Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:
Verification:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: September 14, 2025, 05:37:06 pm »

"Why are "progressives" such as Bill Gates so afraid of death?"

Because they want to personally witness the progress they believe in. As there is no limit to progress by definition, there is no point at which they can feel that they have finished witnessing it.

Fear of dying prior to completing what you want to do is understandable (especially if you can find no one reliable to take over the task), but what you want to do must have a completion point.

The worst double-standard, however, is that progressives who fear their own deaths support progress itself, even though progress is none other than the death of what came before. Instead, progressives shamelessly say that the old has to go in order for the new to come.

Then again, what do we expect? Progressives are literally those who support animal experimentation (which has led to the deaths of countless victims) for the sake of medical (ie. life-prolonging) research, so it's not as if their double-standard were not already through the roof.....

Conclusion: progressives are vampires.
Posted by: SuicidalSystem
« on: September 14, 2025, 04:19:48 am »

"I read on a Reddit post about Jung’s concept of confidence and self esteem, which is about overcoming fears and other natural conditioning that leads to low confidence. This helps to resist selective pressure and to prevent any more loss of original nobility."

I fell to the current system before I even realized it was meant to be avoided at all costs. I feel the only fear that truly needs be overcome is the fear of death. No one can serve a community in a truly unselfish manner if they fear death. Many whom have sacrificed for their community through human history did so by by sacrificing their own lives! This is just a fact at this point...

Question:

Why are "progressives" such as Bill Gates so afraid of death?
Posted by: HikariDude
« on: September 12, 2025, 09:35:26 pm »

“people of various different physiques/net worths/qualifications/etc. who all say that what they've got makes them feel confident, which would appear contrary to your proposal, but how many are telling the truth?”
Seems like confidence can based off of various kinds of parameters (as opposed to an amount of people that claim to base it off of certain parameters).

“People who lack confidence often try to portray themselves as supremely confident, so it is not always immediately clear whose apparent confidence is real and whose is an act.”
Sounds like most selfish people. They seem to lack confidence themselves leading them to focus on themselves more than others (which is ignoble especially if there is no completion point).

I read on a Reddit post about Jung’s concept of confidence and self esteem, which is about overcoming fears and other natural conditioning that leads to low confidence. This helps to resist selective pressure and to prevent any more loss of original nobility.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: September 12, 2025, 08:54:42 pm »

It is hard to know for sure. I have encountered people of various different physiques/net worths/qualifications/etc. who all say that what they've got makes them feel confident, which would appear contrary to your proposal, but how many are telling the truth? People who lack confidence often try to portray themselves as supremely confident, so it is not always immediately clear whose apparent confidence is real and whose is an act.
Posted by: HikariDude
« on: September 12, 2025, 06:31:34 pm »

“Because shorter "whites" still have partial Giant ancestry, whereas even taller "non-whites" do not”
I guess that is valid considering the majority of “non-white” NBA players (including “non-black” “non-white” players like Lin, Misaka, etc) have less giant blood compared to “white” players:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/human-evolution/sexual-dimorphism-preferences/msg7138/#msg7138
An example of short Giants would be pre-MJ MTV artists:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/counterculture-era/alice-cooper-vs-homophobia/msg3629/#msg3629

But you still haven’t confirmed whether or not:
Quote
unlike non-Western confidence, [Western (including Eurocentric) confidence] is always directed towards one side of the spectrum (regardless if someone expands it or a Eurocentrist follows it) as opposed to a part of the spectrum that helps complete their purpose?
The first point I tried to confirm
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: September 12, 2025, 04:09:37 pm »

Because shorter "whites" still have partial Giant ancestry, whereas even taller "non-whites" do not.
Posted by: HikariDude
« on: September 12, 2025, 10:05:37 am »

“All I have observed is that taller "white" tourists tend to get better treatment than shorter "white" tourists, but even shorter "white" tourists get better treatment than taller "non-white" tourists.”
Then why is giant worship still a reason for it?
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: September 11, 2025, 11:46:11 pm »

"Wouldn't giants visiting former colonies and other non-Western countries (especially those not visited by giants) have been sort of like Faustianism and progressivism as if they were the first/biggest to visit those countries (or cities, neighborhoods, etc) and appear in their surroundings’ eyes. Not saying it is Faustian (regardless whether or not it is) since Faustianism is not in their minds. Just saying what it appears to their surroundings."

What does this have to do with progressivism??

As for your main point, your choice of words is still rather strange. Are you saying that present-day "non-whites" in former Western colonies might view "white" tourists the same way that pre-colonial "non-whites" would have viewed the first "white" colonialists? If so, it would have been clearer by not bringing in Faustianism.

All I have observed is that taller "white" tourists tend to get better treatment than shorter "white" tourists, but even shorter "white" tourists get better treatment than taller "non-white" tourists.
Posted by: HikariDude
« on: September 11, 2025, 08:34:33 pm »

“I don't understand what you mean.”
Wouldn't giants visiting former colonies and other non-Western countries (especially those not visited by giants) have been sort of like Faustianism and progressivism as if they were the first/biggest to visit those countries (or cities, neighborhoods, etc) and appear in their surroundings’ eyes. Not saying it is Faustian (regardless whether or not it is) since Faustianism is not in their minds. Just saying what it appears to their surroundings.

“What is 'it'?”
Westernized (including Eurocentric) confidence.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: September 11, 2025, 05:37:23 pm »

"Do you think giants’ heights have a little Faustianism in non-Western countries? This includes countries without exposure to giants, and hence wouldn’t some Faustianism come into play (though the “whites” have not intended so)?"

I don't understand what you mean.

"But do you agree that, unlike non-Western confidence, it is always directed towards one side of the spectrum (regardless if someone expands it or a Eurocentrist follows it) as opposed to a part of the spectrum that helps complete their purpose?"

What is 'it'?
Posted by: HikariDude
« on: September 11, 2025, 04:20:41 pm »

“Giant-worship by non-Giant Gentiles:”

Do you think giants’ heights have a little Faustianism in non-Western countries? This includes countries without exposure to giants, and hence wouldn’t some Faustianism come into play (though the “whites” have not intended so)?
So even if Eurocentrists make a mistaken assumption about pigmentation, they surely would not make one about height (another parameter in the first previous post).

But do you agree that, unlike non-Western confidence, it is always directed towards one side of the spectrum (regardless if someone expands it or a Eurocentrist follows it) as opposed to a part of the spectrum that helps complete their purpose?
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: September 10, 2025, 07:18:52 pm »

"Are you trying to say expansionism =/= Faustianism/Progressivism?"

Expansionism =/= Faustianism =/= progressivism, to be precise.

"Because they belong to an identity of Faustians/Progressives that have already colonized so much that colonized people see them as these high status"

But how the colonized see them may not be how they actually are.

"Why do you think Eurocentrists follow “whites”?"

Giant-worship by non-Giant Gentiles:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/issues/psychological-decolonization/msg451/?topicseen#msg451

Quote
(I actually have a racial theory of Eurocentrism (in addition to colonialism causing Eurocentrism). I currently suspect that, among prehistoric Gentiles, Giants would have been considered superior (e.g. on account of physical size, sexual dimorphism, etc.). On the other hand, among prehistoric Aryans, there would have been no particular reason to consider Aesir etc. superior, since their Golden Age was not better than the Golden Age elsewhere. So when present-day "non-whites" worship "whites", it would be a function of their Gentile blood memory. Based on my anecdotal observations of individuals, Eurocentrism does seem less frequent (or weaker in manifestation) among "non-whites" with noticeable Aryan traits, though as always there are exceptions.)

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/issues/psychological-decolonization/msg16917/?topicseen#msg16917

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/human-evolution/re-sexual-dimorphism-preferences/msg16328/#msg16328

"Are all “whites” Faustians/Progressives? I predict you say ‘no’ considering not all “whites” are machinists:"

No, not all "whites" are Faustians, and not all "white" are progressives. However, there are non-machinist Faustians and non-machinist progressives, therefore the existence of non-machinist "whites" does not necessarily imply the existence of non-Faustian "whites" and non-progressive "whites".
Posted by: HikariDude
« on: September 10, 2025, 06:51:06 pm »

“an individual Faustian or individual progressive may not be consciously thinking about expansion when they do their stuff.”
Are you trying to say expansionism =/= Faustianism/Progressivism?

“Why can a "white" not be only a Faustian but not a progressive, or only a progressive but not a Faustian, or even neither a Faustian nor a progressive, and still have "non-white" Eurocentrist followers?”
Because they belong to an identity of Faustians/Progressives that have already colonized so much that colonized people see them as these high status that seek for some sort of approval/glory, which according to their Nietzschean/Achillean (both Western) desires is sign of their naturalist success.
So in a way, Faustians and Progressives (and sovereign neocolonialists) might have had some role in Eurocentrists’ perceptions

Why do you think Eurocentrists follow “whites”?

“because are neocolonialists”

Are all “whites” Faustians/Progressives? I predict you say ‘no’ considering not all “whites” are machinists:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/leftists-against-progressivism/msg30896/#msg30896
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: September 10, 2025, 04:34:53 pm »

"Isn’t Faustianism the desire to be the first, while progressivism being the belief in progress?"

Yes and yes.

"Both of which motivated by expansion?"

I would say expansion is an eventual consequence of either, but an individual Faustian or individual progressive may not be consciously thinking about expansion when they do their stuff.

Still, none of the above implies:

Quote
You have to be a Faustian and a Progressive for colonized Eurocentrists to follow along.

Why can a "white" not be only a Faustian but not a progressive, or only a progressive but not a Faustian, or even neither a Faustian nor a progressive, and still have "non-white" Eurocentrist followers?

"Well someone was probably the first to cross it."

Yes, but every red light runner we see today is not the first to run a red light! They do what they do not because they are Faustians but because they are either 'sovereign citizens' (who think rules do not apply to themselves):

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-right/plebian-hubris/msg18403/#msg18403

or, in the case of "whites" in non-Western countries, because are neocolonialists who (while perhaps following rules in Western countries) think rules in non-Western countries do not apply to themselves:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/colonial-era/western-neo-colonial-mentality/msg22071/#msg22071

Yet still they are followed by "non-white" Eurocentrists. This is why I brought up the example.
Posted by: HikariDude
« on: September 10, 2025, 07:37:20 am »

“But such "whites" may be non-Faustians and/or non-progressives.”
Isn’t Faustianism the desire to be the first, while progressivism being the belief in progress? Both of which motivated by expansion? I understand how skin brightening predates the colonial era hence not much Faustian or Progressive, but wasn’t it further expanded via colonialism?

“something as banal as running a red light.”
Well someone was probably the first to cross it. Even if it is not innovative enough, skin care has progressed more than how one runs a red light. Hasn’t it?