I am basically offering to speak for white nationalists to represent them in fact as a lawyer would.
They will predictably reject my offer on grounds of sex and race.
And I will say to them "What do you have to lose? If I crash and burn, you can always say to yourselves you knew I'd crash and burn, but if I get the publicity, then it will have paid off, wouldn't it?"
My theory is that if the problem of feminism is solved, then so will everything else.
White nationalists just concentrating on feminism alone for now will be enough to get them what they want, eventually.
But I have to be the one doing it.
And I must have some sign that they are aware that I am doing it on their behalves, and want their interest and attention.
Also, I am prepared to go to jail for stating my beliefs.
I just know white nationalists are going to be crap at making the case against feminism. I am therefore offering to do it for them.
"The average man is superior to the average woman, but the superior woman is superior to the superior man."
Confucius said this, apparently. I am claiming to be that superior woman. I am particularly well placed to make all the arguments against feminism on their behalf, without fear or favour, because I do not have a wife to upset nor will I be dismayed if feminists won't have sex with me.
This is something white nationalist men should bear in mind, when they ask themselves why they should allow me, a female and a foreigner, to make their case for them.
I am really the best placed person in the world to make the case for nationalism and give them the most publicity.
They should look upon my offer as a lawyer acting pro bono. I shall not be charging them by the hour or at all.
More and more people are increasingly coming round to the conclusion that the consequence of universal suffrage is that the female preference is always prioritised.
The adverse effects of so doing can be explained.
The only problem is that no one in the political establishment or media will be listening.
However, we must go through the motions of speaking to them as if they would listen, to build up our case.
In short, we must state the case for nationalism and why it is desirable and in the long term national interest.
And then we come to the problem of nationalism. Some people think it is racist and therefore evil.
But there are plenty of non-white people in the West who are also getting disturbed and alarmed about immigration.
Trump managed to get many non-whites to vote for him because he showed no racism. This is something to bear in mind.
In any case you need to agree to shut the door FIRST, before you can decide later who within the house you might want to throw out. We can say illegal immigrants, which is fair enough.
If you are going to say you are going to throw out non-white citizens just because they are non-white, that would be problematic.
Even if your intention is to throw out all non-white citizens ultimately, it would be politic to keep quiet about it for mow to gain their support so they can help you with the business of shutting the door. One step at a time.
The problem with Muslims is more nuanced. While there were laws forbidding the incitement of racial hatred, Muslims were in the only group people were allowed to insult until The Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 forbidding Muslims from being targeted because of their religion.
Muslims are therefore resented as
1) immigrants
2) people whose beliefs and practices are incompatible with liberalism
3) people whom the West bombs as well as those most likely to commit acts of terrorism
They are most resented because in them is combined all that is hateful and fearful about the enemy alien who are increasing in number and getting stronger, while the host nation is decreasing in number and getting weaker and more fearful. Muslims are no more than the symptom of the disease of feminism. It was feminism that caused immigration, and it is the female voter's preference for social spending and indifference to immigration and foreign policy that allows the deep state to continue pulling the strings of every single US President.
I would say that our problem is a problem of democracy. It worked before, and people were reasonably happy, but it is now breaking down because democracy has allowed the left to take over after political parties have identified winning the female vote as a way of getting elected.
The female voter is always seduced by promising to have more laws that protect women from men, so we lose our liberties.
The female voter will always vote for more public spending in the way people who don't pay taxes will always vote for higher public spending.
The female preference is feminist and this means being a working mother.
The more working mothers you have the more divorced mothers you have.
Working and divorced mothers have fewer children causing a labour shortage creating a demand for immigrant labour.
Once divorced single mothers became normalised, the unmarried single mother also became normalised whose children tend not grow up into good law abiding citizens who are good employees.
If we point the finger of blame at feminism and call it out, it would attract real attention, just as long as we don't mince our words and call it Cultural Marxism or Postmodernism as Jordan Peterson does.
Most people don't know what Cultural Marxism or Postmodernism is so they won't think it affects them.
We have to call a spade a spade, and the problem that afflicts all Western nations and indeed all nations practising democracy under indiscriminate universal suffrage should be called by its proper name ie FEMINISM.
We haven't even got to this stage yet.
How hard can it be for men to do that?
If this is presented as a war between men and women, then the probability of men winning it must be greater, mustn't it?
So, instead of saying racist, antisemitic and Islamophobic things and getting into trouble over it, why not just concentrate on feminism alone? Tactically, it would be more effective because it would attract more attention ie feminists who will become alarmed and angry generating more publicity.
It is just a question of tactics and presentation.
We can talk about GENDER JUSTICE and denounce gender equality as a fundamental philosophical error.
It was Aristotle who said "It is the greatest injustice to treat unequal things equally."
If you present the problem as feminism, then you will have in effect chosen the battlefield on which to fight on the higher moral ground.
If you want to continue complaining about Jews, you are actually allowing them to dictate the terms of debate. Ditto on racial matters and Islam.
Just concentrate on one thing at a time.
Lions don't use a scattergun approach to their hunting. They actually choose an animal that is slower and weaker than the others in the herd and keep going for it.
Sometimes, less is more.
They will predictably reject my offer on grounds of sex and race.
And I will say to them "What do you have to lose? If I crash and burn, you can always say to yourselves you knew I'd crash and burn, but if I get the publicity, then it will have paid off, wouldn't it?"
My theory is that if the problem of feminism is solved, then so will everything else.
White nationalists just concentrating on feminism alone for now will be enough to get them what they want, eventually.
But I have to be the one doing it.
And I must have some sign that they are aware that I am doing it on their behalves, and want their interest and attention.
Also, I am prepared to go to jail for stating my beliefs.
I just know white nationalists are going to be crap at making the case against feminism. I am therefore offering to do it for them.
"The average man is superior to the average woman, but the superior woman is superior to the superior man."
Confucius said this, apparently. I am claiming to be that superior woman. I am particularly well placed to make all the arguments against feminism on their behalf, without fear or favour, because I do not have a wife to upset nor will I be dismayed if feminists won't have sex with me.
This is something white nationalist men should bear in mind, when they ask themselves why they should allow me, a female and a foreigner, to make their case for them.
I am really the best placed person in the world to make the case for nationalism and give them the most publicity.
They should look upon my offer as a lawyer acting pro bono. I shall not be charging them by the hour or at all.
***************************************************
More and more people are increasingly coming round to the conclusion that the consequence of universal suffrage is that the female preference is always prioritised.
The adverse effects of so doing can be explained.
The only problem is that no one in the political establishment or media will be listening.
However, we must go through the motions of speaking to them as if they would listen, to build up our case.
In short, we must state the case for nationalism and why it is desirable and in the long term national interest.
And then we come to the problem of nationalism. Some people think it is racist and therefore evil.
But there are plenty of non-white people in the West who are also getting disturbed and alarmed about immigration.
Trump managed to get many non-whites to vote for him because he showed no racism. This is something to bear in mind.
In any case you need to agree to shut the door FIRST, before you can decide later who within the house you might want to throw out. We can say illegal immigrants, which is fair enough.
If you are going to say you are going to throw out non-white citizens just because they are non-white, that would be problematic.
Even if your intention is to throw out all non-white citizens ultimately, it would be politic to keep quiet about it for mow to gain their support so they can help you with the business of shutting the door. One step at a time.
The problem with Muslims is more nuanced. While there were laws forbidding the incitement of racial hatred, Muslims were in the only group people were allowed to insult until The Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 forbidding Muslims from being targeted because of their religion.
Muslims are therefore resented as
1) immigrants
2) people whose beliefs and practices are incompatible with liberalism
3) people whom the West bombs as well as those most likely to commit acts of terrorism
They are most resented because in them is combined all that is hateful and fearful about the enemy alien who are increasing in number and getting stronger, while the host nation is decreasing in number and getting weaker and more fearful. Muslims are no more than the symptom of the disease of feminism. It was feminism that caused immigration, and it is the female voter's preference for social spending and indifference to immigration and foreign policy that allows the deep state to continue pulling the strings of every single US President.
I would say that our problem is a problem of democracy. It worked before, and people were reasonably happy, but it is now breaking down because democracy has allowed the left to take over after political parties have identified winning the female vote as a way of getting elected.
The female voter is always seduced by promising to have more laws that protect women from men, so we lose our liberties.
The female voter will always vote for more public spending in the way people who don't pay taxes will always vote for higher public spending.
The female preference is feminist and this means being a working mother.
The more working mothers you have the more divorced mothers you have.
Working and divorced mothers have fewer children causing a labour shortage creating a demand for immigrant labour.
Once divorced single mothers became normalised, the unmarried single mother also became normalised whose children tend not grow up into good law abiding citizens who are good employees.
If we point the finger of blame at feminism and call it out, it would attract real attention, just as long as we don't mince our words and call it Cultural Marxism or Postmodernism as Jordan Peterson does.
Most people don't know what Cultural Marxism or Postmodernism is so they won't think it affects them.
We have to call a spade a spade, and the problem that afflicts all Western nations and indeed all nations practising democracy under indiscriminate universal suffrage should be called by its proper name ie FEMINISM.
We haven't even got to this stage yet.
How hard can it be for men to do that?
If this is presented as a war between men and women, then the probability of men winning it must be greater, mustn't it?
So, instead of saying racist, antisemitic and Islamophobic things and getting into trouble over it, why not just concentrate on feminism alone? Tactically, it would be more effective because it would attract more attention ie feminists who will become alarmed and angry generating more publicity.
It is just a question of tactics and presentation.
We can talk about GENDER JUSTICE and denounce gender equality as a fundamental philosophical error.
It was Aristotle who said "It is the greatest injustice to treat unequal things equally."
If you present the problem as feminism, then you will have in effect chosen the battlefield on which to fight on the higher moral ground.
If you want to continue complaining about Jews, you are actually allowing them to dictate the terms of debate. Ditto on racial matters and Islam.
Just concentrate on one thing at a time.
Lions don't use a scattergun approach to their hunting. They actually choose an animal that is slower and weaker than the others in the herd and keep going for it.
Sometimes, less is more.
22 comments:
We are already making a huge difference as MGTOWs we don't need women in MGTOW at all. White men are doing a lot destroying feminism. Feminists are now starting to make videos claiming they are no longer feminists and are now equalists instead. They still won't care about men's issues. Feminism is dying this year very fast. Along with all the other groups connected to it. Nobody needs a leader to do this. Men do not want a woman trying to talk for us. We are speaking loud and clear. Peterson along with so many others are doing it. I talk publicly about it to people I run into at the bar or anywhere. It is dying very fast and men do not need 1 person as our voice. Not happening.
The battle is far from won. There are 3 important elections still this year in Europe.
I know we have not won totally yet. Us men don't need a spokesperson to speak for us. The people that are awake are all exposing the B.S. feminism will not make a comeback and will not recover from the major decline so far this year alone.
Don't you want it to be coordinated campaign worldwide?
If you kill it quickly, less damage will be done and fewer people will suffer. Too many people in Europe still believe in it.
MGTOW men do not want any 1 person talking for all of us especially a woman. It won't ever happen. You can say what you want, however you are not my spokes person and I have not and will never will hear your name in MGTOW videos saying you are our spokes person or leader.
Do you have favourite MGTOW YouTuber?
Wow. You are afraid to tell me even that?
How am I afraid?
Why do I have to tell you?
So why won't you tell me which MGTOW YouTuber you admire?
You are displaying a beta male trait. Like women, they only have the power to withhold.
All men only MGTOW videos. you are just a troll
I'll tell you who I admire. I'm not scared, like you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9iGqK6pFd1c&t=2214s
You're a bitter beta and want to blow the world up and then piss on it.
so now you are using shaming tactics just like a female does all the to make a man feel guilty some how.
Men use shaming tactics too.
Where did I shame you?
I wasn't accusing you of that. I am saying men also use shaming tactics on other men.
I talked about you using shaming tactics on me and your response is to say other people use shaming tactics. You started calling me names and insulting me because I said MGTOW does not want a woman speaking for them at all. Then accuse me of being a terrorist by wanting to blow up the world. You really think if you said that to my face I would just be ok with it and not call you out just like I just did. Certain MGTOW videos already exposed that women would try and take over MGTOW some how or try and speak for us men on feminism. You are one of those women and I no longer want anything to do with you. Good luck trying to take over MGTOW as a woman. Lol. It won't ever happen keep dreaming while I pump and dump all of these feminist women that love to be whores and sluts while being proud of it.
I didn't mean to suggest that you are a terrorist.
I meant if you could you would blow up THE WHOLE WORLD and then piss on it because you are so bitter and hopeless.
Bitter and hopeless how?
You won't do anything that involves any risk on your part. I actually know a male friend who actually said he doesn't want a leader. He doesn't want a leader because he doesn't want the burden of following him and doing as he directs, I guess.
I am also apart of Anonymous Hackers. Leaderless and we also go our own way with just a few ideas and exposing the truth. What take a risk with a woman or a man and put all of our eggs in one basket only to lose it all. No thanks that is why it is called MEN GOING THEIR OWN WAY MGTOW.
You refuse to accept that we no longer need a leader and that we can do things on our own without a woman. I have been seeing women starting to freak out a bit because they no longer have power over us and can no longer use the government against us if we checkout of marriage and having children. Women trap us by having children with us only to use them as weapons to get money out us and to destroy us mentally with our own kids. Yeah most men are done with that crap. Men of all ages too. From boys in elementary school to men that are in their 60's and 70's. We are done letting women destroy our lives and steal our stuff that we earned.
You don't have to support me, but should rally round John of MGTOW IS FREEDOM.
I take risk with my life by exposing the truth everyday and facing secret service, homeland security, and local police. In last few years all of this happened to me all because of the truth. Yet people like you think I don't use my freedom of speech enough or that I may not being enough some how. I don't have to advertise everything that I do to satisfy ungrateful people. I will continue to do whatever I want while trying to make sure I stick to our plan.
Post a Comment