Todays "Just for Laughs"

[Colonel_Reb]

White_Savage, You don't have to be a Christian to understand the impact that Christianity had on curbing illegitimate births both in the US and elsewhere in the world. Christianity held up the values which protected marriage and encouraged abstinance. I do not think these points can be argued.

 

[White_Savage]

On the contrary, I believe practical consequences are a far more important check on behavior than moralisms. As proof, I submit how quickly any moral stigmata about illegitamacy evaporated when we began to subsidize it rather than letting the circumstances of life act as a punishment for it. You must explain to me how non-Christian persons or cultures manage to control sexual impulses sans the vaunted Christianity....could it be simply because it's a logical and pragmatic thing to do?

Christianity is indeed often cited as the root of Western Civilization and a cause of it's success, but I don't buy it, I believe those things spring entirely from White temperament and intelligence. The glory that was Greece and the grander that was Rome did not require Christianity, nor did the sophisticated cultures of our Germanic and Celtic ancestors. (They were not "barbarians", that's second-hand Roman propaganda that's unfortunately still with us.) Ethiopa is the oldest Christianized nation in the world, yet their civilization does not approach ours. The American black and the mestizo are also largely Christianized, yet still not the equal the white in sociable behaviors. Large portions of the turd world are also being Christianized, yet they remain the turd world.

 

[White Shogun]

Another excellent post, White_Savage. Interesting perspective on
Christianity vis a vis white civilization. You make an excellent
argument.



There are other cultures that are not Christian OR white who have
succeeded in controlling illegimiate birth rates and other markers of a
society's moraly, such as violent crime. I'm thinking in
particular of Japan, as well as perhaps Singapore and Hong Kong, albeit
under British rule. I was going to mention China, too, but I'm not
honestly aware of birth and crime rates in that country and how much
those rates have been controlled by communism as opposed to quality
inherent in the Chinese people.

 

[Don Wassall]

Safe countries have racial homogeneity in common, or at the very least a dominant ethnic group that keeps the others in line. That doesn't mean black African countries will ever have low crime rates, but it's a prerequisite inwhite and Asian countries, along with a healthy nationalist outlook.

 

[White_Savage]

Shogun:
Yes, the Asian civilization-building ability is almost equal to that of whites, in fact I've seen evidence that their intelligence actually averages slightly higher than that of whites. I think their problem, if anything, is a tendency to be TOO amendable to group socialization and not individually assertive enough. This leaves them vulnerable to despotism and the cult of established authority which hurts their innovativeness. You can really see it when you compare cultural institutions, such as Feudal Asian vrs. Feudal European martial arts. The systems of the latter were never presented in as dogmatic or absolutist manner as that of Asia. Nor was the teacher-student relationship as authoritarian, indeed in Europe the teacher was often the employee and of a lower social class than his student! Then again the Asians managed to preserve their martial arts through dogmatic past-worship while we largely forgot ours when firearms replaced them.

 

[Colonel_Reb]

What I'm saying is that the US was founded on Christian principles, and was against illegitimacy, among other things. With the decline of the Christian influence in the US over the last 60 years or so, there has been a parallel decline in morality and stigma attached to illigitimate births. I don't think this is a coincidence.

 

[White_Savage]

Reb:

Perhaps it's hairsplitting, but I would say rather that country was founded on Western/White principals, even if they are commonly considered "Christian" principles. Certainly some of the Founding Fathers like Jefferson were notably free-thinking in regards to religion. Jefferson credited the legal foundations of our country to Anglo-Saxon common law, which he traced back to Horsa and Hengist of pre-Christian times. I feel like if this country were really founded on Middle-Eastern religous principals, it would be more like the Middle East.

In any case, you're a Christian, I'm a Heathen, yet our outlooks are still more similar than that of say, you and a Christianized Bantu, proving race is a far more important bond than religion.

 

[Colonel_Reb]

White_Savage: If you read Jefferson's writings, you'll find much evidence pointing to him being a Chrsitian, contrary to the almost universal belief of him being a deist. You are correct that we are more alike and have more in common in many ways than I would be with an African Christian, but I do share the bond of salvation with him. That bond, even though I may never know him here, will last eternally, not just during our lives. Anyway, I get your point and enjoy reading your posts, which are very well thought out and written. By the way, I used to live in a community called Savage.

 

[White_Savage]

Hey, if you wanna hang out for eternity in a place that'll let Mr. Mubabe the headhunter in and keep me out, it's none of my business

 

[Colonel_Reb]

It's cool WS; just telling you what I believe!

 

[jaxvid]

Libertarians like to assume that a civil society will suddenly spring up in the absense of a widespread popular, genuine, sound moral ethic. Supposedly the urge to live in peace with ones neighbors is universal and just needs the absolute minimal state to allow freedom to flourish. It does not. As is obvious most people, especially non-white people, can not live in peace but must resort to force against others to live their lives.

The only place a near libertarian society ever existed (the USA pre-1900) occurred because of an odd intersection of events. 1) Enlightenment era Christian philosophy; an uninhabited wilderness too far for existing states to add much force; the unique qualities and talents of the European peoples.

For a brief time in history the tendency of people to coerce others was muted. Now Christianity is fading, the wilderness is gone, the white people are going. It may be a long time until (if ever) mankind sees the like again.

 

[White_Savage]

jax: Not being a politically correct libertarian nor an extremist libertarian, I tend to assume civil society will spring up when we're free to exclude the un-civil from our communities and shoot 'em if they get excessively uncivil. I do realize the basic libertarian view of government's role in relation to life, liberty, and property is by and large a "white thing". While other Libertarians will scramble to make up arguments why "no negros here" signs won't appear if we get back freedom of association, I'm content to say that's well within the property owner's rights and is probably a good policy.

Liberty, combined with the white man's indigenous ways, is all you need for the social ethic you speak of IMO. I have no idea why you think peoples competent to produce their own bread would have to resort to force against other peoples, except in self-defense. I've known whites of nearly every political, religous and philosophical persuasion. The one thing they have in common is the ability to most always leave their neighbors and his stuff alone.

Making whites aware of just who has been manipulating and making subversive war on them for 2,000 years is vital also, of course.

Could be I admit if you immediately got rid of 90% of the needless government, the dregs would get pissed over the loss of their gravy trains. But hell, we conquered nearly the whole bloody world, we could handle disorganized mobs of muds.