옥수수 🌽

𝐘𝐎𝐔𝐍𝐆, 𝐌𝐈𝐋𝐈𝐓𝐀𝐑𝐈𝐙𝐄𝐃, 𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐑𝐀𝐃𝐈𝐂𝐀𝐋: 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐔𝐒𝐓𝐀𝐒𝐇𝐀 𝐘𝐎𝐔𝐓𝐇 𝐎𝐑𝐆𝐀𝐍𝐈𝐙𝐀𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍, 𝐈𝐃𝐄𝐎𝐋𝐎𝐆𝐘 𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐏𝐑𝐀𝐂𝐓𝐈𝐂𝐄, 𝟏𝟗𝟒𝟏-𝟏𝟗𝟒𝟓

- 𝙶𝙾𝚁𝙰𝙽 𝙼𝙸𝙻𝙹𝙰𝙽 -

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐈𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐁𝐞𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐝 𝐓𝐫𝐮𝐦𝐩'𝐬 𝐑𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐓𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐟𝐟𝐬

So Israeli Jews are still stuck in regressive stone ages, while Palestinian Canaanites make guns and grenades?

This has to be an anti-Israel account

The reason why I supported Trump over Harris out of practical measures is because Trump is far better than any other candidates when it comes to revealing this false and frail sense of “Universal Pan-Transatlantic Coalition” which is not based on any sophisticated organic civilizational basis like the Chinese and the Russians independently possess. To put it simply, the subject matter is ontologically deficient in nature. This is something that even Richard Spencer admitted, but evidently, Richard supports the projection of an artificially inculcated identity of pan-Europeanism (which pragmatically includes western-aligned countries such as Japan and South Korea) over the world. I can actually respect him for being intellectually honest on that part. However, this doesn’t mean that the Axis of Resistards possesses any profoundly unifiable material basis that projects geopolitical power and interest on a monolithic basis. At least the Transatlantic movements have profound institutionalized political structures such as G7, EU, or NATO. Axis of Resistards doesn’t even have any of that besides BRICS to which India and Saudi Arabia subscribe.

https://youtu.be/ZRvjyEDwbP4?feature=shared

The Trade Expansion Act, International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), Reciprocal Trade Act… Since taking office, US President Donald Trump has launched a “tariff war,” deploying a range of “new weapons” rooted in these previously obscure laws. By imposing tariffs using legal frameworks that had long been considered obsolete, he has aggressively pressured other nations.

https://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/news/2025-02-12/business/economy/KoreaUS-FTA-could-limit-impact-of-reciprocal-Trump-tariffs-economists-say/2240745

Pope Francis condemns Mass Deportations and anti-immigration rhetoric being put forward by the current US leadership and implies how Jesus was an exiled immigrant as well

Not only Hans Gunther but even Alfred Rosenberg in the Myth of the 20th century accused the Irish of being brown due to miscegenation.

Attempting to detect “browns” from these dudes was so schizo to an extent that it becomes respectable at this stage.

Carl Brigham, the American eugenicist and psychologist who created the SAT, originally devised it as part of a larger endeavor to limit immigration from Eastern Europe, the Mediterranean region, and African American communities. His purpose was to maintain the supremacy of "Nordic races" and propagate pseudoscientific ideas about racial hierarchy in American society. His work was later used to justify the 1924 immigration act that was signed by former US President Calvin Coolidge. However, Brigham did later admit that his work was heavily flawed due to faulty methodology and not considering the fact that migrants from non-Anglo Germanic sphere had a language barrier which prevented them from attaining higher IQ results.

Heidegger saw humanity at that time as having become little more than animals, just working to survive and seek pleasure, while universities had turned into mere vocational schools for making a living. He believed that to overcome social and cultural decay and to turn people into truly profound beings, universities needed to become hubs for national renewal, with the Nazis leading a European revolution. Thus, it is rational to conclude that NS were ideologically compatible with the Heideggerian Axioms. Heidegger didn't support NS just not to get shot or camped.

(2)

Contrary to what Haz argues here, Heidegger's support for the Nazis is totally compatible within the contextual basis of his worldview. If you look at Heidegger's ideas through the lens of a "serious clash of ideologies and the times," it's clear that his involvement with the Nazis isn't something that can be easily written off as a simple moral failure. Read any of Heidegger's work and you'd see that he believed the NS revolution was a way to protect Europe from the dangers of "technological totalitarianism," which he saw in both American materialism and Soviet communism. So, his decision to align with the Nazis wasn't some irrational move; it was more about grappling with the historical circumstances in line with his philosophy that humans are "beings-in-the-world."

(1)

Brown

Even Donald Trump won the World Cup

What’s Cristiano Ronaldo’s excuse?

Soccer is the gayest word that exists on the planet

No contest

I’ve come to the realization myself that normies are not only morally, but in many cases intellectually superior to “revolutionary/reactionary dissidents”

Took me awhile to realize that the self-described DR was full of spiteful mutant types on par with far left Antifa members who have so much pent up resentment towards society that they want to burn it all down and self-immolate. These self-destructive freaks are attracted to anything edgy and transgressive. They bring their personal dysfunction into their politics and end up with insane opinions like that.

America’s support for a two state solution remains intact. It’s just not Palestine-Israel. It’s America-Israel.

Breaking 🚨

According to the Saudi Royal family, Saudi Arabia’s position on the establishment of the Palestinian state remains firm and unshakable, and the Crown Prince affirmed this position in a clear and frank manner that does not tolerate interpretation in any way.

𝐍𝐚𝐳𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐟𝐟𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐀𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐬; 𝐓𝐨 𝐁𝐨𝐲𝐜𝐨𝐭𝐭 “𝐙𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐭” 𝐏𝐚𝐥𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐞 𝐆𝐨𝐨𝐝𝐬

𝐃𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐝 𝐓𝐫𝐮𝐦𝐩’𝐬 𝐓𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐟𝐟𝐬 𝐑𝐞𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐧, 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐈𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬?

"Anti-Globalist Ratified Nationalism" presents itself as a type of internationalism in which reciprocal respect for territorial boundaries is supposed to be anticipated. In reality, this approach is essentially bound to deluded pacifism because it reinforces the idea of ontologically ambiguous social constructs. The idea that these people advocate for predicates on structures that strive for a global cooperation paradigm that, paradoxically, tries to create an idealized, utopian ethnostate devoid of any true cultural foundation.

So no more AOC?

Retarded & Conspiratard are redundant

My apologies

The communists and anti-imperialist resistard circles commonly spew this framework. Anything that has the West involved must be some sort of evil scheme to dismantle the Eurasian Hegemony over which they goon. It’s similar with the schizo dissident right or online nazis who believe that even a microscopic/negligible involvement of jews in a certain ideology or historical event must be some jewish elite’s scheme to genocide gentiles. All retarded conspiratard crap just for the sake of being “anti-status quo”

Social Conservatism for thee
Social Liberalism for me

That’s my credo

𝙰 𝟷𝟿𝟺𝟷 𝚌𝚊𝚛𝚍 𝚍𝚎𝚙𝚒𝚌𝚝𝚜 𝚄𝚗𝚌𝚕𝚎 𝚂𝚊𝚖 𝚌𝚑𝚘𝚔𝚒𝚗𝚐 𝚂𝚘𝚞𝚝𝚑 𝙰𝚖𝚎𝚛𝚒𝚌𝚊, 𝚜𝚢𝚖𝚋𝚘𝚕𝚒𝚣𝚒𝚗𝚐 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝙼𝚘𝚗𝚛𝚘𝚎 𝙳𝚘𝚌𝚝𝚛𝚒𝚗𝚎 𝚒𝚗 𝚊𝚌𝚝𝚒𝚘𝚗, 𝚠𝚑𝚒𝚌𝚑 𝚐𝚛𝚊𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚍 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚄𝚗𝚒𝚝𝚎𝚍 𝚂𝚝𝚊𝚝𝚎𝚜 𝚍𝚘𝚖𝚒𝚗𝚊𝚗𝚌𝚎 𝚒𝚗 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚆𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚎𝚛𝚗 𝙷𝚎𝚖𝚒𝚜𝚙𝚑𝚎𝚛𝚎 𝚏𝚘𝚛 𝚗𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚕𝚢 𝟸𝟶𝟶 𝚢𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚜.

𝐃𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐝 𝐓𝐫𝐮𝐦𝐩’𝐬 𝐓𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐟𝐟𝐬 𝐑𝐞𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐧, 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐈𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬?

https://philpapers.org/archive/KIMDJA.pdf

𝐃𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐉𝐮𝐜𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐠𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐭 𝐚𝐧 𝐔𝐧𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐀𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐲𝐬𝐢𝐬

𝐇𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐚𝐡 𝐇. 𝐊𝐢𝐦

On June 18 1940, Stalin’s USSR Officially Congratulated Hitler’s Germany for Successfully Conquering France

K-Pop has been a total disaster in the sense that a substantial amount of Korean males that are “average” at best when it comes to looks have overly deluded themselves into believing that they are a reincarnation of BTS or BigBang , providing them with unwarranted ostentatiousness. The fringe “anti-woke” conservatards who’re obsessed with being validated as “model minorities” possess a more calamitous psychological state where they eviscerate wokeness as an epitome of postmodern social liberalism when “wokeness” undoubtedly led to the elevation of “K-Pop.” This is one of the reasons why I don’t commit myself into entirely denouncing leftism or social liberalism in the west or even in the east when I know some of the offsprings that these “imperialistic” ideologies provide clearly benefit the community in which I reside in some way. It’s the minimum level of token of gratitude which I can provide in a non-assertive manner, or else, I would be a total lunatic living in denial.

Jean-Marie Le Pen’s grave was vandalized by French leftist activists

https://www.lefigaro.fr/faits-divers/a-la-trinite-sur-mer-la-tombe-de-jean-marie-le-pen-degradee-a-la-masse-20250131

It’s more complex than what the tweet above suggests. President Trump's direct diplomatic engagement with North Korea effectively bypasses South Korea, thereby diminishing South Korea's role in peninsula diplomacy. Trump doesn’t even have to rely on South Korea to obtain direct contact with North Korea any longer because he knows Kim Jung Un now after having met him on 3 separate occasions. This sort of unconventional diplomatic approach has been perceived by anti-North Korea advocates in South Korea as undermining their country's diplomatic leverage. By indirectly or should I even go further and say “by directly” sidelining South Korea, Trump's strategy potentially reduces Seoul to a mere spectator in its own regional security dynamics. Thus, really this shift in diplomatic focus raises concerns about South Korea's influence and strategic autonomy in Northeast Asian geopolitics. Its position falls into jeopardy.

Richard Nixon won nearly 100% of the white vote in Mississippi when he ran against George McGovern in the 1972 presidential election

😭

Goebbels is criticizing Salazar for his indecisiveness and lack of full support for Nazi Germany. He points out that Salazar relies heavily on his military and has lost some trust in Germany, resulting in his wavering between supporting the Allies and the Axis, much like Franco in Spain. Goebbels argues that both dictators would benefit from openly siding with Germany, as they face defeat if the Axis loses. He also highlights the strong British influence in Portugal and criticizes German diplomacy for failing to counter British propaganda effectively. To address this, Goebbels plans to intensify German propaganda in Portugal, particularly by acquiring movie theaters to circumvent a Jewish-led boycott that prevents German films from being shown.

- 𝙶𝚘𝚎𝚋𝚋𝚎𝚕𝚜 𝙳𝚒𝚊𝚛𝚒𝚎𝚜 -

Average GDL nibba

Madison Grant contends that a shared language gently unifies people, forming political and cultural communities… as witnessed with English-speaking inhabitants in the British Empire and America, and German-speaking Austrians with Germany. He uses Belgium as an example of how linguistic differences, combined with religion, cause separation between the Alpine French-speaking Walloons and the Nordic Dutch-speaking Flemings, demonstrating how an artificial nation battles with internal linguistic and cultural issues (while simultaneously implying that the Northern Belgians are superior to Southern Belgians because the former are Nordics, whereas the latter are Alpines). Grant contrasts this with other initiatives that employ language and religion to preserve national identity, such as in Ireland and among French Canadians. He also observes a counter-trend in which lesser nations assert themselves against bigger imperial groups, frequently motivated by historical beliefs or cultural resistance, which he sees as a return of "lower races" opposing the Nordic race.

𝚁𝚎𝚏𝚎𝚛𝚎𝚗𝚌𝚎: 𝚃𝚑𝚎 𝙿𝚊𝚜𝚜𝚒𝚗𝚐 𝚘𝚏 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝙶𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚝 𝚁𝚊𝚌𝚎, 𝙼𝚊𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚘𝚗 𝙶𝚛𝚊𝚗𝚝

(3)

Rare footage of South Korean GirlGroup Baby V.O.X performing in Pyongyang, North Korea in 2003

𝐂𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐚’𝐬 𝐆𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐨𝐧 𝐑𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐄𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐡𝐬 𝟐𝟎𝐭𝐡 𝐂𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐲

I honestly still can’t believe Trump is president again

The dude was first elected when I was in high school

Madison Grant here is arguing that democracy can harm societal progress when races of “unequal value” live together, but aristocracy can be just as damaging when it imports labor for convenience (cheap wage). He points out that in America, the upper classes historically introduced foreign workers like slaves, Chinese coolies, and Japanese laborers, leading to demographic changes detrimental to native populations. This practice, according to Grant, fundamentally jeopardizes the existence of American farming and artisan classes, akin to how Roman plebeians were initially displaced by slaves… only for the patricians to follow suit generations later.

𝚁𝚎𝚏𝚎𝚛𝚎𝚗𝚌𝚎: 𝚃𝚑𝚎 𝙿𝚊𝚜𝚜𝚒𝚗𝚐 𝚘𝚏 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝙶𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚝 𝚁𝚊𝚌𝚎, 𝙼𝚊𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚘𝚗 𝙶𝚛𝚊𝚗𝚝

(2)

If true, Obama W

What an alpha rizzler

I will be driving to Busan
See you later

In 1956, King Saud of Saudi Arabia cut oil supplies to Britain and France in response to their invasion of Egypt during the Suez Canal Crisis. This action was part of a broader Arab boycott against the two countries, aiming to pressure them into withdrawing from the conflict.

Karl Marx contends that the English bourgeoisie, in collaboration with the aristocracy, economically exploits Ireland by converting it into agricultural land for low-cost exports while lowering its population to secure English investments. This exploitation also advantages English landlords by generating absentee revenues. The exodus generated by this land concentration floods the English labour market, lowering wages and living circumstances for the English working class. Marx argues that the presence of Irish workers in England generates a divided, antagonistic working class that capitalists use to keep control. He contends that this split, fostered by prejudice, undermines the English proletariat's unity and might, therefore maintaining capitalist rule. Indeed, Marx thought the mass importation of Irish labor to England was a tool used by the English capitalists.

(2)

𝐌𝐚𝐫𝐱 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐃𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐄𝐱𝐩𝐥𝐨𝐢𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐈𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐡 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐄𝐧𝐠𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐡 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐭𝐬 𝐛𝐲 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐄𝐧𝐠𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐡 𝐁𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐠𝐞𝐨𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐞

“𝘈𝘴 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘌𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘨𝘦𝘰𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘦, 𝘪𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘴𝘵 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘤𝘦 𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘌𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘺 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘐𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘱𝘢𝘴𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘩 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘌𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘬𝘦𝘵 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘮𝘦𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘰𝘰𝘭 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘩𝘦𝘢𝘱𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘦𝘴. 𝘐𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦𝘸𝘪𝘴𝘦 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘳𝘦𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘐𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘱𝘰𝘱𝘶𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘣𝘺 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘤𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘦𝘮𝘪𝘨𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘢 𝘴𝘮𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘯𝘶𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘌𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘤𝘢𝘱𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘭 (𝘤𝘢𝘱𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘭 𝘪𝘯𝘷𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘧𝘢𝘳𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘨) 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘧𝘶𝘯𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 “𝘴𝘦𝘤𝘶𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘺”. 𝘐𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘮𝘦 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘪𝘯 𝘤𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘐𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘴 𝘪𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘨𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘌𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘚𝘤𝘰𝘵𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 £6,000-10,000 𝘢𝘣𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘦-𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘭𝘰𝘳𝘥 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘐𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘳𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘯𝘶𝘦𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘩 𝘢𝘵 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘧𝘭𝘰𝘸 𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘓𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘰𝘯 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘴𝘰 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘦𝘯 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵.

𝘉𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘌𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘨𝘦𝘰𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘢𝘭𝘴𝘰 𝘮𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘐𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥. 𝘖𝘸𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘭𝘺 𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘥𝘴, 𝘐𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘭𝘺 𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘴 𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘸𝘯 𝘴𝘶𝘳𝘱𝘭𝘶𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘌𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘭𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘬𝘦𝘵, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘶𝘴 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘤𝘦𝘴 𝘥𝘰𝘸𝘯 𝘸𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘭𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘌𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘴𝘴.

𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘮𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘢𝘭𝘭! 𝘌𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘌𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘢 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘴𝘴 𝘥𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘸𝘰 𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘭𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘮𝘱𝘴, 𝘌𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘭𝘦𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘯𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘐𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘭𝘦𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘯𝘴. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘳𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘌𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬𝘦𝘳 𝘩𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘐𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘰𝘳 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘭𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘢𝘳𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘭𝘪𝘧𝘦. 𝘐𝘯 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘐𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬𝘦𝘳 𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘳𝘥𝘴 𝘩𝘪𝘮𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘧 𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘮𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘶𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘦𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘭𝘺 𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘴 𝘢 𝘵𝘰𝘰𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘌𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘢𝘱𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘵 𝘐𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥, 𝘵𝘩𝘶𝘴 𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘨𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘥𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘩𝘪𝘮𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘧. 𝘏𝘦 𝘤𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘩𝘦𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘨𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴, 𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘫𝘶𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘐𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬𝘦𝘳. 𝘏𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘥𝘦 𝘵𝘰𝘸𝘢𝘳𝘥𝘴 𝘩𝘪𝘮 𝘪𝘴 𝘮𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘮𝘦 𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 “𝘱𝘰𝘰𝘳 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘴” 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘕𝘦𝘨𝘳𝘰𝘦𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘦𝘳 𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘜.𝘚.𝘈.. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘐𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘩𝘮𝘢𝘯 𝘱𝘢𝘺𝘴 𝘩𝘪𝘮 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘪𝘯 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘰𝘸𝘯 𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘦𝘺. 𝘏𝘦 𝘴𝘦𝘦𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘌𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬𝘦𝘳 𝘣𝘰𝘵𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘶𝘱𝘪𝘥 𝘵𝘰𝘰𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘌𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘳𝘶𝘭𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘐𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥.”

𝚁𝚎𝚏𝚎𝚛𝚎𝚗𝚌𝚎: 𝙺𝚊𝚛𝚕 𝙼𝚊𝚛𝚡 𝚝𝚘 𝚂𝚒𝚐𝚏𝚛𝚒𝚍 𝙼𝚎𝚢𝚎𝚛 𝚊𝚗𝚍 𝙰𝚞𝚐𝚞𝚜𝚝 𝚅𝚘𝚐𝚝 𝙸𝚗 𝙽𝚎𝚠 𝚈𝚘𝚛𝚔, (𝙻𝚘𝚗𝚍𝚘𝚗, 𝙰𝚙𝚛𝚒𝚕 𝟿, 𝟷𝟾𝟽𝟶)

(1)

A Mainland Chinese on RedNote tells a political schizo shitlib American who apparently ghosted his “MAGA white supremacist” family to drop the political obsession when it comes to treating one’s beloved family

“𝘕𝘦𝘸𝘭𝘺 𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘶𝘨𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘜.𝘚. 𝘗𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘋𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘥 𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 𝘳𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘕𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘩 𝘒𝘰𝘳𝘦𝘢 𝘢𝘴 𝘢 “𝘯𝘶𝘤𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘳 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳," 𝘔𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘢𝘺 (𝘭𝘰𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦), 𝘢 𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘬 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘚𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘩 𝘒𝘰𝘳𝘦𝘢 𝘢𝘴 𝘰𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭𝘴 𝘣𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘴𝘸𝘦𝘦𝘱𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘧𝘵𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘞𝘢𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘵𝘰𝘯'𝘴 𝘕𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘩 𝘒𝘰𝘳𝘦𝘢 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘺 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘯𝘦𝘸 𝘢𝘥𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯.

𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴, 𝘮𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘴𝘵 𝘧𝘦𝘸 𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘺, 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘳𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘢 𝘜.𝘚. 𝘰𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭, 𝘭𝘦𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘶𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵. 𝘚𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘺𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘴𝘪𝘨𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 𝘢𝘥𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘮𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘣𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘪𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘰𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘢𝘤𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸𝘭𝘦𝘥𝘨𝘦 𝘕𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘩 𝘒𝘰𝘳𝘦𝘢'𝘴 𝘥𝘦 𝘧𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘰 𝘯𝘶𝘤𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘳 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘴.

𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 𝘴𝘱𝘰𝘬𝘦 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘕𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘩 𝘒𝘰𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘯 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘒𝘪𝘮 𝘑𝘰𝘯𝘨-𝘶𝘯 𝘥𝘶𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘵𝘶 𝘮𝘦𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘖𝘷𝘢𝘭 𝘖𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘦, 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘭𝘺 𝘢𝘧𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘴𝘸𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨-𝘪𝘯 𝘤𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘺 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘊𝘢𝘱𝘪𝘵𝘰𝘭 𝘙𝘰𝘵𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘢 𝘪𝘯 𝘞𝘢𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘵𝘰𝘯.

"𝘐 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘧𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘭𝘺 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘩𝘪𝘮. 𝘏𝘦 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦𝘥 𝘮𝘦. 𝘐 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦𝘥 𝘩𝘪𝘮. 𝘞𝘦 𝘨𝘰𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘨 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘸𝘦𝘭𝘭," 𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 𝘴𝘢𝘪𝘥. "𝘏𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘢 𝘯𝘶𝘤𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘳 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳. 𝘞𝘦 𝘨𝘰𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘨. 𝘐 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘣𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘦𝘦 𝘮𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬."”

https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.amp.asp?newsIdx=390828

“𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘭 𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘑𝘦𝘸𝘳𝘺 𝘪𝘴 ..... 𝘗𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘦𝘦𝘪𝘴𝘮. 𝘐𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘤𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘩𝘰𝘱𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘔𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘢𝘩, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘴𝘪𝘮𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘦𝘰𝘶𝘴𝘭𝘺 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘨𝘶𝘢𝘳𝘥𝘪𝘢𝘯 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘩 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘔𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘢𝘩 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘢𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘯𝘨 ..... 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘤, 𝘮𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘥𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘴 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮 𝘰𝘧 𝘑𝘦𝘸𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘭𝘥 ..... 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘗𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘦𝘦 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘭𝘺 𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘭𝘥. 𝘏𝘦 𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘶𝘳𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵, 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦, 𝘯𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘦𝘴 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘦, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘴𝘰 𝘥𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘩𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘳𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘣𝘺 𝘢 𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘪𝘤 𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯. 𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘶𝘴 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘢 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘢𝘳𝘭𝘺 𝘷𝘪𝘰𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘭𝘥 𝘢𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘯𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘴𝘺𝘮𝘱𝘵𝘰𝘮𝘴.”

- 𝚃𝚑𝚎 𝙼𝚢𝚝𝚑 𝚘𝚏 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝟸𝟶𝚝𝚑 𝚌𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚞𝚛𝚢 𝚋𝚢 𝙰𝚕𝚏𝚛𝚎𝚍 𝚁𝚘𝚜𝚎𝚗𝚋𝚎𝚛𝚐 -

Does Hitler have an alt?

Hezbollah was “supposed” to save Hamas. In reality, Hamas saves Hezbollah.

카말라 해리스의 실험, 민주당의 자폭이었나?

"𝘞𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘯𝘰 𝘦𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘴, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘯𝘰 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘱𝘦𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭 𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘮𝘪𝘦𝘴. 𝘖𝘶𝘳 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘦𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘱𝘦𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘥𝘶𝘵𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘧𝘰𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸."

- 𝐕𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭 𝐏𝐚𝐥𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐧 -

FemBoy NazBol Juche Discord Mod endorses Donald Trump for President

This is Twitter

“Communists Accidentally Making Liberals Look Based”

“They are eating the dogs 🐶 They are eating the cats 🐱”

Springfield, Clark County, Ohio

2020
🔵 Biden 69% (+40)
🔴 Trump 29%

2024
🔵 Harris 54% (+11)
🔴 Trump 43%

𝐔𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐇𝐲𝐩𝐞𝐫-𝐂𝐚𝐥𝐯𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐦: 𝐂𝐥𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐟𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐃𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐌𝐢𝐬𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬

Hyper-Calvinism was also expressed in theological movements that rejected the gospel's universality. For example, some hyper-Calvinists believed that God's elect would be saved regardless of whether they received the gospel message, emphasizing that the efficacy of salvation was totally dependent on God's sovereign will. This resulted in a theological framework that minimized the need of evangelism and missionary labor, dismissing these efforts as unnecessary for the elect.

In contrast, the mainstream Calvinist tradition continues to believe in the importance of proclaiming the gospel, believing that while God's sovereignty determines who is saved, the mechanism by which that salvation is brought about is via faithful preaching of the gospel. This contrast between God's sovereignty and human accountability is a crucial point in the current theological debate between Calvinists and hyper-Calvinists.

To summarize, whereas Calvinism is commonly connected with a heavy emphasis on God's sovereignty and the idea of predestination, hyper-Calvinism reflects an extreme variant of these doctrines, frequently denying the universality of the gospel call and individuals' moral responsibility to respond. This has resulted in considerable doctrinal conflicts within the larger Christian community, particularly over the function of evangelism, the nature of grace, and personal responsibility in salvation. Understanding the distinction between Calvinism and hyper-Calvinism is essential for grasping the diversity of Reformed theology and the current arguments over these vital concepts.

(3)

In fact, hyper-Calvinists have frequently been chastised for refusing to acknowledge people' moral responsibility to respond to God's call to repentance and faith. For example, the concept of an individual's free will in responding to the gospel is widely rejected in hyper-Calvinism, which regards God's election as determinative and irresistible, leaving little place for human agency in salvation. This might result in an unbalanced understanding of God's character, emphasizing divine sovereignty to the point that human accountability is minimized.

Theological debates around hyper-Calvinism sometimes include questions of predestination. While the theory of predestination is a cornerstone of Calvinist theology, hyper-Calvinism takes it to the extreme, frequently to the point where the doctrine is so strictly applied that it appears to eliminate the necessity for evangelism or the true offer of salvation to all. Critics of hyper-Calvinism claim that this interpretation weakens the biblical requirement for Christians to communicate the gospel with others, resulting in a theology that appears cold, impersonal, and fatalistic.

The radical stances taken by certain hyper-Calvinists have provoked dispute within the Reformed tradition itself. The most well-known individual linked with extreme Calvinism is John Gill, whose writings, especially his "Body of Doctrinal Divinity," have been interpreted by some as advocating for hyper-Calvinistic beliefs. Scholars disagree on whether Gill's theology actually embodies hyper-Calvinism, with some suggesting that he is simply a fervent supporter of Reformed theology, not an extreme adherent of the stance. Furthermore, the growth of hyper-Calvinism was aided by a select group of people within the British Particular Baptist and Congregationalist traditions, particularly in the 17th and 18th centuries. These men, including John Skepp and Joseph Hussey, were noted for their rejection of free will in salvation and their radical view of predestination. These movements shaped later developments in Reformed and Baptist thought, particularly in the United States.

(2)

𝐔𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐇𝐲𝐩𝐞𝐫-𝐂𝐚𝐥𝐯𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐦: 𝐂𝐥𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐟𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐃𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐌𝐢𝐬𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬

Hyper-Calvinism, sometimes known as "extreme Calvinism," is a type of Reformed theology that takes Calvinist beliefs to their logical extreme, frequently culminating in a theological system that rejects people' universal responsibility to trust in Christ for salvation. It holds that God's love and grace are limited to the elect, while those who are not selected for salvation are abandoned and condemned. This viewpoint is contentious, particularly because it emphasizes predestination to the point of dismissing the importance of evangelistic efforts or God's broad grace, which applies to all individuals.

While Calvinism, particularly its doctrine of predestination, has long been susceptible to theological discussion, extreme or hyper-Calvinism adopts a more rigorous stance, frequently rejecting the broader, more pastoral approaches found in conventional Reformed theology. For example, proponents of hyper-Calvinism may argue that God's will is so sovereign that preaching the gospel is unnecessary for the elect, who will be saved regardless of human action. This belief contrasts sharply with more orthodox Calvinism, which, while emphasizing God's sovereignty, maintains that evangelism and gospel preaching are crucial tools for God to bring the elect to salvation.

The idea of "general grace" is a key theological issue in the Calvinism-hyper-Calvinism dispute. Traditional Calvinism distinguishes between general grace, which is available to everyone and serves to restrain sin and promote the common good in society, and special grace, which is God's saving grace granted solely to the elect. Hyper-Calvinism, on the other hand, frequently denies the reality or usefulness of broad grace in a meaningful sense, instead focusing only on the belief that God's salvation work is limited to the selected few.

(1)

France’s Eric Zemmour will attend Trump’s inauguration

𝐇𝐢𝐭𝐥𝐞𝐫 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐇𝐢𝐦𝐦𝐥𝐞𝐫 𝐂𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐝 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐧 𝐀𝐫𝐲𝐚𝐧 𝐋𝐞𝐭 𝐀𝐥𝐨𝐧𝐞 “𝐉𝐞𝐰𝐢𝐬𝐡”

Why are so many dissident retards online such as Candace Owens and Orthodox Canonist calling Stalin Jewish when the evidence to back that claim is not even scanty at best?

Even Hitler himself certified Stalin as “Aryan” let alone Slavic, never mind Jewish

Himmler argued that Stalin was “accidentally” born in Russia and is part of the “lost Nordic-Germanic-Aryan blood type” like Genghis Khan

𝚁𝚎𝚏𝚎𝚛𝚎𝚗𝚌𝚎: 𝙷𝚒𝚝𝚕𝚎𝚛 𝚊𝚗𝚍 𝚂𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚒𝚗 : 𝚙𝚊𝚛𝚊𝚕𝚕𝚎𝚕 𝚕𝚒𝚟𝚎𝚜 𝚋𝚢 𝙰𝚕𝚊𝚗 𝙱𝚞𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚌𝚔 | 𝚁𝚒𝚌𝚑, 𝙷𝚒𝚝𝚕𝚎𝚛'𝚜 𝚆𝚊𝚛 𝙰𝚒𝚖𝚜, 𝟹𝟺𝟿; 𝙰𝚌𝚔𝚎𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚗𝚗, 𝙷𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚕𝚎𝚛, 𝟸𝟶𝟼

Not Delusional Takes

What Dugin argues here is not that far from the truth. Liberalism started off and essentially was infused with a racialist ideology, which linked civilization to racial superiority. Enlightenment philosophers frequently implied that only Western Europeans were capable of true civilization, therefore excluding non-Western Europeans from “universal human rights of having access to liberty.” This racial hierarchy was very visible in Kant's works, which proposed differing moral and cognitive capacities for different races. Locke’s ideas about property was used as a justification for the Anglo-Saxon conquest and appropriation of the “New World.”

If you think about it, isn't the human mind a wild and complicated thing? It's as if there are multiple layers, some of which you can feel, such as when you're in the present, and others that exist solely as concepts. Some thoughts are crystal clear, while others are a fuzzy muddle. And there's another level where thoughts exist in a way that's neither clear nor confusing.. they're just like there, usually because we misread something. Our senses are playing tricks on us, making us think about things we aren't even sure we're seeing or feeling correctly. And then there's this other layer where we're conscious of these senses, which adds another twist to the mind maze.

Desires? They're all over the place. Some you can feel burning inside, while others are more like silent rules or conventions that lead us without our awareness. Even our actions are sometimes motivated by what we want or want, and that will or choice can be something we are acutely aware of or only know in theory. Trying to describe all of this in simple terms would not suffice because when someone writes about their thoughts, they are not merely playing with words or demonstrating their knowledge; they are drawing out their inner universe. To truly understand what they're saying, you have to look beyond the words and try to see through.

"𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘍𝘢𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦’𝘴 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘤 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘑𝘰𝘴é 𝘈𝘯𝘵𝘰𝘯𝘪𝘰 𝘗𝘳𝘪𝘮𝘰 𝘥𝘦 𝘙𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘢 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘊𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘭 𝘞𝘢𝘳, 𝘢𝘴 𝘸𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘵𝘦𝘳 3, 𝘩𝘦𝘭𝘱𝘦𝘥 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘰 𝘵𝘰 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩𝘦𝘥 𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘧𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘭𝘰𝘪𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘪𝘱𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘦𝘹𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘦 𝘙𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘑𝘰𝘴é 𝘈𝘯𝘵𝘰𝘯𝘪𝘰’𝘴 𝘴𝘶𝘤𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘰𝘳, 𝘔𝘢𝘯𝘶𝘦𝘭 𝘏𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘢, 𝘵𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘦 𝘧𝘢𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘵 𝘪𝘯𝘧𝘭𝘶𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘧𝘶𝘳𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳. 𝘏𝘦 𝘤𝘭𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘭𝘺 𝘴𝘶𝘣𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘨𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘍𝘢𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯 𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘱𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘴 𝘶𝘮𝘣𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘢 𝘰𝘳𝘨𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘻𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘭𝘶𝘥𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘰𝘵𝘩 𝘧𝘢𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘥𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘩𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘴, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘍𝘢𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦 𝘌𝘴𝘱𝘢ñ𝘰𝘭𝘢 𝘛𝘳𝘢𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢 𝘺 𝘥𝘦 𝘭𝘢𝘴 𝘑𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘴 𝘥𝘦 𝘖𝘧𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘷𝘢 𝘕𝘢𝘤𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘚𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢. 𝘐𝘵𝘴 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 “𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘥𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘰’𝘴 𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘨𝘦.”7 𝘞𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘏𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘢 𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘵 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘪𝘯 𝘈𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘭 1937, 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘰 𝘩𝘢𝘥 𝘩𝘪𝘮 𝘢𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘥. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘍𝘢𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦 𝘮𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘪𝘵 𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘪𝘦𝘳 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘰 𝘵𝘰 𝘨𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘱 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘥𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮, 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘢 𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘮𝘶𝘮 𝘰𝘧 𝘧𝘢𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘵 𝘦𝘹𝘤𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵, 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘤𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘭𝘺 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦, 𝘤𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘢𝘧𝘵𝘦𝘳 1942, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘺 𝘣𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦.

𝘈𝘧𝘵𝘦𝘳 1945 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘍𝘢𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘮𝘦 𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘳𝘭𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘤𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘤 𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘯𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘳𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘺 𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘔𝘰𝘷𝘪𝘮𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘰. 𝘐𝘯 1970 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘯𝘢𝘮𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩𝘦𝘥. 𝘉𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘴𝘵 𝘚𝘱𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘩𝘢𝘥 𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘨 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘯 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘥𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘮𝘺, 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘰𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭𝘴, 𝘣𝘶𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘮𝘦𝘯, 𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘰𝘸𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘴, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘊𝘩𝘶𝘳𝘤𝘩, 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘢𝘭𝘮𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘯𝘰 𝘷𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘧𝘢𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯."

- 𝚃𝙷𝙴 𝙰𝙽𝙰𝚃𝙾𝙼𝚈 𝙾𝙵 𝙵𝙰𝚂𝙲𝙸𝚂𝙼, 𝚁𝚘𝚋𝚎𝚛𝚝 𝙾. 𝙿𝚊𝚡𝚝𝚘𝚗 (𝙿.𝟷𝟺𝟿, 𝟷𝟻𝟶) -

(2)

𝙰𝚗𝚝𝚒-𝙵𝚊𝚜𝚌𝚒𝚜𝚝 𝙵𝚛𝚊𝚗𝚌𝚒𝚜𝚘 𝙵𝚛𝚊𝚗𝚌𝚘?

"𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘚𝘱𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘳 𝘎𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘤𝘰 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘰, 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘦𝘹𝘢𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘦, 𝘪𝘴 𝘰𝘧𝘵𝘦𝘯 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘧𝘢𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘵 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘮𝘦𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘚𝘱𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘊𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘭 𝘞𝘢𝘳 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘵 𝘢𝘪𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘔𝘶𝘴𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘪 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘏𝘪𝘵𝘭𝘦𝘳. 𝘐𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘦𝘥, 𝘩𝘦𝘭𝘱𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘚𝘱𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘙𝘦𝘱𝘶𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘯𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘷𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘵 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘰’𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘣𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘧𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘑𝘶𝘭𝘺 1936 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘴𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘮𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘤 𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘧𝘢𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘵 𝘤𝘳𝘶𝘴𝘢𝘥𝘦. 𝘈𝘧𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘷𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺 𝘪𝘯 𝘔𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘩 1939, 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘰 𝘶𝘯𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘩𝘦𝘥 𝘢 𝘣𝘭𝘰𝘰𝘥𝘺 𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘮𝘢𝘺 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘬𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘥 𝘢𝘴 𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘸𝘰 𝘩𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘴𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘦𝘢𝘭 𝘰𝘧𝘧 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘣𝘰𝘵𝘩 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘤 𝘦𝘹𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘤 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘭𝘥.4 𝘝𝘪𝘳𝘶𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘭𝘺 𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘺, 𝘭𝘪𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘮, 𝘴𝘦𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘮, 𝘔𝘢𝘳𝘹𝘪𝘴𝘮, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘍𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘮𝘢𝘴𝘰𝘯𝘳𝘺, 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘰 𝘫𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘏𝘪𝘵𝘭𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘔𝘶𝘴𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘪 𝘪𝘯 𝘈𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘭 1939 𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘴𝘪𝘨𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘯𝘵𝘪-𝘊𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯 𝘗𝘢𝘤𝘵. 𝘋𝘶𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘭𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘪𝘯 1940, 𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘦𝘪𝘻𝘦𝘥 𝘛𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘪𝘦𝘳𝘴. 𝘏𝘦 𝘴𝘦𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘥 𝘦𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘰 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘧𝘶𝘳𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘉𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘢 “𝘧𝘶𝘭𝘭-𝘴𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘦 𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘯𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘹𝘪𝘴.

𝘞𝘩𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘏𝘪𝘵𝘭𝘦𝘳 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘩𝘪𝘮 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘤𝘵, 𝘩𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴 𝘊𝘢𝘶𝘥𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘰 𝘢𝘭𝘸𝘢𝘺𝘴 𝘴𝘦𝘵 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘧𝘶𝘭𝘭 𝘣𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘨𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘺 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘹𝘪𝘴 𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦 𝘶𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘺 𝘩𝘪𝘨𝘩. 𝘈 𝘧𝘦𝘸 𝘥𝘢𝘺𝘴 𝘢𝘧𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘮𝘦𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘰 𝘢𝘵 𝘏𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘢𝘺𝘦, 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘍𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘩-𝘚𝘱𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘣𝘰𝘳𝘥𝘦𝘳, 𝘰𝘯 𝘖𝘤𝘵𝘰𝘣𝘦𝘳 23, 1940, 𝘏𝘪𝘵𝘭𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘰𝘭𝘥 𝘔𝘶𝘴𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘪 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘦𝘦 𝘰𝘳 𝘧𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘵𝘦𝘦𝘵𝘩 𝘱𝘶𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘯 𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘯𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘴 𝘣𝘢𝘳𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 “𝘑𝘦𝘴𝘶𝘪𝘵 𝘴𝘸𝘪𝘯𝘦.”6 𝘈𝘧𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘣𝘭𝘰𝘰𝘥𝘭𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘰𝘧 1936–39, 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘰 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘰𝘳𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘦𝘵; 𝘧𝘢𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘵 𝘥𝘺𝘯𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘮 𝘧𝘪𝘵 𝘣𝘢𝘥𝘭𝘺 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘷𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵. 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘰’𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘥𝘪𝘥 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘢 𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘦 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘺—𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘍𝘢𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦—𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘵 “𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘭 𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦𝘴” 𝘪𝘵 𝘭𝘢𝘤𝘬𝘦𝘥 𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘰𝘶𝘴 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳. 𝘈𝘭𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩 𝘪𝘵 𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘸 𝘵𝘰 𝘯𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘭𝘺 𝘢 𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘮𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘥𝘶𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘰𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘎𝘦𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘯 𝘷𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘪𝘯 1941–42, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘨𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘱 𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘴𝘶𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘤𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘪𝘦𝘴, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘊𝘢𝘶𝘥𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘰 𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘵 𝘯𝘰 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘺-𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘰𝘳 𝘢𝘥𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯."

- 𝚃𝙷𝙴 𝙰𝙽𝙰𝚃𝙾𝙼𝚈 𝙾𝙵 𝙵𝙰𝚂𝙲𝙸𝚂𝙼, 𝚁𝚘𝚋𝚎𝚛𝚝 𝙾. 𝙿𝚊𝚡𝚝𝚘𝚗 (𝙿.𝟷𝟺𝟿, 𝟷𝟻𝟶) -

(1)

If you have any interest, subscribe to my Croatian friend’s telegram channel please!

https://t.me/horvatska88

"𝘚𝘰, 𝘏𝘪𝘵𝘭𝘦𝘳 𝘴𝘦𝘦𝘴 𝘩𝘪𝘮𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘧 𝘢𝘴 𝘯𝘦𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘭𝘦𝘧𝘵 𝘯𝘰𝘳 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵, 𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘪𝘥, 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘭𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘢 𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘴. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘦𝘧𝘵 𝘭𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘢 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘴. "𝘛𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘐 𝘴𝘢𝘺, 𝘪𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭, 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘫𝘰𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘨𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘶𝘱 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘥𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘤𝘦. 𝘛𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘦𝘧𝘵 𝘐 𝘴𝘢𝘺, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘥𝘦𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘥, 𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘴𝘵 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘰𝘸𝘯 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦, 𝘣𝘦 𝘎𝘦𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘯 𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘴𝘵." 𝘕𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘚𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘮 𝘪𝘯 𝘏𝘪𝘵𝘭𝘦𝘳'𝘴 𝘷𝘪𝘦𝘸 𝘩𝘢𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘦𝘧𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘢𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘧𝘦𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘺 𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘹𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘦 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘹𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘦 𝘭𝘦𝘧𝘵. 𝘏𝘪𝘴 𝘮𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘺 𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘵 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘮 𝘮𝘦𝘢𝘯𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘏𝘪𝘵𝘭𝘦𝘳'𝘴 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘥𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘪𝘯 𝘎𝘦𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘯, "𝘱𝘶𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘤 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘶𝘢𝘭 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘴."

"𝘉𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 1933, 𝘣𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘮𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳, 𝘏𝘪𝘵𝘭𝘦𝘳 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘴𝘪𝘨𝘯𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘭𝘺 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘧𝘢𝘷𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘰𝘸𝘢𝘳𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘰𝘯 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘢𝘳𝘸𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘤 𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘭𝘰𝘰𝘬. 𝘈𝘧𝘵𝘦𝘳 1933, 𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘺 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘧𝘢𝘷𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘰𝘸𝘢𝘳𝘥 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘯 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘥𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘱𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘰𝘴𝘰𝘱𝘩𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘤𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘴 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘤𝘴. 𝘓𝘦𝘵 𝘮𝘦 𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘴𝘵 𝘨𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘢 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘪𝘯 1930 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘩𝘢𝘴𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘷𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘵 𝘢 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘺. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘺𝘴, "𝘌𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘭𝘪𝘧𝘦, 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘢 𝘧𝘦𝘸 𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘤𝘵 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘳𝘶𝘭𝘦. 𝘈𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘭𝘴, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘭𝘰𝘰𝘬, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘳, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘴𝘶𝘤𝘤𝘦𝘦𝘥. 𝘐𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦, 𝘸𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘨𝘺 𝘭𝘢𝘤𝘬𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘭𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘢𝘳𝘥𝘴 𝘧𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘶𝘭𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘶𝘯𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘮. 𝘌𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘺 𝘴𝘶𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘴𝘩 𝘭𝘢𝘸𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘤 𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘴𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘦𝘢𝘬. 𝘐𝘵 𝘬𝘦𝘦𝘱𝘴 𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘰𝘳 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘨𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘪𝘧𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘦𝘢𝘬 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘮𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘶𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘰𝘳 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘮𝘣𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴. 𝘞𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘐 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘢 𝘰𝘧 𝘤𝘰𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘴𝘮, 𝘪𝘵 𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘴 𝘰𝘣𝘷𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘵 𝘮𝘦𝘢𝘯𝘴 𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘮 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘪𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘢𝘳 𝘵𝘰 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘦 𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘢𝘯𝘦 𝘢𝘴𝘺𝘭𝘶𝘮𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘰𝘯𝘴. 𝘐𝘯 𝘴𝘰 𝘧𝘢𝘳, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘦 𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘢 𝘰𝘧 𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘻𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘴 𝘪𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘥 𝘶𝘱 𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘭 𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘴𝘦𝘦𝘮𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘦𝘯. 𝘚𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘰𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘮𝘦𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘮 𝘰𝘧 𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘤𝘩 𝘢 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮. 𝘈 𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘮𝘦𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘮 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘭𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘺 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘣𝘶𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘱... 𝘗𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘺 𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘰𝘨 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘢 𝘰𝘧 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘤𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘮. 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵'𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘺 𝘸𝘦 𝘥𝘰𝘯'𝘵 𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘥 𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘺."

- 𝙷𝚊𝚗𝚜 𝙷𝚎𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚗𝚗 𝙷𝚘𝚙𝚙𝚎 𝚀𝚞𝚘𝚝𝚒𝚗𝚐 𝙰𝚍𝚘𝚕𝚏 𝙷𝚒𝚝𝚕𝚎𝚛 𝚊𝚗𝚍 𝙴𝚡𝚙𝚕𝚊𝚒𝚗𝚒𝚗𝚐 𝙽𝚂 𝙴𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚘𝚖𝚒𝚌 𝚅𝚒𝚎𝚠𝚜 -

https://youtu.be/LYEUHk16yk4?feature=shared

Petty White Nationalists Online: “All Western countries have to unite while putting our differences aside and create a Pan-White Racial Imperium Hegemony!”

Trump: “I will annex Canada, Greenland, and integrate the entire North America while continue supporting Ukraine”

Petty White Nationalists Online: “Noooooooo! Not like that!!!”

https://mises.org/power-market/rothbard-slavery-reparations

I did this

𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐈𝐃𝐄𝐎𝐋𝐎𝐆𝐘 𝐎𝐅 𝐍𝐀𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍 𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐑𝐀𝐂𝐄: 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐂𝐑𝐎𝐀𝐓𝐈𝐀𝐍 𝐔𝐒𝐓𝐀𝐒𝐇𝐀 𝐑𝐄𝐆𝐈𝐌𝐄 𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐈𝐓𝐒 𝐏𝐎𝐋𝐈𝐂𝐈𝐄𝐒 𝐓𝐎𝐖𝐀𝐑𝐃 𝐌𝐈𝐍𝐎𝐑𝐈𝐓𝐈𝐄𝐒 𝐈𝐍 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐈𝐍𝐃𝐄𝐏𝐄𝐍𝐃𝐄𝐍𝐓 𝐒𝐓𝐀𝐓𝐄 𝐎𝐅 𝐂𝐑𝐎𝐀𝐓𝐈𝐀, 𝟏𝟗𝟒𝟏-𝟏𝟗𝟒𝟓.

- 𝙽𝙴𝚅𝙴𝙽𝙺𝙾 𝙱𝙰𝚁𝚃𝚄𝙻𝙸𝙽 -

At the heart of Locke's thought is the conviction that these three powers... legislative, executive, and federative... must work together to maintain the stability of the state. His opinions are based on a thorough understanding of political economy and the defense of individual rights. Locke's theory of government holds that political authority is ultimately drawn from the consent of the governed, and that the state's mission is to preserve individuals' natural rights, such as life, liberty, and property. The exercise of federative authority, while concerned with the state's external relations, must be consistent with these broader principles and cannot be separated from the domestic rule of law.

Locke's analysis of federative power is significant for a number of reasons. It recognizes the importance of dealing with foreign forces while maintaining domestic stability, and it provides a framework for understanding how a state should handle its interactions with other countries. Furthermore, Locke's focus on subordination of federative power to the legislative and executive branches demonstrates his adherence to the separation of powers, which is a major component of his overall political theory. The contrast between external and interior domains of administration, as well as the interconnectedness of the many branches of government, are important to Locke's vision of a well-ordered society that balances authority and individual liberties.

When you think about it, John Locke's concept of federative authority makes an important addition to the theory of the contemporary state. Locke's assertion that external and internal powers must be interrelated and subordinate to legislative authority provides a nuanced perspective on how governance should be constructed to promote both national security and individual liberty. His political theory remains fundamental to comprehending the complicated link between state authority, individual rights, and international relations, and his emphasis on the integration of various authorities within the state continues to impact political thought today.

(2)

𝐒𝐄𝐏𝐀𝐑𝐀𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍 𝐎𝐅 𝐏𝐎𝐖𝐄𝐑𝐒 𝐈𝐍 𝐉𝐎𝐇𝐍 𝐋𝐎𝐂𝐊𝐄'𝐒 𝐏𝐎𝐋𝐈𝐓𝐈𝐂𝐀𝐋 𝐏𝐇𝐈𝐋𝐎𝐒𝐎𝐏𝐇𝐘

In his political philosophy, John Locke introduces the concept of "federative power," which is critical to comprehending his larger theory of state power and the interaction between the parts of government. Locke defines federative power as a separate sort of authority within the state, which he describes as "natural" and required for sustaining peace and security both within and without the state. This concept is inextricably linked to the broader notion of the state's right to union, which entails the formation of sociopolitical organizations that serve to unite the nation both domestically and abroad through alliances with other countries. These partnerships are critical for carrying out international obligations and rules, preserving peace and stability on a global scale.

Locke's views on federative power were influenced by his own political experiences, specifically his work as a political advisor to Lord Ashley and his support for the parliamentary opposition to King Charles II's despotic authority. His experiences in the turbulent political climate of 17th-century England led him to conclude that no state could live in isolation; external interactions, such as alliances and treaties with other states, were critical to national survival. In this context, federative power refers to the political authority that a state must exercise in its foreign relations, and Locke saw it as inextricably linked to the protection and expansion of national interests.

Despite the necessity of federative power, Locke contends that it cannot exist without the legislative and executive departments of government. Federative power, which oversees exterior issues such as war and peace, must work in tandem with domestic powers, which oversee internal governance. Locke's paradigm envisions a decentralized system in which legislative authority reigns supreme and federative power is subservient. This relationship is founded on the idea that authority within the state must be unified, and that the many parts of government should be integrated to ensure that no one branch becomes overly dominant or works beyond the law.

Locke distinguishes between federative and executive authority, emphasizing that the federative power is largely concerned with external things (such as foreign policy and diplomacy), whereas the executive power has a greater role in governing internal affairs. However, Locke proposes that the executive can channel federative power inward to handle domestic security, so blurring the distinction between internal and exterior security. This junction of executive and federative powers emphasizes the complexities of governance and the dynamic interplay between various realms of state authority.

(1)

𝐒𝐄𝐏𝐀𝐑𝐀𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍 𝐎𝐅 𝐏𝐎𝐖𝐄𝐑𝐒 𝐈𝐍 𝐉𝐎𝐇𝐍 𝐋𝐎𝐂𝐊𝐄'𝐒 𝐏𝐎𝐋𝐈𝐓𝐈𝐂𝐀𝐋 𝐏𝐇𝐈𝐋𝐎𝐒𝐎𝐏𝐇𝐘

This is what neo-Kahanism with post-Netanyahu characteristics looks like

Italian Regency of Carnaro

“𝐃𝐚𝐥𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐄𝐚𝐠𝐥𝐞? 𝐅𝐨𝐫 𝐔𝐬! 𝐄𝐢𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐅𝐢𝐮𝐦𝐞 𝐨𝐫 𝐃𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐡!”

Propaganda poster of Gabriele D'Annunzio who invaded Fiume

𝐓𝐚𝐨𝐢𝐬𝐦 𝐢𝐧 𝐊𝐨𝐫𝐞𝐚, 𝐏𝐚𝐬𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐏𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐭

Woah

Good evening fellow connoisseurs who take delight in the autism of Fight Club Ministry everywhere.

The owner is doing a channel collaboration today. So take a Quick Look at any of the below servers if it is of any interest to you and join it.

https://t.me/fightclubministry

옥수수 🌽 pinned «Follow me on Twitter if you are willing to read my troll posts https://x.com/bosupolitics?s=21&t=9XG89jWpyT2BfJy3Y5QxTA»

But if you think about it from an irrationalist perspective, fascism’s blend of the archaic and modern reflects a rejection of reason in favor of instinct and will. It seeks to transcend the alienation of modernity by mythologizing a past that never truly existed, using modern tools to reimagine it. This contradiction isn’t a flaw but an expression of deeper, primal forces driving human behavior. Irrationalist thinkers would argue that the movement’s appeal lies in its embrace of chaos, emotion, and the will-to-power, rather than coherent logic. The fusion of myth and technology, then, is a natural outcome of a worldview that prioritizes instinct over rational progress. Fascism in this sense is not incoherent but an “irrational” attempt to impose order on a fractured world.

Fascism presents itself as a defender of some idealized "natural order," but it has no real intention of returning to any such past. Instead, it harnesses the technological and industrial advances of modern society to impose a reimagined version of that order. This reveals a deeper contradiction because while numerous fascist intellectuals or activists may argue how they “reject” modernity from a postmodernist progressive standpoint, it still relies heavily on its material and technological base to reconstruct a mythologized version of the past. Thus, it’s basically a pathological phenomenon, attempting to merge a nostalgic superstructure with the industrial and technological foundation of the present, creating an incoherent blend of the archaic and the modern.

Woah

Bat Soup So Good Yum Yum Groyper

Gunther even accuses some British / Irish people for being “swarthy” as he classifies the population of the British Isles into 3 main racial categories: Nordic, Mediterranean, and Alpine based on physical traits. He argues that racial traits vary geographically, with northern Scotland being mostly "pure Nordic" (fair-skinned), while southern England, Wales, and Ireland are darker due to Mediterranean and Alpine influences. Gunther further claims that some regions, like Cornwall and Ireland, show "Semitic" traits from ancient Phoenician contact. He highlights a strong Mediterranean influence in western Ireland, linking the Irish to the Spanish.

Reference: 𝚃𝙷𝙴 𝚁𝙰𝙲𝙸𝙰𝙻 𝙴𝙻𝙴𝙼𝙴𝙽𝚃𝚂 𝙾𝙵 𝙴𝚄𝚁𝙾𝙿𝙴𝙰𝙽 𝙷𝙸𝚂𝚃𝙾𝚁𝚈 𝚋𝚢 𝙷𝙰𝙽𝚂 𝙶𝚄𝙽𝚃𝙷𝙴𝚁

(2)

“When Mussolini was in power, subways would always arrive on time”

When I met some Italian girls irl, they started talking about this old joke after they got drunk.

𝚄𝚗𝚍𝚎𝚛 𝙿𝚊𝚛𝚔 𝙲𝚑𝚞𝚗𝚐 𝙷𝚎𝚎'𝚜 𝚂𝚘𝚞𝚝𝚑 𝙺𝚘𝚛𝚎𝚊, 𝚙𝚛𝚘𝚙𝚊𝚐𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚊 𝚙𝚘𝚜𝚝𝚎𝚛𝚜 𝚎𝚖𝚙𝚑𝚊𝚜𝚒𝚣𝚎𝚍 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚜𝚊𝚌𝚛𝚒𝚏𝚒𝚌𝚎 𝚘𝚏 𝚒𝚗𝚍𝚒𝚟𝚒𝚍𝚞𝚊𝚕 𝚏𝚛𝚎𝚎𝚍𝚘𝚖𝚜 𝚊𝚜 𝚊 𝚗𝚎𝚌𝚎𝚜𝚜𝚊𝚛𝚢 𝚝𝚛𝚊𝚍𝚎-𝚘𝚏𝚏 𝚏𝚘𝚛 𝚛𝚊𝚙𝚒𝚍 𝚎𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚘𝚖𝚒𝚌 𝚐𝚛𝚘𝚠𝚝𝚑 𝚊𝚗𝚍 𝚗𝚊𝚝𝚒𝚘𝚗𝚊𝚕 𝚖𝚘𝚍𝚎𝚛𝚗𝚒𝚣𝚊𝚝𝚒𝚘𝚗

𝙱𝚛𝚒𝚝𝚊𝚗𝚗𝚒𝚊 𝚙𝚛𝚘𝚝𝚎𝚌𝚝𝚒𝚗𝚐 𝚑𝚎𝚛 𝚜𝚒𝚜𝚝𝚎𝚛 𝙷𝚒𝚋𝚎𝚛𝚗𝚒𝚊 𝚏𝚛𝚘𝚖 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚊𝚗𝚊𝚛𝚌𝚑𝚢 𝚘𝚏 𝙸𝚛𝚒𝚜𝚑 𝚗𝚊𝚝𝚒𝚘𝚗𝚊𝚕𝚒𝚜𝚖 – 𝙿𝚞𝚗𝚌𝚑, 𝟷𝟾𝟾𝟷

Follow me on Twitter if you are willing to read my troll posts

https://x.com/bosupolitics?s=21&t=9XG89jWpyT2BfJy3Y5QxTA

Thank you!

These words mean a lot to me! :D

𝙳𝙿𝚁𝙺 / 𝙽𝚘𝚛𝚝𝚑 𝙺𝚘𝚛𝚎𝚊 𝚘𝚗 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝙹𝚎𝚠𝚒𝚜𝚑 𝚀𝚞𝚎𝚜𝚝𝚒𝚘𝚗
🇰🇵🇰🇵✡️✡️

"Jews Who Hold Power In The United States”

During the summer of 1996, the United States House Subcommittee, comprised of 22 members, introduced the "Iran Sanctions Act," which enforced sanctions by the US government on companies worldwide engaged in trade with Iran. Despite facing widespread criticism for its strict measures, the bill passed smoothly, with the support of AIPAC, an organization representing Jews, rather than from either the Republicans or Democrats. Although Jews constitute a small portion of the US population, their influence in American society is significant, largely shaping US support for Zionism due to their considerable sway in American politics, the economy, and the alignment of Zionist arguments with US policies in the Middle East. AIPAC, supported by significant Jewish donations, categorizes US Congress members each year as either "pro-Israel" or "anti-Israel," offering substantial political funding and advancement opportunities to those aligned with Israel while rallying Jewish individuals across different sectors like politics, finance, media, and law to target and discredit anti-Israel lawmakers.

Following the assassination of an Israeli Prime Minister, numerous prominent US politicians, including then-President Clinton, attended the funeral, largely influenced by AIPAC Despite being a minority within the 284 million US population, Jews hold substantial sway across multiple sectors. A notable portion of current lawmakers in both the US Congress and state legislatures are Jewish, and they also occupy influential roles within the White House and leadership of the main political parties.

In the realm of finance, Jews are prominent, with a dominant presence in institutions like the New York Stock Exchange, banks, and insurance companies. Major financial entities such as JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, and Charles Schwab are predominantly family-owned by Jews. Additionally, Jews hold significant positions in various other industries like tobacco, entertainment, record labels, precious metals, real estate, and textiles. Reports from Western sources reveal that among the top 40 wealthiest individuals in the United States, 16 are Jewish, highlighting their considerable influence in the country's financial landscape. Jews contribute a significant portion of their substantial wealth, amassed through robust economic endeavors, to organizations and lobbying groups that advocate for the interests of Jews in Israel. Their impact in the media sector is noteworthy, with influential outlets like The New York Times, owned by Jews since the 1930s, often promoting a biased narrative portraying Israel favorably and Arabs very negatively. Many major US media organizations, including The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, The Financial Times, and the AP wire service, are also under Jewish control. Moreover, key programs on major broadcasting networks like ABC Radio, NBC, CNN TV, and FOX TV, which has gained popularity since the 1980s, are overseen by Jews. The extent of Jewish ownership in the U.S. media market is significant, although the exact magnitude is uncertain.

Additionally, Jews hold prominent positions as chancellors in four out of five major universities in the United States. They regularly convene national gatherings in Washington and New York, underscoring their organizational unity and influence. An article in the South Korean magazine "말" (May 2006 issue) suggested that while Anglo-Saxon individuals of British descent hold significant political sway in the United States, internally, the nation is often perceived as a 'Jewish Republic.' Furthermore, many of the world's top arms and food corporations are reportedly Jewish-owned, and the core of the neoconservative movement, which supported the theory of invading Iraq, is also said to be predominantly Jewish.

When I see Nusayrites online who can’t stop calling Takfiris, Arab Sunni States, ISIS, and Wahabis “Zionist Jews” and lying about how Hamas wholeheartedly supports Assad

𝙰𝚗𝚝𝚒-𝙰𝚗𝚐𝚕𝚘 𝙸𝚖𝚙𝚎𝚛𝚒𝚊𝚕𝚒𝚜𝚖 𝙿𝚛𝚘𝚙𝚊𝚐𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚊 𝙿𝚘𝚜𝚝𝚎𝚛 𝚋𝚢 𝙽𝚊𝚣𝚒 𝙶𝚎𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚗𝚢

“Errrm Iran bringing in more foreigners like Afghan refugees in Syria to defeat Zionist Jews and Takfiri Terrorists is acktuerlly a good thing 🤓☝️The Barakah of Allah will be upon the Fatemiyoun 🤲 Mashallah”

Former Dutch Prime Minister and current Secretary General of NATO, Mark Rutte, who recently succeeded Jens Stoltenberg, visited my university 2 years ago and delivered a lecture in a seminar.

전 네덜란드 총리이자 옌스 스톨텐베르그의 뒤를 이어 현 나토 사무총장인 마르크 뤼터가 사실 2년전에 제 학교 세미나에 초청되어 짧은 강연을 한 적이 있습니다.

A pro-Palestine Korean boomer right in front of the Israeli embassy in South Korea

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐎𝐧𝐭𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐄𝐩𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐅𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐑𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐏𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲: 𝐀 𝐂𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐪𝐮𝐞 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐇𝐮𝐦𝐞𝐚𝐧 𝐄𝐦𝐩𝐢𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐦 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐌𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐭 𝐒𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐎𝐧𝐭𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐄𝐩𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐅𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐑𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐏𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲: 𝐀 𝐂𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐪𝐮𝐞 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐇𝐮𝐦𝐞𝐚𝐧 𝐄𝐦𝐩𝐢𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐦 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐌𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐭 𝐒𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞

Even from a totally illiberal point of view, one could convincingly argue how individual categorization based on morphological features has no intrinsic utility that is ontologically profound because it is dependent on the erroneous and contingent concept of "racial purity." This concept is not really a permanent or non-static taxonomic reality, but rather a fluid and politically charged fashioned by the political expediencies of those who define it in accordance with their historical/national/political struggles. This ontological vacuity is exposed by the fixation with Nordicism and other related racial purity theories, including the Korean nationalists who believe that Koreans are the most "ethnically pure" people in East Asia, which is a mythology that relies on supernatural explanations which modern post-enlightenment science rejects. These ideologies are essentially tools of exclusionary power, and their epistemological and metaphysical underpinnings are totally insecure. Even the NS adjacent American Eugenicist, Charles Davenport, agrees with me on how the concept of "pure race" is a utopian fantasy that doesn't materially exist in our physical reality.

Once again, I'm not attempting to argue here like an average rainbow-haired shitlib or normiecon on how "race is totally fake, and it's just skin color." In fact, my alternative proposal to this whole contradiction is that people, on the material grounds, should accept that the concept of "pure ethnicity" or "pure race" is a nonexistent abstraction but also acknowledge that the concept of ethnicity/nation/race can find coherence when rooted in a collective, organically formed identity verified through sensory experience and shared practices. Think about what David Hume argued. He was a white supremacist and thought blacks were inferior to whites, but he didn't attempt to explain this through the lens of biology or other social constructs. According to Hume's empiricist perspective, all significant concepts must be able to be traced back to impressions made by our senses, which are the basis of knowing. Therefore, ethnicity/race/nationality is an identity that arises from tangible, lived experiences such as a common language, culture, and history, rather than a metaphysical or abstract essence. "Abstract Essence" is not an oxymoron at all from a Platonic explanation because essence comes from an elevated abstraction called "idea" according to Plato.

In conclusion, the whole argument from me here is that this very strict interpretation of "what racial identity/taxonomy is" can be further supported by Hume's emphasis on habit and custom as the main processes by which human understanding evolves. Ethnicity/Race/Nationality is an actual and dynamic phenomena because a cohesive sense of identity is generated through repeated and collective experiences. The idea of racial or ethnic "purity," which has no material basis and is merely an idealized, manufactured construct, is rejected by this viewpoint. By the way, post-enlightenment science is fundamentally grounded on materialism. You either have to shatter that axiomatic framework, or you simply have to accept the consensus.

🇧🇷 Brazilian Football(Soccer) Legend Pele’s 1970 World Cup Footage

Smartest Resistard Online

https://www.ft.com/content/b32bb0ab-539f-4b29-8330-c76683b0c9e6

Donald Trump’s Cabinet Picks for his upcoming 2nd administration

In his analysis of consanguineous marriages, Charles Davenport highlights how strongly the results of these unions rely on the particular genetic characteristics that exist within a community. To illustrate how inbreeding exacerbates preexisting genetic vulnerabilities among isolated or insular societies, he offers a number of localized examples, such as the preponderance of deaf-mutes and hermaphrodites on Martha's Vineyard or idiocy and insanity in Point Judith. He contends that these characteristics are the consequence of germplasm flaws passed down from common ancestors. This variance emphasizes how intricate genetic inheritance is and how local circumstances influence consanguinity's effects.

He also considers the more general idea of racial purity and challenges its veracity. According to Davenport, centuries of genetic mingling have altered human populations, especially in Europe. Using historical examples, such as the flood of slaves from many racial and ethnic backgrounds into ancient Rome, he makes the case that no community can legitimately claim to be ethnically "pure." According to him, even people who consider themselves to be of pure European heritage most certainly have some African ancestry from the previous millennia. This observation emphasizes the interdependence of human communities and challenges ideas of pure ancestry.

Going back to the subject of consanguineous marriages, Davenport challenges the way the term is commonly used. He contends that although it is commonly connected to first or second cousins, more distant relatives, such fifth or even tenth cousins, can still share important ancestral qualities from a genetic standpoint.

He draws attention to the mathematical truth of ancestry, which states that most people are inevitably distantly related because the number of ancestors doubles with each generation. Attempts to quantify the frequency of consanguineous marriages in general are complicated by this connection. To better understand the ramifications of such marriages, Davenport stresses the necessity for localized research that take into account the distinct genetic and geographic elements influencing populations.

𝚁𝚎𝚏𝚎𝚛𝚎𝚗𝚌𝚎: 𝙷𝚎𝚛𝚎𝚍𝚒𝚝𝚢 𝚒𝚗 𝚁𝚎𝚕𝚊𝚝𝚒𝚘𝚗 𝚝𝚘 𝙴𝚞𝚐𝚎𝚗𝚒𝚌𝚜 𝚋𝚢 𝙳𝚊𝚟𝚎𝚗𝚙𝚘𝚛𝚝, 𝙲𝚑𝚊𝚛𝚕𝚎𝚜 𝙱𝚎𝚗𝚎𝚍𝚒𝚌𝚝

"𝘐 𝘣𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘷𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘴𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘢 𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘪𝘮𝘮𝘪𝘨𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘴 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘥𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘨𝘦𝘳𝘮 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘴𝘮 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘶𝘯𝘧𝘪𝘵 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘵𝘴."

"𝘐 𝘣𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘷𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘮𝘺 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘵𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘰 𝘧𝘰𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘪𝘯𝘫𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘯𝘦𝘹𝘵 𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯."

- 𝐂𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐥𝐞𝐬 𝐃𝐚𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭 -

Sir Francis Galton, who is recognized for having initiated the eugenics movement in the late 1800s, served as an inspiration for Davenport. Galton, a relative of the renowned biologist Charles Darwin, proposed the idea that evolution may be manipulated by autonomous human actions

When Bill sees Monica Lewinsky

vs

When Bill sees Hillary Clinton

폭설 때문에 학교 ㅈㄴ 늦게 가게 생겼는데 왜 도대체 휴강이나 온라인 강의 전환을 안 하는거야

Holy shit I hate the fucking snow ❄️

Total Snow Death, TSD

If the final destination of not being part of the “woke mind virus” is shagging a Thai ladyboy, I’d gladly inject the woke mind virus in my veins

𝐃𝐞𝐟𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐊𝐨𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐧 𝐏𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐨𝐬𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐲

Mind-Boggling Argument

Contrary to what many biological determinists believe, biology is not usually used by racists to justify racial inequalities. Many liberal intellectuals and Enlightenment philosophers of the 18th century held the view that Black people were inferior, but they did not always relate this view to biology. Rather, they frequently blamed it on things like climate, habits, or conventions.

David Hume, for instance, did not base his belief that Black people and other races were inherently inferior to White people on biological factors. Likewise, pro-slavery John Locke rejected biological reasons for racial inequity. Many Enlightenment intellectuals believed that everyone could see the superiority of European civilization without referring to biology because they believed that reason was universally accessible.

On the other hand, while not all 19th-century social intellectuals shared racist beliefs, some attempted to connect sociology to biology. For instance, Herbert Spencer, a social Darwinist who did not hold racial views, was a pacifist and supported "development of other races through progress." Furthermore, some racist intellectuals of the 20th century even denounced biological racism as nonsensical and rejected biological explanations for racism.

Racists are also not all in agreement with the idea of a "pure race". While some racist theorists, such as Albert Memmi, contend that racism is predicated on the concept of pure races, others, such as Arthur de Gobineau and eugenicist Karl Pearson, opposed this notion. The specific goal of Gobineau's work was to show that there were no longer any pure races. Thinkers such as René Martial and Houston Stewart Chamberlain believed that "racial achievements" were more important than purity.

There has also been discussion over miscegenation, or racial mingling. The majority of anthropologists in the 19th and early 20th century believed that miscegenation was the cause of racial degradation. Nonetheless, intellectuals such as Auguste Comte opposed racial hierarchy and even favored "appropriate miscegenation." The Saint-Simonian philosopher Victor Courtet famously wrote, "Long live miscegenation," because he believed it was a means of reviving humanity. He was branded a communist even though he was seen as a forerunner of racist ideas. In more recent times, academics such as Frank H. Hankins have challenged the claims made by proponents of racial equality by criticizing egalitarian perspectives on race. He states, "It seems evident that the races are entirely unequal," yet he strongly advocates for interracial relationships.

𝚁𝚎𝚏𝚎𝚛𝚎𝚗𝚌𝚎: 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐑𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐦?

- 𝙰𝚕𝚊𝚒𝚗 𝙳𝚎 𝙱𝚎𝚗𝚘𝚒𝚜𝚝 -

(2)

Since the Larousse dictionary first used the term "racism" in 1932, meanings have mostly focused on the concept of racial hierarchy. The idea that one race is superior to another and that this superiority justifies the dominance of "inferior" races is a common theme in these classifications. Additionally, definitions emphasize the biological or anthropological foundation of these apparent disparities, implying that they are irreversible and cannot be altered by social influences or education. Furthermore, racism frequently involves the belief that racial purity must be preserved by preventing miscegenation and that these biological distinctions give rise to a "superior civilization" for the dominant race.

Although more contemporary formulations go into greater detail, they all mostly agree on three fundamental points: a hierarchical perspective on races, the assumption that social position is determined by biological distinctions, and the rationale for racial dominance. While some definitions emphasize racism's ideological component, others highlight its cultural or scientific foundation. The belief in racial disparity is ultimately what defines racism as a whole.

𝚁𝚎𝚏𝚎𝚛𝚎𝚗𝚌𝚎: 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐑𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐦?

- 𝙰𝚕𝚊𝚒𝚗 𝙳𝚎 𝙱𝚎𝚗𝚘𝚒𝚜𝚝 -

(1)

𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐑𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐦?

- 𝙰𝚕𝚊𝚒𝚗 𝙳𝚎 𝙱𝚎𝚗𝚘𝚒𝚜𝚝 -