Sign into an existing account

Bullshit. That's letting women vote jews into power.

No.

This is what happens when you allow jews to interpret what Jesus said.

It’s sad that some white people (like OP) have IQs lower than a nigger’s.

You should watch this:
Https://files.catbox.moe/gj93i5.mp4

Maybe OP has a chance to understand that Jesus told us to execute these pedophiles and not allow their cultures - but I’m guessing that OP is a fully judaised kikenigger retard.

Empathy wasn't taught to Christians. Empathy is a natural process humans experience. jews lack this natural process and exploit others that do experience it.

If I wanted a bunch of really kind-hearted, empathetic people to join my cult, I would tell them that my cult is all about being kind-hearted and empathetic. It's not like I'm teaching them how to be kind-hearted and empathetic.

Not Christian empathy, Christian moral paradigm in its entirety.

At the beginning, morality was based upon personal preference/individual valuation, it was subjective, it was self-serving, and there was no problem with that.

Because people had connections to one another where the happiness of another would be a source of the happiness of yourself, and their sorrows were also your own, people were able to build communities where they looked after one another.

Because people depended upon one another for the things they needed or wanted, which would make them happy, they would look after those within their communities even if they were those whom they may not have liked, simply because they served a role in getting the individual what made them happy.

But there was no sense of being morally obligated to care about every single person, especially those whose detriment was a source of your own benefit, in fact, the reverse was true, it was good if someone else suffered if that other persons suffering caused pleasure to you and those whom you had a reason to care for.

Kings would brag about the other nations they had conquered, the other peoples they had slain or enslaved, the lands they had taken for their people from another, this made them good kings because everything they had done was optimally beneficial for their people, whatever harm it had caused to people outside the of the king's rule was unimportant, because it was common sense that the king had a moral obligation to his subjects, and none towards those who weren't counted amongst the subjects of his reign.

This was logical, simple, and true. It embraced the world as it is, and it was later revealed to be, a place of relentless competition where there are supposed to be losers who get eliminated before they could leave a legacy that lasts, and winners who outlast the losers and establish a legacy that runs until the end of the world.

People would do best to go back to the mindset of placing themselves first, looking after themselves before others, and prioritizing others based upon how essential they are to the propagation of their own genetics. it's the cheat code strategy that the kikes and niggers of various flavors are currently using to destroy us in our own homelands.

White pride, identity, supremacy, nationalism, etc. are all just us taking a play out of their playbooks, meeting them on like terms of victory, seeking out the exact same things for ourselves by the exact same means.

Neitzsche rejected both christianity and communism as being the exact same mindset, a slave morality that worships weakness and defeat by lauding them as actually being their opposites, while the elites who propagated such ethics among the masses pursue their own strength and enjoy actual victory, helped along by the fact that they had essentially tricked the many into refusing to compete against them in this game.

The entirety of normative ethical systems exists only to provide a christian morality without reference to god as it's rationale. It's still the morals teachings of christ in every practical sense of the word. Very telling how most normie atheists are still fans of the ethical lessons of christ.

The political left is christ's advisements on how we should live, without reference to god or heaven, the political right is christ's teaching about god and heaven, but without reference to how he said society should be structured. For someone who spoke out against christianity a lot, Karl Marx ripped off jesus for much of his political and economic ideas that he had detailed in the communist manifesto. There's many very good images that show the agreement of communists with jesus as he is quoted as having spoken in the holy bible. We call that projection.

The right talks a lot about how they reject relativistic morality, because they shift their ethical values more than the left does, the conservative position is keeping things as they were familiar with when they were young, the simple reality of aging meant that each generation advocated for a more left wing conservative position than the last.

the left talks about how they reject absolutist morality because they themselves are moral absolutists, unable to argue for practical reasons why they support multiculti political correctness and globohomo social justice causes, there's no material benefit for themselves, and in fact much detriment being done to them by these positions, to their countries, to their political power, and to their own quality of life, yet they defend them on principle of dogma.

That's just one example of many, but the point demonstrated is clear: That the way each side portrays the other reveals the flaws they are trying to conceal within their own camp. for one other notable example, the Left portrayal of the Right as conformists reveals how conformist they truly are (which is more conformist and totalitarian than any other ideological faction within the political mainstream).

Libertarians are an outlier that seems to stand unique to the other two mainstream political factions that are considered to be acceptable within our society, proudly non-conformist while actually being so in more than lip-service and pretension, tolerating of the degenerate and as well as those who live a disciplined life, going forth to say that whatever way one chooses to live is one's own business, and that everyone should feel free to go whatever path they feel would be best for themselves, to find the best way, with the very small exception for the ones who violate the principle of non-aggression.

Desade went into detail on how this was all a transparent fraud from the start, jesus simply tailored his speech to what the poor would have wanted to hear: They were in bad circumstances, and were told that they should do nothing about them, because they would just be handed a perfect world after they had died for doing so.

They were powerless, so he told them not to fight, and that they would win by not fighting - but only after they had died.
They were starving, so he told them not to seek out riches to feed themselves with, and that they would be well fed by not doing so - but only after they had died.
He told them to be lazy and submissive, and that some victory would come to them in the afterlife if they were just to do absolutely nothing and just lazily wallow in their defeated states during their brief stint on earth, like cowards who lack the ambition to strive for anything better than what they had.

He wasnt the king of kings, he was a shepherd of beggars.
He wasnt a rebel of any sort, he was a servant of the oppressors, keeping the masses from rebelling against the tyranny.

Stirner and Rand were self-hating jews who loved the goyim far more than they did their own people, they gave us up the plot of the jewish mindset, and with it the secret to meeting the enemy on equal terms, rather than on the terms the enemy would rather us be playing on.

Low IQ post.

There once was a time when a White could put a hatchet in the face of anyone he wanted and face no reprocussions from the government.

Then a Jew told you to "Turn the other cheek, Goyim!".