Forgiveness

@Ted

I tend to agree with you – the war in Ukraine suggests that people are not willing to get involved unless it somehow directly involves them. Hand washing didn’t become more normal until the woo-flu could impact them. I’m sure there are other examples.

One benefit to not picking outright enemies with certain groups is they are less inclined to take steps against you. Or so I would suspect. That doesn’t mean you have to like them, or go along with their views though.

what do you define as being forgiveness in this context?

Further question is – does it matter whether you forgive them or not? A proper parallel society does not require forgiveness or not forgiveness of that which it is parallel to. It sets up separately, and is otherwise indifferent to the out-group. Am I mistaken?

“when the majority either passively let them do it”

and that always what they do, because the Hoï polloï who has never opposed his own dispossession other than verbally is unlikely to put more energy into countering a movement aimed at re-establishing his symbolic and material situation.

Of course, it’s not a question of foolishly thinking that we’ll “convince” him in a democratic-type process where “the reaction” will take place when 50% of the sheep plus one vote adhere to the discourse, but just that if a revolutionary force is capable of :.

1) inspiring greater fear than that of the state apparatus
2) effectively replacing the state force in its role of organizing social life (provisioning, exercising justice and authority in the general sense), THEN the sheep-who-don’t-want-to-have-problems will rally to the process that has been installed.

that’s why the first enemy of any dissident is the state apparatus, and in particular its variable-geometry application of the legal monopoly of violence, and certainly not the nigga he wants to get rid of.

” but of low overall power from small numbers”

a punchline in one our 1950’s movie is “a walking idiot goes further than two sitting intellectuals”.

your approach sees the political question from an electoralist and democratic point of view (in the sense of aggregating the greatest number of individual wills).

History teaches us that it is first and foremost made by limited, coherent cohorts who know where they’re going.

the bolsheviks never had a majority in 1917’s Russia.

@Seb

I recommend cold rationality here. Does forgiving them help or hurt our bid for survival?

If you’re not in a position of command, you only need to think of how it effects you personally. Does being upset at them fuel you, or does it sap your morale? Would the contempt remind you that you’re in a long-term struggle for your people’s existence amidst modern comfort, or would it burn you out and lower your success if you regularly seethe about them?

From a movement perspective, forgiveness will get you more allies, but it will alienate your existing hardliners. The hardliners tend to be higher quality, but of low overall power from small numbers. However, some of the most ardent enemies of the anti White system are former believers. The USSR discovered that disillusioned former true believers became their most committed enemies, to the point they’d automatically send assassin teams after agents of a failed mission. That’s the story behind Yuri Bezmenov.

My personal feelings are all the way on the forgiveness side, but consequential matters should be decided through the group survival lens.

“Their best natures are corrputed by the nature of the system we live in”

and who, exactly creates this “system” if not the hoï polloï who avidly follow a dysfunctional and even suicidal organization as long as it grants them a few small material rewards and, above all, the moral comfort of being in the general movement.

you seem to live under the illusion that they are just big, pure-hearted naiveties.

No, they CHOOSE to be “deceived” for the aforementioned reasons and would not hesitate to deliver you to all the gay-stapos of the moment to stay in the Camp of Good.

you take the defense of people who would NEVER take yours in an opposite situation.

and you know why these people will never join your side? Because they understood the very “Catholic” nature of your reflexes

spoiler: there is no point in a person breaking out of the mainstream if you give them the option of being able to join you at the moment when they can maximize their opportunistic approach

my solidarity is exercised very exclusively towards people who share my struggle: I have been freed for a very long time from any reflex of solidarity with any of the idiots I meet in the street under the pretext that they have my phenotype (and I’m obviously not even talking about the others)

don’t forget that most were ready to deprive us of all social life for refusing to be injected with their Jewish juice.

any position other than intransigence will perhaps facilitate your social relations, but will always distance you further from the solution that you say you want to achieve.

and of course those who have bred with other races cannot be subject to any redemption, ever.