Home
Search
Login
RegisterPosted by: Icewater
« on: December 23, 2025, 01:31:26 pm »Aryanism.net is down. Somehow more down than it was before. But just another six more years bros and it'll come back up just trust the plan
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: November 12, 2025, 06:21:51 pm »I am not sure what you are trying to say. Are you implying that "non-whites" are safer in countries with no "whites"? Have you noticed what is happening in Gaza?
"Non-whites" living among "whites" will be targeted as individuals. "Non-whites" not living among "whites" will be targeted as populations. The latter is not safer than the former.
See also:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/issues/demographic-blueshift/msg3298/#msg3298
"Non-whites" living among "whites" will be targeted as individuals. "Non-whites" not living among "whites" will be targeted as populations. The latter is not safer than the former.
See also:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/issues/demographic-blueshift/msg3298/#msg3298
Posted by: rp
« on: November 11, 2025, 09:45:02 pm »"A weakened U.S with its nuclear arsenal depleted would allow India or China to emerge as the leading global power. What do you think?"
But would either India or China be both able and willing to pressure the Great Replacement to completion in the rest of the world? I fear they would not only dislike the idea of the Great Replacement, but worse would compete for "white" refugees fleeing the nuclear devastation (needless to say at the expense of "non-white" refugees). We could easily end up with significant
white" populations in both India and China!
The success of the Great Replacement depended on Western countries continuing to be perceived by "non-whites" as the best places for "non-whites" to live in for at least several more generations. (This is one reason why I did not even want China to economically grow as quickly as it did. I wanted it to grow just enough for most Chinese to be able to afford to emigrate to Western countries, not (as in reality) so much that they now have no incentive to do so.) An intra-Western nuclear exchange would definitively end this perception in all the affected areas.
As long as even a single "White" exists in a country, that country is not safe for "non Whites"..
Posted by: Pop
« on: October 11, 2025, 04:59:29 pm »From the accounts of Kirk turning against Israel, and the fact that more in the GOP have been following that same path, I'd say it is "part of a greater turn of events". Not sure that this is why Kirk was assassinated, but it is certainly one of the more plausible lines of questioning in this regard I have witnessed so far. People with large followings, especially of the Judeo-Christian variety, are obviously a threat to the state of Israel if they suddenly 'change sides' so-to-speak...
Posted by: christianbethel
« on: October 10, 2025, 10:10:52 pm »Do you think Kirk's assassination is part of a greater turn of events involving the American Republican Party or an isolated incident?
Posted by: rp
« on: October 10, 2025, 12:38:38 am »"Would lt be easy? The distance involved alone would make it difficult. The only Western country China could invade is Russia, with which it has a land border. Anything else depends on adjacent countries willing to let India or China station enough troops there first. And military offensives would have to be launched one at a time. NATO would continue to function, which means that one NATO country attacked would lead to counterattack by all NATO countries.."
I see. In that case, we just need some other strategies. For example, we could advocate for a deep state coup against Trump. But what is worrying is that establishment institutions are now moving rightwards.
I see. In that case, we just need some other strategies. For example, we could advocate for a deep state coup against Trump. But what is worrying is that establishment institutions are now moving rightwards.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: October 09, 2025, 05:57:50 pm »"But would you not agree the task of "White" genocide is easier from a military perspective?"
Only if we strike literally immediately after your theorized NATO vs Russia nuclear exchange. Otherwise, our targets would not be waiting around idly. They would move to wherever they can get the best protection.
"imagine how easy it would be for India or China to simply launch military offensives against Western countries"
Would lt be easy? The distance involved alone would make it difficult. The only Western country China could invade is Russia, with which it has a land border. Anything else depends on adjacent countries willing to let India or China station enough troops there first. And military offensives would have to be launched one at a time. NATO would continue to function, which means that one NATO country attacked would lead to counterattack by all NATO countries.
"Take Iran, for example. I would argue the main reason the leadership hasn't declared war on Israel is because of the latter's WMD arsenal. But with the WMDs out of the picture it changes things up quite a bit."
Yes, but Iran is geographically near Israel. In contrast, from where are we supposed to go to war against Britain, for example?
Finally, Orania has no WMD arsenal. Why hasn't it been militarily destroyed yet?
Only if we strike literally immediately after your theorized NATO vs Russia nuclear exchange. Otherwise, our targets would not be waiting around idly. They would move to wherever they can get the best protection.
"imagine how easy it would be for India or China to simply launch military offensives against Western countries"
Would lt be easy? The distance involved alone would make it difficult. The only Western country China could invade is Russia, with which it has a land border. Anything else depends on adjacent countries willing to let India or China station enough troops there first. And military offensives would have to be launched one at a time. NATO would continue to function, which means that one NATO country attacked would lead to counterattack by all NATO countries.
"Take Iran, for example. I would argue the main reason the leadership hasn't declared war on Israel is because of the latter's WMD arsenal. But with the WMDs out of the picture it changes things up quite a bit."
Yes, but Iran is geographically near Israel. In contrast, from where are we supposed to go to war against Britain, for example?
Finally, Orania has no WMD arsenal. Why hasn't it been militarily destroyed yet?
Posted by: rp
« on: October 09, 2025, 03:34:11 am »"my pessimistic estimation, the weakened state of Western countries, instead of increasing "white" genocidal intent, is more likely to lead to complacency among "non-whites" and hence the evaporation of what little "white" genocidal intent there used to be.
The disappointing truth is that anti-"whiteness" itself does not necessarily lead to "white" genocidal intent. Instead, among "non-white" non-Aryans, it leads to vindictive Eurocentrism. In a particularly revealing example, I encountered a discussion among (self-proclaimed proudly anti-"white") "non-white" non-Aryan men whose fantasy was that when "non-whites" rule the world, imprisoned "white" men would as their main source of entertainment watch livestreams of "non-white" men having sex with "white" women outside prison, and then these "white" men's semen would be harvested and used to actually impregnate the "white" women, who would then give birth to a new generation of "whites" to restock the cycle, thereby ensuring that endless future generations of "non-white" men will never run out of monoethnic "white" women sexual partners. This form of anti-"whiteness" leads to positive desire to preserve "white" blood in perpetuity! The structural contrast between this fantasy and Pierce's fantasy (ending of The Turner Diaries) explains why we are losing so badly."
I see what you are saying. But would you not agree the task of "White" genocide is easier from a military perspective? With sufficient anti colonial sentiment coupled with a strong leadership, imagine how easy it would be for India or China to simply launch military offensives against Western countries with the goal of killing off all "Whites", as vengeance for colonialism. It is unthinkable now due to the US's WMD arsenal, but a significantly weakened US changes the picture.
Take Iran, for example. I would argue the main reason the leadership hasn't declared war on Israel is because of the latter's WMD arsenal. But with the WMDs out of the picture it changes things up quite a bit.
The disappointing truth is that anti-"whiteness" itself does not necessarily lead to "white" genocidal intent. Instead, among "non-white" non-Aryans, it leads to vindictive Eurocentrism. In a particularly revealing example, I encountered a discussion among (self-proclaimed proudly anti-"white") "non-white" non-Aryan men whose fantasy was that when "non-whites" rule the world, imprisoned "white" men would as their main source of entertainment watch livestreams of "non-white" men having sex with "white" women outside prison, and then these "white" men's semen would be harvested and used to actually impregnate the "white" women, who would then give birth to a new generation of "whites" to restock the cycle, thereby ensuring that endless future generations of "non-white" men will never run out of monoethnic "white" women sexual partners. This form of anti-"whiteness" leads to positive desire to preserve "white" blood in perpetuity! The structural contrast between this fantasy and Pierce's fantasy (ending of The Turner Diaries) explains why we are losing so badly."
I see what you are saying. But would you not agree the task of "White" genocide is easier from a military perspective? With sufficient anti colonial sentiment coupled with a strong leadership, imagine how easy it would be for India or China to simply launch military offensives against Western countries with the goal of killing off all "Whites", as vengeance for colonialism. It is unthinkable now due to the US's WMD arsenal, but a significantly weakened US changes the picture.
Take Iran, for example. I would argue the main reason the leadership hasn't declared war on Israel is because of the latter's WMD arsenal. But with the WMDs out of the picture it changes things up quite a bit.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: October 09, 2025, 03:08:17 am »"But I was thinking with enough anti "White"sentiment, they would be compelled to seek the genocide of "Whites" worldwide, a task now made easier by the weakened state of Western countries."
In my pessimistic estimation, the weakened state of Western countries, instead of increasing "white" genocidal intent, is more likely to lead to complacency among "non-whites" and hence the evaporation of what little "white" genocidal intent there used to be.
The disappointing truth is that anti-"whiteness" itself does not necessarily lead to "white" genocidal intent. Instead, among "non-white" non-Aryans, it leads to vindictive Eurocentrism. In a particularly revealing example, I encountered a discussion among (self-proclaimed proudly anti-"white") "non-white" non-Aryan men whose fantasy was that when "non-whites" rule the world, imprisoned "white" men would as their main source of entertainment watch livestreams of "non-white" men having sex with "white" women outside prison, and then these "white" men's semen would be harvested and used to actually impregnate the "white" women, who would then give birth to a new generation of "whites" to restock the cycle, thereby ensuring that endless future generations of "non-white" men will never run out of monoethnic "white" women sexual partners. This form of anti-"whiteness" leads to positive desire to preserve "white" blood in perpetuity! The structural contrast between this fantasy and Pierce's fantasy (ending of The Turner Diaries) explains why we are losing so badly.
This is nothing new either:
https://www.econjobrumors.com/topic/four-things-you-didnt-know-about-martin-luther-king
"I will say they still have incentive to emigrate"
We still have global warming to drive climate refugees, but if NATO countries and Russia become a nuclear fallout zone, even heat might not be enough to make radioactivity seem preferable.
In my pessimistic estimation, the weakened state of Western countries, instead of increasing "white" genocidal intent, is more likely to lead to complacency among "non-whites" and hence the evaporation of what little "white" genocidal intent there used to be.
The disappointing truth is that anti-"whiteness" itself does not necessarily lead to "white" genocidal intent. Instead, among "non-white" non-Aryans, it leads to vindictive Eurocentrism. In a particularly revealing example, I encountered a discussion among (self-proclaimed proudly anti-"white") "non-white" non-Aryan men whose fantasy was that when "non-whites" rule the world, imprisoned "white" men would as their main source of entertainment watch livestreams of "non-white" men having sex with "white" women outside prison, and then these "white" men's semen would be harvested and used to actually impregnate the "white" women, who would then give birth to a new generation of "whites" to restock the cycle, thereby ensuring that endless future generations of "non-white" men will never run out of monoethnic "white" women sexual partners. This form of anti-"whiteness" leads to positive desire to preserve "white" blood in perpetuity! The structural contrast between this fantasy and Pierce's fantasy (ending of The Turner Diaries) explains why we are losing so badly.
This is nothing new either:
https://www.econjobrumors.com/topic/four-things-you-didnt-know-about-martin-luther-king
Quote
One of King's closest friends, Rev. Ralph Abernathy, wrote a book in 1989 in which he talked about King's obsession with white prostitutes. King would often use church donations to have drunken sex parties, where he would hire two to three white prostitutes, occasionally beating them brutally. This has also been reported by the FBI agents who monitored King.
"I will say they still have incentive to emigrate"
We still have global warming to drive climate refugees, but if NATO countries and Russia become a nuclear fallout zone, even heat might not be enough to make radioactivity seem preferable.
Posted by: rp
« on: October 09, 2025, 12:37:42 am »But would either India or China be both able "and willing to pressure the Great Replacement to completion in the rest of the world? I fear they would not only dislike the idea of the Great Replacement, but worse would compete for "white" refugees fleeing the nuclear devastation (needless to say at the expense of "non-white" refugees). We could easily end up with significant
white" populations in both India and China"
Yes. Already we see many medical tourists from Western countries in India, some of whom would end up settling there.
But I was thinking with enough anti "White"sentiment, they would be compelled to seek the genocide of "Whites" worldwide, a task now made easier by the weakened state of Western countries. But I will admit this does not does not take into consideration the existing geopolitical tensions between nuclear armed China/India/Pakistan. What do you think?
"I wanted it to grow just enough for most Chinese to be able to afford to emigrate to Western countries, not (as in reality) so much that they now have no incentive to do so.)"
With India as well. Economic growth also leads to more consumerism/Indians seeking to replicate the first world lifestyle (along with the higher carbon footprint). However, I will say they still have incentive to emigrate, as there are other problems (i.e. the unsustainability of maintaining a first world life style with the size of India in what is ultimately a third world country, as well as the dysfunctional nature of its democracy, or in the case of China, the harsh work culture/authoritarian nature of the state).
white" populations in both India and China"
Yes. Already we see many medical tourists from Western countries in India, some of whom would end up settling there.
But I was thinking with enough anti "White"sentiment, they would be compelled to seek the genocide of "Whites" worldwide, a task now made easier by the weakened state of Western countries. But I will admit this does not does not take into consideration the existing geopolitical tensions between nuclear armed China/India/Pakistan. What do you think?
"I wanted it to grow just enough for most Chinese to be able to afford to emigrate to Western countries, not (as in reality) so much that they now have no incentive to do so.)"
With India as well. Economic growth also leads to more consumerism/Indians seeking to replicate the first world lifestyle (along with the higher carbon footprint). However, I will say they still have incentive to emigrate, as there are other problems (i.e. the unsustainability of maintaining a first world life style with the size of India in what is ultimately a third world country, as well as the dysfunctional nature of its democracy, or in the case of China, the harsh work culture/authoritarian nature of the state).
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: October 08, 2025, 11:40:38 pm »"A weakened U.S with its nuclear arsenal depleted would allow India or China to emerge as the leading global power. What do you think?"
But would either India or China be both able and willing to pressure the Great Replacement to completion in the rest of the world? I fear they would not only dislike the idea of the Great Replacement, but worse would compete for "white" refugees fleeing the nuclear devastation (needless to say at the expense of "non-white" refugees). We could easily end up with significant
white" populations in both India and China!
The success of the Great Replacement depended on Western countries continuing to be perceived by "non-whites" as the best places for "non-whites" to live in for at least several more generations. (This is one reason why I did not even want China to economically grow as quickly as it did. I wanted it to grow just enough for most Chinese to be able to afford to emigrate to Western countries, not (as in reality) so much that they now have no incentive to do so.) An intra-Western nuclear exchange would definitively end this perception in all the affected areas.
But would either India or China be both able and willing to pressure the Great Replacement to completion in the rest of the world? I fear they would not only dislike the idea of the Great Replacement, but worse would compete for "white" refugees fleeing the nuclear devastation (needless to say at the expense of "non-white" refugees). We could easily end up with significant
white" populations in both India and China!
The success of the Great Replacement depended on Western countries continuing to be perceived by "non-whites" as the best places for "non-whites" to live in for at least several more generations. (This is one reason why I did not even want China to economically grow as quickly as it did. I wanted it to grow just enough for most Chinese to be able to afford to emigrate to Western countries, not (as in reality) so much that they now have no incentive to do so.) An intra-Western nuclear exchange would definitively end this perception in all the affected areas.
Posted by: rp
« on: October 08, 2025, 09:38:08 pm »"In particular, I am not even certain that we have a path to foreseeable victory any more. It is looking like the US will be irrecoverable by the time MAGA Is finished with it. Our entire plan depended on the US remaining the leading geopolitical power for at least as long as it would take for the Great Replacement to succeed in the US. This would have happened smoothly absent Trump 2016, and was still feasible prior to Trump 2024, but it would take nothing short of a miracle to get us back onto that track the way things are now."
The best we can hope for is a nuclear exchange between Russia and the U.S/NATO. A weakened U.S with its nuclear arsenal depleted would allow India or China to emerge as the leading global power. What do you think?
The best we can hope for is a nuclear exchange between Russia and the U.S/NATO. A weakened U.S with its nuclear arsenal depleted would allow India or China to emerge as the leading global power. What do you think?
Posted by: Reparations?
« on: October 08, 2025, 06:06:49 pm »Quote
...I am not even certain that we have a path to foreseeable victory any more. It is looking like the US will be irrecoverable by the time MAGA Is finished with it. Our entire plan depended on the US remaining the leading geopolitical power for at least as long as it would take for the Great Replacement to succeed in the US...
I feel this too. I do not see much hope for the U.S. at all anymore. I think Hitler will be proven right in regard to his feelings toward the U.S.! I now feel the same way, as I believe many world leaders are now feeling toward the U.S. too, especially Xi of China...
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: October 08, 2025, 06:00:16 pm »As previously mentioned, everything is happening too quickly. It is almost guaranteed that nothing I write now will be relevant by the time the current turmoil is over.
In particular, I am not even certain that we have a path to foreseeable victory any more. It is looking like the US will be irrecoverable by the time MAGA Is finished with it. Our entire plan depended on the US remaining the leading geopolitical power for at least as long as it would take for the Great Replacement to succeed in the US. This would have happened smoothly absent Trump 2016, and was still feasible prior to Trump 2024, but it would take nothing short of a miracle to get us back onto that track the way things are now.
In particular, I am not even certain that we have a path to foreseeable victory any more. It is looking like the US will be irrecoverable by the time MAGA Is finished with it. Our entire plan depended on the US remaining the leading geopolitical power for at least as long as it would take for the Great Replacement to succeed in the US. This would have happened smoothly absent Trump 2016, and was still feasible prior to Trump 2024, but it would take nothing short of a miracle to get us back onto that track the way things are now.
Posted by: HikariDude
« on: October 08, 2025, 03:23:47 pm »Leave 90sRF alone. Give him time like you said you would.
From the main site:
PS: Quit calling him ‘AS’. In this site, he identifies as 90sRetroFan. That’s like transphobes identifying people by their biological gender like it matters so much.
From the main site:
Quote
In general, due regard for anyone engaged in a task is important. Except in the face of true emergencies, others should try their best not to disturb him. All offers of assistance in the task should be made prior to the beginning of work; once work has commenced, no further offers of assistance by others should be made, as this could adversely affect the confidence of the worker by implying that he needs help. If during the course of the task the worker finds that he indeed needs help, it is up to him to request it.
One delegated to do a task is obliged to inform the delegator of any relevant changes in circumstance, or of how the task is going in general. The delegator is not obliged to (and should not) regularly “check up on” the delegate in order to ask how the task is going, as again this could adversely affect the confidence of the delegate. In absence of news from the delegate, the delegator is only to assume the task is proceeding smoothly and steadily. (If it turns out otherwise, the delegate thus demonstrates that he is undutiful.)
PS: Quit calling him ‘AS’. In this site, he identifies as 90sRetroFan. That’s like transphobes identifying people by their biological gender like it matters so much.