it into pure oxygen and carbon monoxide, demonstrating technology that could keep settlers alive on the Red Planet —*and help them blast off the surface when it's time to go home. (Oxygen can be used as an oxidizer, helping to burn rocket fuel.).."

We'll be trying it out in 2020:

https://mars.nasa.gov/mars2020/missi...or-scientists/
Planets can't support the power needs of vast numbers of life-forms since they don't intercept much sunlight, and ultimately it is sunlight that provides the power for all life (fossil fuels can be thought of as "captured" sunlight in this context; geothermal can provide some power, but it is actually non-renewable in most places since the rock cools after a few decades; nuclear power is also non-renewable, and there is also the matter of nuclear waste; fusion power, OTOH, is seemingly "unlimited" - we can get hydrogen from water, but still compared to the power being output by the Sun, we would use up our water pretty quickly; also fusion reactors might not ever be viable).

An asteroid or even a planet like Mercury can be mined to construct Dyson-habitats that capture many times more sunlight than the asteroid or planet itself could (millions of times more sunlight in the case of Mercury, providing the power for insane numbers of life-forms); plus Dyson-habitats can have cool weapons (these would be hard to ban since they would double as systems to, say, vaporize random asteroids that made their way into the Dyson swarm; I'm actually not happy about this since I'd like to limit the offensive capabilities of Dyson-habitats as much as possible to prevent them from conquering Earth). For me, the real reason for creating a Dyson swarm is because 99.999999999% of the power generated by the Sun is wasted (no useful work done), and this breaks my heart.

Note: Hopefully Earth and the Moon could hold out against the Dyson swarm, but I worry that at some point some enterprising alliance of Dyson-habitats might decide to conquer Earth and the Moon and mine them for carbon, iron, etc... That would be the one reason why, perhaps, any attempt at creating a Dyson swarm should be ruthlessly suppressed, and rogue Dyson-habitats should be hunted down and annihilated. Then again, a nation on Earth could decide to embrace trans-humanism and become super-smart robots that conquer the world. So the danger of traditional humans being wiped out is present whether or not a Dyson swarm is permitted.

Quote:
The part in bold--if these nano bots, who do not need food or oxygen and have intelligence that surpasses ours (speed-of-light) ever gain the upper hand-and they would-there would be no 'diversity of life', they don't need us.
I think diversity (and the resulting competition for survival) is itself the best protection against a threat vector (e.g. "nano-bots") wiping everyone out.

Different Dyson-habitats/races will evolve differently, have different histories and grudges, different strengths and weaknesses; different protocols and personalities and intelligence levels; different race-souls. And they will constantly be trying to learn from each other and evolve to a more competitive level to ensure their survival, upgrading their habitats with the latest weapons systems and defenses, forming and breaking alliances, etc...

So it's highly unlikely that any given threat vector could easily and quickly knock out everyone (realize there might be billions, even trillions, of Dyson-habitats in the Dyson swarm).

Quote:
That's why we don't want to make them smarter than us. It would be like giving a baby super-human strength while possessing the IQ and temperament of a baby-outcome would be real bad, lol.

I like nature and progress both--it's a matter of some foresight being applied. The nano bots are bad, imo. I'd go full 'Luddite' over them thar bots. I don't even like the fact that Siri tries to sound like she's got 'feelings'-not foolin' me!

I do think the robo surgeries are great, as are the vacuum cleaners that the cat can 'ride' while other cleaning is done. I just don't want them talking to me, or acting like we are 'diverse' buddies/fam. Something about that screams 'get away'.
It's true that folks who choose to rely more heavily on AI, maybe even to the point of wiring their brains up to computers, risk losing their humanity. Are tricked-out cyborgs really human, really Aryan?

On the other hand, a Dyson-habitat which doesn't fully embrace AI might risk falling behind in research and technology, and their inefficiency might spell their doom if some super-tricked out Dyson-habitat decides to take them out of their misery, deeming them too lazy, dumb, and useless to be worth their carbon and iron content. The conquering race of "super-men" might consider themselves to be Aryan, and might be smarter and stronger than everyone else, and have the most bad-ass weapons, but it's a real question whether they are really Aryan, especially if all they are is brains wired up to computers.

Still, I guess whether any traditional humans (maybe folks who stayed on Earth) would consider the super-men to be Aryan wouldn't really matter much when the super-men decide to conquer Earth and genocide the traditional humans.

At which point some folks might decide it's time to leave the solar system; although I don't know if it will ever be feasible for folks to leave the solar system en masse; but maybe they could send some micro-robots and frozen embryos (to be incubated and raised by robots) to a virgin system so that traditional humans wouldn't be killed off as a species.

If we ever do allow a Dyson swarm, we must somehow ensure that Earth stays alive. Perhaps we implement something like in Dune, except instead of banning computers, we ban artificial life, and ban rapid evolution practices, so that people stay recognizably human. No hooking your brain up to a computer. Also ban weapons systems on Dyson-habitats. Only Earth gets to research and develop weapons systems and defenses. Earth will have vast fleets of space-ships bristling with the latest weapons defending her and the Moon.
__________________
Blood & Soul Aryan

Last edited by George Witzgall; July 12th, 2017 at 07:22 PM.
 
Old July 12th, 2017 #411
Emily Henderson
Intellijintly Dezined
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Pre-Rapture, USA ⚛️
Posts: 3,871
Default Religion Stops Science

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
"..If we ever do allow a Dyson swarm, we must somehow ensure that Earth stays alive. Perhaps we implement something like in Dune, except instead of banning computers, we ban artificial life, and ban rapid evolution practices, so that people stay recognizably human. No hooking your brain up to a computer. Also ban weapons systems on Dyson-habitats. Only Earth gets to research and develop weapons systems and defenses. Earth will have vast fleets of space-ships bristling with the latest weapons defending her and the Moon.."
The prob with religion, in a nutshell: all it will take to stop any and all progress toward true 'eternal life' via other planets (by that I mean the continuing of a race of people, not a soul) is some dude named Muhammad Kablewydad hitting a nuclear power plant or two or ten while yelling 'Allu Akbar!', and that's it. We're Nuked toast, whole planet. Or some nutter really get their finger on 'the button'. In the name of their preferred flavor of religion.

Religion is like oatmeal-some flavors are better than others, but it's all just bland, sticky oatmeal really. Under the décor and tricks.
__________________
"Inquiry and doubt are essential checks against deception."--Richard Carrier
 
Old July 16th, 2017 #412
George Witzgall
Senior Member
 
George Witzgall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,645
Default Otherism

"Otherists" (my coinage) define themselves in opposition to the "other": you are one of us (e.g. "pro-white") only if you are anti-"other" (e.g. "anti-jew").

Whatever flavor Otherist cults come in, whether NOI, La Raza, or WN, this is the essence of their mentality. Otherists feed on perceived oppression, requiring an enemy to keep the in-group motivated and prevent members from turning on each other (which they are wont to do).

Otherist cults claim to be nationalist/racialist, but in actuality they are merely using nation/race as a vehicle for their Otherism. Aryans are true nationalists/racialists, being guided not by Otherism, but by our race-soul, our genetic ("race") and non-genetic ("soul") heritage.

Note that civic nationalism, wherein non-genetic heritage is the focus, to the exclusion of genetic heritage, is also a false path. History has borne out that a people must keep its blood (reasonably) pure if it wants to survive the ages like the Jewish nation has; you cannot separate race from soul.
__________________
Blood & Soul Aryan

Last edited by George Witzgall; July 16th, 2017 at 12:56 PM.
 
Old July 16th, 2017 #413
Emily Henderson
Intellijintly Dezined
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Pre-Rapture, USA ⚛️
Posts: 3,871
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
"Otherists" (my coinage) define themselves in opposition to the "other": you are one of us (e.g. "pro-white") only if you are anti-"other" (e.g. "anti-jew").

Whatever flavor Otherist cults come in, whether NOI, La Raza, or WN, this is the essence of their mentality. Otherists feed on perceived oppression, requiring an enemy to keep the in-group motivated and prevent members from turning on each other (which they are wont to do).

Otherist cults claim to be nationalist/racialist, but in actuality they are merely using nation/race as a vehicle for their Otherism. Aryans are true nationalists/racialists, being guided not by Otherism, but by our race-soul, our genetic ("race") and non-genetic ("soul") heritage.

Note that civic nationalism, wherein non-genetic heritage is the focus, to the exclusion of genetic heritage, is also a false path. History has borne out that a people must keep its blood (reasonably) pure if it wants to survive the ages like the Jewish nation has; you cannot separate race from soul.
The part I put in bold: I agree with this--you see losers who need someone to 'hate' and they really don't care about anything. Good that you mentioned the 'Latino' and other variations of this--I'd say BLM qualifies as well. The old Garvey-ites were motivated to stay Black and get away from this country-they were motivated in the right way-survival of their people and so on.

However, those losers aside--there is 'perceived' oppression and real oppression. Those doing the right things know the difference. BLM thinks having to 'not rob stores' is oppression, whereas a black motivated by true concern for blacks would only cite cases where someone not doing wrong was killed. Everything isn't oppression.

But the soul part, I don't agree with, although I know you are defining soul differently than I.
__________________
"Inquiry and doubt are essential checks against deception."--Richard Carrier
 
Old July 19th, 2017 #414
George Witzgall
Senior Member
 
George Witzgall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,645
Default

A nation is both "race" (shared blood) and "soul" (profoundest beliefs/values).

Just having shared blood is not enough; a nation must value its blood, it must have a sense of being a people distinct from all others. That's where "soul" comes in.

Judaism gave rise to the Jewish nation or Jewish race-soul. Jews believe a supreme deity made covenants with them as a people, which is why they have a sense of being a people distinct from all others and why they value their blood (if you aren't Jewish by blood, conversion is difficult).

Aryanism is different, we don't believe in a supreme deity who made deals with us; but we do have a race-soul, taking our cue from our ancestors and Aryan peoples throughout the ages. We value our peoples because they are the only ones who can carry on our race-soul. Our blood is an essential part of our race-soul.
__________________
Blood & Soul Aryan
 
Old July 19th, 2017 #415
Emily Henderson
Intellijintly Dezined
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Pre-Rapture, USA ⚛️
Posts: 3,871
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
A nation is both "race" (shared blood) and "soul" (profoundest beliefs/values).

Just having shared blood is not enough; a nation must value its blood, it must have a sense of being a people distinct from all others. That's where "soul" comes in.
But what you're defining as a 'soul' is what is actually our biological make-up. It's why people in Greece are not like people in Germany. A combo of how and where they evolved. IMO all else is 'woo'.

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
Judaism gave rise to the Jewish nation or Jewish race-soul. Jews believe a supreme deity made covenants with them as a people, which is why they have a sense of being a people distinct from all others and why they value their blood (if you aren't Jewish by blood, conversion is difficult).
There is untruth there. the Semitic peoples had a totally different religion and picked one of their many gods to form what you're calling 'Judaism'.

The belief that you are 'special' and others are 'not' is actually biologically wired in, and the god freak out thinking is a reminder that our brains haven't 'caught up'. Attributing things to a 'higher power' is a throwback to our more primitive minds.

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
Aryanism is different, we don't believe in a supreme deity who made deals with us; but we do have a race-soul, taking our cue from our ancestors and Aryan peoples throughout the ages. We value our peoples because they are the only ones who can carry on our race-soul. Our blood is an essential part of our race-soul.
You can cultivate this sort of religion and it is fine to do so, and you can define 'soul' as DNA even, though you often indicate you think it is more than that, but don't go on and 'define'. This is where pseudo-science comes into play: when it can't be defined, but we are supposed to accept 'what we don't understand' anyway.

The part we understand is very tangible.
__________________
"Inquiry and doubt are essential checks against deception."--Richard Carrier
 
Old July 19th, 2017 #416
George Witzgall
Senior Member
 
George Witzgall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emily Henderson View Post
But what you're defining as a 'soul' is what is actually our biological make-up. It's why people in Greece are not like people in Germany. A combo of how and where they evolved. IMO all else is 'woo'.



There is untruth there. the Semitic peoples had a totally different religion and picked one of their many gods to form what you're calling 'Judaism'.

The belief that you are 'special' and others are 'not' is actually biologically wired in, and the god freak out thinking is a reminder that our brains haven't 'caught up'. Attributing things to a 'higher power' is a throwback to our more primitive minds.



You can cultivate this sort of religion and it is fine to do so, and you can define 'soul' as DNA even, though you often indicate you think it is more than that, but don't go on and 'define'. This is where pseudo-science comes into play: when it can't be defined, but we are supposed to accept 'what we don't understand' anyway.

The part we understand is very tangible.
I've described Aryanism in terms of "understanding and not understanding", exhibiting an indomitable, questing spirit that the best among so-called Aryan peoples have exhibited throughout history, from Indo-Aryans to ancient Greeks to Renaissance and modern-day Europeans. To me that's what underlies our race-soul.

Aryanism is perhaps more an "anti-religion" than it is a religion*, a rebellion against the religious outlook that demands belief and shuts off debate. In that sense it's like agnosticism, which one might characterize as the fundamental belief that all beliefs must be backed up with evidence (although it's hard to convincingly prove the fundamental belief using evidence, which is a bit of a problem for agnosticism).

Any rate, you seem to be making the argument that beliefs are actually in our biological make-up. I agree that there are some tendencies or sensibilities that are biologically wired into us, although I'm not sure these rise to the level of abstract belief -- they are more like urges or impulses, like how white babies reach for white dolls over black dolls. Your beliefs about race are far more nuanced and involved than just a preference for white dolls over black dolls, and you have undoubtedly modified and refined your beliefs over the years, and adhered to them with greater or lesser enthusiasm over the years, so it's hard for me to see these beliefs as being biologically wired in.

Not everything comes from our genes; "nurture" also plays a role. Although I will say the orthodoxy in the last century was to downplay "nature" and ascribe everything to "nurture", which is also wrong.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Note: Our race-soul isn't something you believe in, it's something you, well, understand and don't understand. I don't want to dwell on it too much, but I think of it as our heritage as Aryans; Aryanism isn't so much a religion as it is an appreciation and advancement of our race-soul.
__________________
Blood & Soul Aryan

Last edited by George Witzgall; July 20th, 2017 at 05:16 AM.
 
Old July 20th, 2017 #417
George Witzgall
Senior Member
 
George Witzgall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,645
Default

Aryans shouldn't be reluctant to assert Otherness, to make a distinction between Aryans and non-Aryans. Asserting Otherness, recognizing that we are different from non-Aryans, is not the same as Otherism.

Otherists define themselves in terms of the Other (you are one of us only if you are anti-Other). In Aryanism, the focus is on our race-soul, not on the Other - edited after response below. (Note: IMO this is the distinction between master and slave moralities that Nietzsche was driving at.)

Thus when Aryans assert Otherness, we are merely making a factual observation. Asserting Otherness isn't what gives us a sense of fulfillment; not like exploring and exploiting the mysteries of the universe.

That doesn't make us cucks. Anyone who threatens us or harms us will be dealt with accordingly. But it does mean that non-Aryans don't have to be our enemies, unless they so choose.

BTW There's another type of Otherism; I'm talking about folks who actively seek out the Other, to the exclusion of their own. For these folks, the grass is always greener on the Other (oh no) side. Their fixation with the Other gives them a sense of fulfillment; they figure they must be good since they are so selfless.
__________________
Blood & Soul Aryan

Last edited by George Witzgall; July 21st, 2017 at 12:52 AM.
 
Old July 20th, 2017 #418
Emily Henderson
Intellijintly Dezined
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Pre-Rapture, USA ⚛️
Posts: 3,871
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
Aryans shouldn't be reluctant to assert Otherness, to make a distinction between Aryans and non-Aryans. Asserting Otherness, recognizing that we are different from non-Aryans, is not the same as Otherism.
I've never heard the term 'otherism', nor 'otherness', but no harm in word creation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
Otherists define themselves in terms of the Other (you are one of us only if you are anti-Other). Aryans define ourselves on our own terms, without recourse to the Other. (Note: IMO this is the distinction between master and slave moralities that Nietzsche was driving at.)
What you're talking about is 'the psychology of totalism' imo. Robert Lifton. 'If you aren't with us you are against us' and 'the ends justify the means' group mentality. Cults. Xtianity. Jews. They all have a psychology of totalism.

Robert Lifton is a British Jew, so he never calls out Jews on their psychology of totalism--not that I'm aware.

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
Thus when Aryans assert Otherness, we are merely making a factual observation. Asserting Otherness isn't what gives us a sense of fulfillment; not like exploring and exploiting the mysteries of the universe.

That doesn't make us cucks. Anyone who threatens us or harms us will be dealt with accordingly. But it does mean that non-Aryans don't have to be our enemies; the choice is theirs.
And they chose to be our enemies, though. With willful intent, too, not by accident.
Nature is kind of brutal, you know. Not always, but when animals are in a bind for resources, and it's 'you' or 'them', animals pick themselves and their own families. Unless they are somehow insane.

I would agree that whoever leaves us alone should be left alone in return. If it weren't for personal, in-your-face knowledge of how dangerous a non-white dominated environment is, I'd be pretty egalitarian by innate nature. I don't feel a need to focus on removal of others until they've focused on removal of me. And they are focused on that (not just me I mean Whites, lol).

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
BTW There's another type of Otherism; I'm talking about folks who actively seek out the Other, to the exclusion of their own. For these folks, the grass is always greener on the Other (oh no) side. Their fixation with the Other gives them a sense of fulfillment; they figure they must be good since they are so selfless.
You'll have that type of person in absolutely any movement or group, religious or political.

I don't understand the context of your last sentence--'they figure they must be good since they are so selfless'--because they 'fixate' on the 'other'?

'Splain.
__________________
"Inquiry and doubt are essential checks against deception."--Richard Carrier
 
Old July 20th, 2017 #419
Emily Henderson
Intellijintly Dezined
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Pre-Rapture, USA ⚛️
Posts: 3,871
Default Oh Wait I think I Get It

I think you mean that instead of self-improvement they focus on the 'other', and consider that good and selfless.

Well, sure, certain people do this kind of thing. But it's like driving-you have to look around at what's going on, and defensiveness is necessary when you know other people might run you over. You can't always be looking inward.

I'd say there is some truth to the idea that people need to be uplifted, work on self, and have happy and positive foci. But they may be doing that on their own unrelated to working on WN causes. I do yoga and play piano, which have nothing to do with my awareness of the World Bank, black criminality, etc.

Nobody can consistently think on how bad things are without it being harmful to their well-being--if they don't do anything else. But everyone I'm sure has other interests that are unrelated to recognition of all that's negative. You have to deal with unpleasant things, too, though-- or they will deal with you.
__________________
"Inquiry and doubt are essential checks against deception."--Richard Carrier
 
Old July 21st, 2017 #420
George Witzgall
Senior Member
 
George Witzgall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emily Henderson View Post
Nature is kind of brutal, you know. Not always, but when animals are in a bind for resources, and it's 'you' or 'them', animals pick themselves and their own families. Unless they are somehow insane.
You need more than blood tying your 'racial family' together. Some folks might be Christian, and believe faith in Christ is way more important than blood - they would see fellow brothers in Christ where you see threatening alien faces. Some folks might be atheist, but still not care about race. Some folks might even be ethno-nationalists, but they are waging a war against fellow Whites of a different nation over what you regard as a silly matter. These folks might be your 'racial family', but just like you judge them "somehow insane", they'll think the same of you.

What you need tying folks together is a 'religion' (profoundest beliefs/values) that gets people to value race/ethnicity - like Judaism does for Jews. One possibility is the Otherist approach that is ubiquitous among White racialists/nationalists.

A different approach to get folks to value their heritage is Aryanism, wherein folks can explore the issues and contribute to the debate, contribute to our race-soul, in a way that makes sense for them. What blocks folks from grasping an issue is often one of two things: either we are convinced we understand everything about the issue, and that's all there is to it; or we believe we can't possibly begin to fathom the issue, it's too deep or we're too dumb. But our race-soul tells us otherwise, encouraging us to explore the issues that seem most ripe for questioning, reminding us there is no issue that we can't question. That's how our ancestors made progress, and I believe that's how we'll make progress.
__________________
Blood & Soul Aryan

Last edited by George Witzgall; July 21st, 2017 at 04:50 AM.
 
Reply

Tags
aryanism

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:17 AM.
Page generated in 0.23454 seconds.