Always the ugliest whiteys having kids with each other. That bloodline needs some refreshing with a little bit of Africa.

He correctly recognizes that religion isn’t just something a clever social reformer can invent.

Mormonism. Scientology. To name two.

Religions seem a lot less mysterious when you can see new ones originate in recent times and under well-documented conditions. I don’t see how Scientology can sustain itself, considering that L. Ron Hubbard invented it as a grift which should have ended after he died. But it’s interesting that Mormonism has flourished generations after its founders have come and gone.

If you’re talking about the Boers from South Africa fine, anything else will produce slow, dull-brained and violent offspring; we already have enough of those, thank you.

Why don’t you set an example for us? I’ve heard Lizzo is available.

I wrote about whether or not religiousness may be heritable in a previous comment, where I noted that ‘the largely secular population of the West today is composed of the descendants of largely religious previous generations.’

Regarding COVID, Unz recently wrote about the ‘elephant in the room’ — regarding the secularization of the US and the West generally, the ‘elephant in the room’ is Jewish influence and control over the mass media, also to some extent academia — in many cases there is a kind of synergy there, e.g. the way the media popularized the cultural relativism and racial egalitarianism of the Jewish academic Franz Boas, whereas early in the 20th century race realism and a belief in the necessity of segregation were very common in the US.

Obviously Jews don’t control the media in muslim countries — they probably also don’t have much of a presence in the universities there.

There is an analogy with democracy — with media saturation, democracy is corrupted by the fact the views and votes of people are heavily influenced by the media, hence those who control the media can, to a large extent, control the electorate and therefore the outcome of elections — this is one of the origins of the phrase ‘media controlled state’, although clearly the media heavily influences politicians too.

Yeah, no surprise here. The self-styled irreligious think that they can invent a religion, without of course realizing that they are already the product of that, usually being attached to the religion of deduction/critique/Sorath called “Science” whereby understanding = annihilation.

Irony as old as time. As if much of anybody anymore even knew what the word “religion” meant. It’s practically a dog-whistle. Might as well mean tradition, but could survival of the fittest have applied to ideas in the past? Certainly not!… at least in the mind of the definitionally foolish antitheists.

When people thousands of years ago have your number, you’re probably not very clever.

That being said, their personal style reminds me of my younger sister years ago faking nearsightedness at the optometrist in order to get glasses because she thought they were stylish. Style designed to look smart at the expense of… style. Nice BCGs.

You “Jew” skinsuiters are really trying hard to ritually sacrifice your zuckermen in BurntOffering(“holocaust”) 2.0 aren’t you?

You’re even more foolish than the pictured duo, reinforcing your own numbers into the grave.

Religion is superstition in disguise.

Sikhism was a whole new civilizational dispensation. Newer than Islam. You’re not an honest man.

Lindsay’s website will never attract religious readers so I am unsure who he is addressing. He is an unserious writer with probably few followers.

As for the question posed – whether America will convert to Islam to avoid its own depopulation – one needs some sociological insight. America is a post-industrial economy and its economic model is one of creating false economies out of fiat money and social fictions. The FIRE (finance, real estate, insurance) sector of the economy for example is entirely fueled by creating mortgages out of thin air whereby the banksters can foreclose and grab a concrete, hard asset for lending the borrower nothing but their own creditworthiness. In such a service economy, professionalism is the hegemonic model.

In America, one marries one’s profession, not a wife or husband. The professional model is patterned after the military which re-socializes people to break familial bonds and obligations, by using sleep deprivation, fatigue, and stress. This is how academic institutions resocialize people into being doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc. and is based on degeneracy – the failure to produce the next generation. So, to convert to Islam, America would have to abandon or de-professionalize its professions, an unlikely scenario.

Antireligion is superstition in its most visible form.

I had a horrible Kafkaesque dream one night under a full moon. Someone was incessantly badgering me for no reason. They just kept on and on until I broke. I started beating this individual with my fists until he was bloody, yet it had no effect. It was then that I realized – as he was grinning up at me through shattered teeth – that being beaten was exactly what this individual wanted, and that it was I who was in a trap. That’s when I awoke.

yes, people have invented “religions.” Bahai is another example..

All religions except Judaism have been invented.

A bunch of Romans wrote the new testament.

A fellow Persian Jew, Salman, whispered in his ears that mad Arab and he recited.

And you are a useful goy idiot. You get a high gargling that crappy book we wrote to put you to 😴 sleep, and that’s great Besides you chose to bow to Kong Has Ann of Maure Occo, whom we bought with Shekels.

LOL

You are a rabid dog barking but you have no teeth to bite with because King Kong Has Ann has pulled your teeth.

Islam is not really a religion but a political theology. Islam is the creation of one man. You can’t say that of Christianity. 12 Apostles taught by a God! And then you have Jeffrey Dell Ehrlich say that Plato is the founder of Christianity! (q.v. Plato’s Gift to Christianity.)

Islam fundamentally begins with the Sword. The Islamic doctrine is “Convert or Die”. It does nothing about Sin, nor did Mohommed cure the effects of Sin. Only Jesus did that. Islam does not conform to the Natural Law but Christianity does. Nature teaches a Tripartite paradigm–how does Trifunctionality exist in Nature if it is not in the Islamic ‘god’?

Islam like Judaism is Idolatry. Islam is a brutish, barbarian ideology.

He correctly recognizes that religion isn’t just something a clever social reformer can invent.

Yes, it can – see Mormonism. Probably Mohammed as well. Jesus, on the other hand, was maybe just schizophrenic; are we saying that an autistic can’t do by technique and intention what a schizophrenic could by spontaneity and accident? Maybe due to the modern psyche not but I’d give the autist a better chance. The conversation is interesting but it seems like typical smug, conservative, anti-technical boomer cope (e.g. haha, what is this “young” White genius going to do, hahaha). Newsflash : the natural, spontaneous world has completely collapsed and been totally replaced by technique.

This site sucks thanks to Cloudflare. I made a detailed and thoughtful post and it has now vanished.

Am very pissed off, over an hour of writing and thought, I recommend anyone to save any comment here as a text file (I didn’t do it this time, and am angry enough to not bothering to repeat my earlier informative post), since Cloudflare will inevitably make trouble for posts.

Sikhism is also interesting in that it originated in northern India around the same time that the Renaissance and the Reformation were happening in Europe, and that it shows some rationalizing innovations which make this religion look somewhat more “modern” than older faiths. For example, Sikhism apparently treats women as spiritual equals to men, and it allows women to assume what would otherwise be considered traditionally make roles.

You have to wonder if there was some cultural transmission from contemporary Europe during Sikhism’s formative period, perhaps unintentionally via Christian missionaries or European merchants who were active in India at the time.

A fair number of Sikhs become Muslims including one girl that I knew years ago.
Sadly she had to run away from home and hide from her family 💔

Despite my earlier sabotage by Cloudflare, I will repeat myself, this time saving in a text file and going into a little more detail, since the example of Scientology is incorrect.

Scientology is anti-natal.

Lafayette Ronald Hubbard (founder of the cult) had seven children with three wives in succession. The second was in a state of bigamy, he hadn’t yet divorced his first wife.

Although he kidnapped the daughter from his second marriage when she was a baby, and took her to Cuba to escape U.S. law, he later claimed that he wasn’t her father. Scientology had forced the mother to sign N.D.A.s in return for money.

Hubbard also drove one of his sons from his third marriage to suicide.

The ‘elite’ of Scientology, the Sea Organisation, who cosplay in faux naval uniforms are strongly encouraged to be childless. Accounts of abortion under cult pressure, and of one half of a couple being sent to a very distant place are many.

The leader of now, David Miscavige (from Polish Miskaeowicz or similar, choice of his grandparents, so not crypsis by him) had a fellow-cultist wife, Shelley.

Never any children.

Shelley remains a cultist, but is a recluse and has not been seen in public for seventeen years, if she is still living.

Rubbish, Islam is as fake as they come a bunch of desert pirates feigning a religion to justify their many crimes.

Clearly also influenced and strengthened by merger with early and later heretical Christian offshoots.

Reasons were entirely different, Guru Nanak was more concerned with protecting people from Moslem depredation. Had little connection with other influences. Possibly Nestorian Christians, but I doubt it.

I looked up some north African history on wikipaedo tonight, topic clearly controlled by sub-Saharans on behalf of Wikipedia Jews. Article was so strange that I suspect some Jewish lies to have been thrown in.

Every should always remember that the wikijews control the site, but they also now allow their pets to control parts of the site.

That depends on if one may consider Islam to be or have been civilised.

Doing religion for natalism seems like extreme autism to me. Sorry, but I won’t be able to tune into this one.

In general, what inspires people in religion, aside from spirituality, is the “ethical” aspect. Religions give people an idea of what it looks like to “be a good person,” they codify certain “ethics” (e.g. life-lessons, behavioral traits, emotional dispositions, etc.) that people might value, and they allow parents/leaders a lever to enforce the ethics upon society.

The benefits people derive (or think they derive) from a religion has little or nothing to do with whether it originated as a con. NT scholar Robert Price, who also has an interest in new religions/cults, makes that point about Mormonism: it was obvious a long con by Joe Smith, but the structure he created has an independent life of its own.

Or, simply, as another great American theologian of the Smith era said, there’s a sucker born every minute.

IF the answer to falling birthrates is religion, then obviously only the dumbest people will reproduce.

If pro-natalism is needed for slaves, canon fodder, or taxi drivers, that’s a feature, not a bug.

Natalism is not the same as equal eugenics.

In America, one marries one’s profession, not a wife or husband. The professional model is patterned after the military which re-socializes people to break familial bonds and obligations, by using sleep deprivation, fatigue, and stress. This is how academic institutions resocialize people into being doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc. and is based on degeneracy – the failure to produce the next generation. So, to convert to Islam, America would have to abandon or de-professionalize its professions, an unlikely scenario.

Interesting. Military, academia…. monks too (some combine both, like the Knights Templar or Teutonic Knights), The two highest castes, Brahmins and Kshatriya. Perhaps throw in Vaishyas to cover the more mercantile professions. That leaves Sudras (slaves) and Untouchables.

The Catholic ideal from the Middle Ages: a small group of celibate clergy, some nobles and warriors, and… masses of dirt poor, ignorant serfs.

Pro-natalists can bitch about it all they want, but history shows anyone with brains doesn’t want to raise children. Instead, they use their brains to create art and science. I know the natalists will reply with talk about how rewarding parenthood is, missing out on the joys of parenthood etc., and maybe that’s true but again, the people with brains seem to think otherwise (like liberals who talk about equality but live in white neighborhoods; they show what they really think by their actions, or in this case, inaction).

The answer, as in the Greek city-states, is simply to require marriage and children by law. Most of the folks on the Right worried or complaining about this issue are, as ususal, trying to leverage it into an argument for (their) religion. No needed.

Christianity is not about being “a good person”. That is Judaism.

Christianity is about something cosmic – Christ’s ascension (“He is Risen!”).

The reason Christianity can not be reduced to ethics or morality, is that we don’t know the consequences of most of our actions (“the way to hell is paved with good intentions”).

The agnostic Max Weber put it this way: “I is not true that good can follow only from good and evil only from evil, but that often the opposite is true. Anyone who fails to see this is, indeed, a political infant.” That is why Christians pray to be forgiven for their sins of omission: “not knowing what they are doing”.

Judaism is principally about sin; Christianity is about being a “fool” (Apostle Paul). One can live their entire life according to the 10 Commandments but still have lived and participated in an illusion that led one to believe they were moral and ethical. One can be a moral fool. The Catholic thinker Erasmus approach to Christianity can be summed up as:

Folly provides the illusions necessary to render life in this world tolerable and even pleasant;
Folly makes the professional leaders of church and state blind enough to be happy in their vicious irresponsibility;
Folly enables the Christian fool to renounce the world in favor of Christian transcendence, joy, humor, play, order and a sense of damnation of evil in this life and a beatific vision of life in the next world.

Christianity contains its own anti-religious critique. To be a Christian one must:
Condemn the money changers
Not project their faults on others (particularly racism)
Not love your tribal enemy who wants to kill you and your innocent children but seek mutual reciprocation (“love your enemy” is a Hebrew admonition to love the tribe who kill you)
Not embrace child or animal sacrifices
Not embrace circumcision and body mutilation (eg., sex change operations)
Not substitute the law and legalism for an understanding of unintended consequences

I know I’m ignorant, but as far as I can tell Islam was mainly spread by the sword, but perhaps this is a myth. Perhaps it’s only the 3rd world breeding proclivities of it’s adherents that more accounts for its civilizational success than the generally more materially successful and technologically advanced Christian civilizations. Breeding proclivity will certainly explain the New Muslim Dark Ages soon a’comin’, that’s for sure.

Christianity, an inherently messianic religion, must cough up a messiah sooner rather than later, or it is doomed to failure.

ALL religions are nothing more than superstitious b.s.

Religion isn’t even necessary. Simply give secular natalists total control over the money supply, the media, the educational system, the government and everything else for a generation, and they will reverse the declining birthrate. The real problem is feminism: modern women have been taught to put career ahead of motherhood, which is a violation of the natural order.

Great: uglier and dumber.

Not project their faults on others (particularly racism)

In what way is it a “projection” (Jewish Science jargon for simultaneous accusation and admission of guilt, which is, coincidentally, the Jew modus operandi in all dealings with non-Jews: accuse them of everything we plan to do to them!) for me to observe that niggers are congenitally disadvantaged along practically all cognitive and behavioral measurements of endeavor and achievement? So only criminals read crime stats? Christian anti-racism has been one of the major sticking-points which prevents me from cultivating an interest in Christ. If I can’t remain a Christian while teaching my daughter not to create an inhuman monstrosity with some nigger then I have no use for Christ. If Christ would have me evince passivity and uncaring relinquishment of agency over whether or not my direct genetic offspring should include African admixture, then Christ is actually a force for evil in my estimation.

I tend not to think so. I can’t come up with a reasonable explanation for why there is matter and where all the matter that exists comes from or why it exists at all. Has the creator revealed himself to us and if so what are our reponsibilities to him? So if there is a creator what do we owe him if anything? Maybe these have already been answered and I’m unaware.

I realized that I’m making up my own religion as I go along. It’s fine, I trust the system. It basically comes down to “Thou shalt know what to do when the time comes”. Or not. In Anthony Burgess’ book The Kingdom of the Wicked he calls the Roman afterlife the Una Nox Dormienda, or the long night’s sleep. It doesn’t sound unfair. If one doesn’t experience the universe as being exclusively hostile could that be good enough? I can think of a lot of good things with no effort.

Dammit, it’s not helping my fertility, but then I would probably have been a monk if I followed an organized religion.

I could live with atheism, except for my not liking atheists. What’s the worst thing about Monty Python?
Monty Python fans!

Video Link

Why do you need a rational explanation for where all the matter that exists comes from or why it exists at all? Does it really matter how the universe began? Does it affect your daily life in any way? Surely an answer exists somewhere, but is there any pressing need to find out?

Was it spontaneous generation, ie a Big Bang? Did Allah do it? How did Allah get there anyway? Unfortunately it is the case that rational explanations require a process of rational cause and effect. But the process of cause and effect breaks down at the beginning of all things, since if the universe had a cause, then the cause unfortunately must have had a cause as well etc etc. Thus cause and effect go around in a circle at the beginning of all things.

So be happy to consider the idea that the universe has no rational cause, since no rational cause can be defined by definition, so to speak. The best rational answer thus comes from that all-wise and all-knowing alternative religious figure, the Buddha. The question of the beginning of the universe is defined as one of the 14 Unanswerable Questions. You are perfectly free to imagine whatever beginning of the universe you desire.

Presumably the Musloons, for example, regard the Supreme Being, ie Allah, as naturally being outside of cause and effect. This is really a reformulation in anthropic terms of the same (non)answer. The Musloon imagines, or has been told by a certain possibly schizophrenic individual who lived a long time ago, that Allah created the universe, and viola He does!

This is not to rule out that ‘The Science’ may come up with something better than its current pathetic effort in perhaps a few hundred thousand years or so. This is not a long time in the history of consciousness or the universe.

Video Link

I can’t come up with a reasonable explanation for why there is matter and where all the matter that exists comes from or why it exists at all.

Matter as opposed to what else? Mind? Thought?

The “why” of something is turtles all the way up and all the way down. The search is endless.

From a Cartesian/dualistic view, mind and matter are 2 distinctly separate domains. From an holistic view, they are gradients of the same; only the “properties” differ.

Does it really matter how the universe began? Does it affect your daily life in any way?

I think “how” the universe began is less interesting than the “what” and what it means for our lives. If the nature of the universe is such-and-such, what does it mean for us as human beings?

I think the “how” is also a search for the “what” and “why” in disguise. When scientists seek the answers to the material origins of the universe, they’re really searching for their own meaning.

Actually, all questions and all answers are a search for our own meaning.

Since Kevin Barrett is a Muslim, I might relate it to Islam as well. In the Muslim faith, the highest creed is “there is one God”.

Superficially, it’s a call for monotheism. On a higher level, it means everything that exists and everything we do returns to God and the question of God, ie, it is all God and nothing but God.

On a moral level, it means every moral choice is with a view to the God we serve, ie the true moral God, or the false immoral God.

Thanks, but I just don’t have the people skills needed for joining any organization. I was born Afrikaner and into Christianity(I still support them in a political sense), and that’s quite enough group activity for a lifetime for me. Even on social media or Unz Review I have to take frequent breaks to charge my batteries, LOL.

James, are not you the person I recommended ditching South Africa and moving to Russia to maintain and further the same life and style, i.e., farming? Russia and its culture, traditional values are in line with Boer Afrikaners.

“They got some crazy lookin’ women there, and I’m gonna get me one”.

Video Link

Home is where the heart is.

Video Link

propoganda?

The thing is that Russia seems to be doing fine without me. While they do serve as an inspiration, I am a different kind of human, and I follow a different path. Like I said before, the majority of whites here just don’t have the option to pack up and leave, our fight is here.

Hubbard’s acolyte David Miscavige has made sure to keep the entire thing chugging powerfully along. He’s basically a very warped ruthless CEO with an extreme paranoid streak.

That said, Scientology, like a lot of cults, does offer newcomers a lot of help initially. Hubbard based his introductory ideas on psychology. Newcomers are forced to do a number of things like confronting past traumas and mentally thinking about them to over come them (the e-meter stuff), as well as being taught to understand every single word of a book when they read it. This helps them to psychologically deal with pain and also to become more well-read.

The esoteric nature of Scientology’s system keeps the newcomers from learning about the Xenu stuff until later, when they’re already full believers anyway. The fact that its in Hollywood — a land filled with desperate people searching for fame as a cover for their deep insecurities and problems — gives it the biggest pool of potential brainwashees (cults and SoCal go hand and in hand, e.g. the Mansons).

Scientology has also systematically used blackmail as a big weapon to keep itself in business. It cultivates information as well as any high-functioning state intel agency.

Finally, and it can’t be dismissed, having Tom Cruise as your face — the long-lasting, most bankable movie star ever — with all of his money and influence hasn’t hurt. Other celebrities coming in help, but Cruise is the big dog.

The only thing I can’t figure is how Scientology hasn’t really cornered the p.r. market. All that blackmail, and yet being a Scientologist doesn’t guarantee you leading roles in movies and gets you made fun of a lot.