What does the future hold for the warrior when there's nothing left to fight for...what kind of a future is not worth fighting for?
The word FUTURE is not without ambiguity. What misfortune befalls us 5 minutes after reading this post, will the UN issue a non binding edict for the sacrifice of the 1st born so as to fight climate change? Or an absurdity of some type will fuck things up.
And the warriors are neutered...the West is definitely in the mid way of the ACTIVE MEASURES stage of "DEMORALIZATION"...previous was the 1st stage of "DESTABILIZATION". It's not good when the warrior is demoralized. It's not good for the future.
a) Everything forwards each thing by internal separation of partials (life) within whole (inception towards death)...nothing (nihilo) implies suggested nihil-ism tempting ones de-nial of perceivable.
b) Nature implies balance forwarding choice...left vs right implies an artificial imbalance of choice...if one chooses to hold onto a suggested side.
what kind of a future is not worth fighting for?
Value (all perceivable) forwards evaluation (ones perception)...suggested worth tempts evaluation to ignore evaluating by holding onto something, while fighting others about it.
The word FUTURE is not without ambiguity.
Future/futurus/bheue - "to be"...suggested future tempts perceiving being to ignore self by seeking something "yet to be".
It's ONEs consent to another ONEs suggestion which establishes ambiguity aka equivocalness aka double sense aka dualism (fiction) within singularity (reality).
It's ones choice which selects a chosen ones suggestion, thereby inverting ones choice into a chosen one. Ones consent does it to YOU/JEW.
will the UN issue a non binding edict for the sacrifice
Free WILL of choice isn't bound unless choosing to bind itself aka sacrifice self by uniting consent with another ones suggestion. Edict/edit aka ordinance implies the natural order generating ones free will of choice by separating each one from one another.
active measures
Action (perceivable) cannot be measured by reactions (perception) without ignoring the ongoing separation of action into reactions. To exploit this ignorance a jew suggests "active measures" to tempt the reacting choices of gentiles to invert moving reality by holding onto suggested fiction.
demoralization
Suggested moralism tempts gentiles against each other (good vs bad), while ignoring that nature sets perceivable and perception apart from one another.
destabilization
Stable motion (inception towards death) generates movable matter (life)...de-stabliz-ation implies this division of stable action, yet the jewish suggestion of the word "destabilization" tempts gentiles to seek stability aka immovability aka cessation of motion aka dormancy aka death.
Consenting to a suggestion tempts a gentile to hold together (destabilization) what nature separates (de-stabiliz-ation), and a jew can only shape words within sound by the use of LETTERS aka by each gentiles consent LETTING a jew shape words into defintions aka DEAF PHONETICIANS aka gentiles deaf to phonics (sound).
[ + ] ImplicationOverReason
[ - ] ImplicationOverReason 0 points 2 weeksApr 14, 2025 06:27:18 ago (+0/-0)
Holding onto ignores partition.
a) Everything forwards each thing by internal separation of partials (life) within whole (inception towards death)...nothing (nihilo) implies suggested nihil-ism tempting ones de-nial of perceivable.
b) Nature implies balance forwarding choice...left vs right implies an artificial imbalance of choice...if one chooses to hold onto a suggested side.
Value (all perceivable) forwards evaluation (ones perception)...suggested worth tempts evaluation to ignore evaluating by holding onto something, while fighting others about it.
Future/futurus/bheue - "to be"...suggested future tempts perceiving being to ignore self by seeking something "yet to be".
It's ONEs consent to another ONEs suggestion which establishes ambiguity aka equivocalness aka double sense aka dualism (fiction) within singularity (reality).
It's ones choice which selects a chosen ones suggestion, thereby inverting ones choice into a chosen one. Ones consent does it to YOU/JEW.
Free WILL of choice isn't bound unless choosing to bind itself aka sacrifice self by uniting consent with another ones suggestion. Edict/edit aka ordinance implies the natural order generating ones free will of choice by separating each one from one another.
Action (perceivable) cannot be measured by reactions (perception) without ignoring the ongoing separation of action into reactions. To exploit this ignorance a jew suggests "active measures" to tempt the reacting choices of gentiles to invert moving reality by holding onto suggested fiction.
Suggested moralism tempts gentiles against each other (good vs bad), while ignoring that nature sets perceivable and perception apart from one another.
Stable motion (inception towards death) generates movable matter (life)...de-stabliz-ation implies this division of stable action, yet the jewish suggestion of the word "destabilization" tempts gentiles to seek stability aka immovability aka cessation of motion aka dormancy aka death.
Consenting to a suggestion tempts a gentile to hold together (destabilization) what nature separates (de-stabiliz-ation), and a jew can only shape words within sound by the use of LETTERS aka by each gentiles consent LETTING a jew shape words into defintions aka DEAF PHONETICIANS aka gentiles deaf to phonics (sound).