True Left

"Would it? Can you give me an example of a non-tribalist, non-violence-initiating bloodline, given that you are now categorising people based on geographical ethnic origin?"

I'm not sure what the "geographical ethnic origin" of Capybaras are, but I'm pretty certain they could not be classified as Turanian or Gentile by Aryanist standards:

You see, capybaras really don't pose any threat to anyone around them, so most animals just leave them be. Capybaras have made friends with anything from cats and dogs to birds and monkeys! In addition, capybaras are quite caring creatures, who often “adopt” orphaned animals of other species.

@Junito

Hell yes. The complete ambiguity of the word "white" itself is alone proven by how 90sRF bounces between all of its different micro-defintions. Then, he complains when someone tries to make a distinction between them. "When did I say 'beige skin'!?! You are illiterate!!!".

Its important to remember how, like you and I have been saying, using broad geographical racial categorizations used to be something we'd frown upon tribalists for. Now, its something 90sRF openly wants to accentuate in people. A friend of mine, despite not even being an Aryanist, was today still able to remark to me that this fixation on identity politics goes against the very foundations of Aryanism. I don't mean to disregard everything else you have pointed out, but everything else I honestly have to say there that I'm relieved to see someone else is calling all of this out.

Its a shame that Aryanists are either too naively gung-ho for the blind obedience larp to listen to their reason, or too understandably put off — yet flightish — to try to save something beautiful from rotting.

>Can I give you a piece of advice? You say you want to create a new movement to restore the original version of Aryanism, but why? You should just ditch the ideology and start from scratch.

Aryanism is simply my life's purpose. For years, I've suffered, accomplished, and transformed in pursuit of becoming a higher version of myself, for the sake of Aryanism. I hate to sound pretentiously vague but if you were one of my close friends, you'd know what I'm talking about. Don't get me wrong, my loyalty is ultimately to Aryanism as a ideal, not "Aryanism" as a dysfunctional community. Ascesis is just my last ditch attempt to restore Aryanism as a community, because I still care about everyone here.

After all of my insights and experiences, I feel like I owe it at least that. This way, I can be rest assured knowing that I at least tried to save this wordlessly beautiful source of idealism and inspiration from fading into the Abyss, if it truly is destined to do so. But even then, there is really nothing stopping us from pretending that 90sRF never existed and "marketing" Ascesis to completely new people, if we want. Worst case scenario, all of us over here at Ascesis will simply carry the torch by through pragmatic expression of Aryanism in the real world, if that answers your question.

>Yeah, it was better than this new site but are you really convinced that it was completely correct?

Not completely per se, no. But I've always been comfortable with adhering to a dynamic worldview that acknowledges its faults, and changes in order to reach its ultimate mission. I never saw Aryanism as a static and ritualistic doctrine. Realistically, there are just as many "Aryanisms" as there are Aryanists, so I won't pretend that "Ascesian" Aryanism does not provide innovations upon the original material. But at the end of the day, this is and always will be Aryanism.

>And Ascesis came in pretty hot with their own litany of insults,

If I ever insulted anyone, it was an insult, not an Ad Hominem-Strawman as it was for 90sRF. I only really went off after winning the debate, wherein 90sRF would just twist my words to insult/Ad Hominem/Strawman me. Deal with eight Goddamn pages of verbal Jewry from 90sRF, and you'd want to call him a Jew too. He is notorious for being a cúnt to people, he needs to be made fun of.

If you simply don't like that kind of tension in general, fine. But you are lying to yourself if you pretend this isn't warranted.

Your still talking? Little ****

“Why not apply this to ‘black’ people too?”

Because “black” supremacy isn’t really a thing. It didn’t exist historically the way that “white” supremacy or even Jewish supremacy did. And any so-called “black” supremacist groups rose recently as a response to how “white” people treated “black” Americans. Reactionary tribalism isn’t as bad to me because it’s a defense mechanism, whereas “white” supremacy rose organically, and on its own. Not as a response to “white” people as a whole being mistreated. Also, people like the Black Israelites are more-so just anti-white than anything. They really only tend to talk about being superior to “white devils”. They don’t tend to talk about other groups at all from what I’ve read and seen from them. But to clarify, if it does become a phenomenon so large that it ends up having the same implications as “white” identitarianism, then I would apply the same standards

“Well his highly-documentated inability to acknowledge that anti-tech "whites" exist, and pro-tech "non-whites" exist, and that the problem is with technocrats, not a broad ethnic group, does a damn good job at making it seem like he is allergic to this nuance.”

They don’t neglect it. Non-whites get their images posted as enemies on here all the time, whether the topic is about machinism or some other issue. I think we all agree here, including 90sRetroFan, that most of the problems we’re facing are present at least to some extent universally. The issue is that one group is disproportionately responsible for many of them, and it’s not even close. If we’re only counting people who are genuinely “white” by most Aryanists’ metrics, then the stats probably look even worse for “white” people. Keep in mind that we’re still using the confused and false western conception of whiteness when we read these stats. The western conception includes even white-passing people who are not white, and so are probably less likely to contribute to those problems. Whether your conception or 90sRetoFan’s conception is more accurate, doesn’t really matter. The logic still applies because you’re both at least on the same page that some conventionally “white” people are not actually “white”

“Whether you like it or not, treating everyone who passively refers to themselves as ‘white’ are not making an (un)conscious declaration that they are a tribalist.”

They don’t. 90sRetroFan already gave an example of someone who’s non-white even though they passively label themselves as such. You just don’t agree with their example, which is the actual difference here

“Wait, what do you mean they're becoming self-hating idiots reinforcing everyone else's racist egos? What do you mean they're choosing extreme arrogance over extreme submission, and becoming racist themselves?”

Even if 90sRetroFan’s approach were the wrong approach, an ally taking the wrong approach to victory is still way more of an ally than someone who becomes an enemy because of that wrong approach. I can’t in good conscience throw a fellow Aryanist under the bus. I understand why you’re afraid of any unforeseen consequences from taking the wrong approach along the way, but if someone becomes a genuine tribalist, then it’s ultimately their problem

“You need to tell him Galahad. I know you think you're helping him, but you can't let him depend on you like this, its sad”

I’m mostly letting 90sRetoFan defend themselves, because they don’t need for me to speak for them on things where a direct answer from them would be the most appropriate. And I don’t really like debates, so it’s not like I’m a brick wall guarding them in this context. I’m just butting in when I think I have information or anecdotes that 90sRetroFan may lack or have potentially forgotten. But when it comes down to it, I’ll always have 90sRetroFan’s back. They’re still the person that I admire the most, regardless of any potential criticisms

Hell yes. The complete ambiguity of the word "white" itself is alone proven by how 90sRF bounces between all of its different micro-defintions.

I already told you about definition of "whites". Seems you deny it :

"White" doesn't only mean glorifying slavery. But this characteristics :

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2021/12/07/guillaume-durochers-the-ancient-ethnostate-biopolitical-thought-in-ancient-greece/

Quote

As Ricardo Duchesne notes, the Indo-European legacy is key to understanding the restless, aggressive, questing, innovative, “Faustian” soul of Europe. Indo-Europeans were a “uniquely aristocratic people dominated by emerging chieftains for whom fighting to gain prestige was the all-pervading ethos. This culture [is] interpreted as ‘the Western state of nature’ and as the primordial source of Western restlessness.”[3]

Resulting :

1. Pro-democracy
2. Pro-capitalist
3. Pro-progressivism
4. Pro-Judaism
5. Pro-Empiricism
6. Pro-Complexity
7. Pro-competition
8. Pro-Stoicism
9. Pro-Industrialism
10. Pro-communism
12. Pro-Relativism
13. Pro-Naturalism

Anyone who still embrace and do that ethos and way of life can be considered as "white" and should be punished.

Hell yes. The complete ambiguity of the word "white" itself is alone proven by how 90sRF bounces between all of its different micro-defintions. Then, he complains when someone tries to make a distinction between them. "When did I say 'beige skin'!?! You are illiterate!!!".

If you say "beige skin", then it imply that you defend "whites" with different words. like the Jews who defend themselves with word "semite". Actually they are also called as "Israelites"

Aryanism is simply my life's purpose. For years, I've suffered, accomplished, and transformed in pursuit of becoming a higher version of myself, for the sake of Aryanism.

You just lowering your personality because you defending "whites" with another semantic strategy, with using word "beige"

my loyalty is ultimately to Aryanism as a ideal, not "Aryanism" as a dysfunctional community.

You broke our struggle against Whiteness

This way, I can be rest assured knowing that I at least tried to save this wordlessly beautiful source of idealism and inspiration from fading into the Abyss, if it truly is destined to do so.

No, you try to hamper our struggle, get out of the way

And my point is that most people who currently call themselves "white" do so apolitically, and would be happy to not do so if made aware that the option existed.

If they got warned to not do that and they refused to obey, then they are "whites" and got punishment

"Whites" do not have nearly the same racial and spiritual homogeneity that Jews do. Why not apply this to "black" people too? Don't get me wrong, just saying that "whiteppl suck" isn't enough.

Your attempt to differentiate between "whites" and Jews shows your ignorance of the similarity between that two groups of people. "Whites" adopt Judaism too and keep promoting racial homogeneity as long the rightist on the West not yet got totally defeated

A technological innovation, nevertheless. Let's kill all Arabs & Koreans! But if we're not going to get them for technocracy, then why not get them for other moral issues?

We order the people who bear "white" characteristics to not reproduce, not directly kill them. You keep accusing us.

Well his highly-documentated inability to acknowledge that anti-tech "whites" exist, and pro-tech "non-whites" exist, and that the problem is with technocrats, not a broad ethnic group, does a damn good job at making it seem like he is allergic to this nuance.

If the anti-tech "whites" exist, there will be fierce resistance to the rightist on the West today, but in reality none of it happen, so your sayings just assumption. Indeed pro-tech "non-whites" exist, but their natural features of lack of intelligent ability will make us easily to forbid them to do so. But not on "whites", we must control them with iron grip and ruthlessness

Whether you like it or not, treating everyone who passively refers to themselves as "white" are not making an (un)conscious declaration that they are a tribalist.

If they obey while getting a warning to not declare themselves as "white", then they save. If they refuse to do so, concentration camps or physical punishment is the way to make them behave correctly. Otto Warmbier or Das Reich treatment is the best way to solve their problem

Who are dead. Slave identities are slave identities. Are you going to bring people together in pursuit of a common ideal by saying everyone but this one group of people can be racist?

"Whites" are the identity of an enslaver and colonizer even though you always deny it. "Whites" (including Jews) are not in common with us.

Wait, what do you mean they're becoming self-hating idiots reinforcing everyone else's racist egos? What do you mean they're choosing extreme arrogance over extreme submission, and becoming racist themselves?

Being discriminative towards "whites" means attacking back the people with a colonial mentality. The more "whites" become "self-hating idiots" the more winning got gained from our struggle. Such activity will reinforce everyone else anti-whiteness self-consciousness.

If I ever insulted anyone, it was an insult, not an Ad Hominem-Strawman as it was for 90sRF.

Your judging words to him just show your inability to answer our logical arguments. If you can answer, answer back with knowledges and logic, not merely an advice

@SirGalahad If you have a problem with me then say it to my face you little ****. Who do you think you are calling me "it", keep disrespecting me and I'll destroy you

@Junito18

but for some reason Europeans going to America and building settlements is wrong. And before you tell me that they drove the natives off their land, not every wave of European immigrants was involved in doing that.

Jews will answer the same thing if they got questioned about the history of their ancestor's settlement's progress on Islamic land. I don't take their argument seriously

And then that graph he posted to show that Arabs and Europeans are clustered together genetically. There was a time when he would have said that geographical racial categorisations aren’t even valid and ridiculed anyone who used them as a ‘HBD forum user’ or a ‘Gentile’ or a member of the Alt-Right or a ‘Neo-Nazi’. Now he’s using them himself.

Because those racial graphs are empirically proven in reality. It's up to us to give response to it. The devout left like me will gain more hatred for the "whites", the rightist will feel gain more empirical data to ridicule "blacks" and another group of people whose behavior are same as theirs. We want to ruthlessly wipe out rightist. Because the truth is anti complexity and anti-white

Does he also think that African Americans should also not reproduce because they are descended from members of tribes who displaced the Khoisan, and who warred amongst each other? Does he think that Austronesian people should not reproduce because they displaced the native Negritos. Is that what the ideology is now - an ultra-recidivist movement whose goal is to return all land to whatever aboriginal people first laid claim to it?

Their genes not potentially create westernization and Western Civilization, so, not all of them not allowed to reproduce, instead we must think with a good view that some of them will bear noble gene pool. Western Civilization and westernization enlarge the problem and complexify the solution to that problem. Therefore the people who tend to perpetuate it must be defeated ruthlessly.

@m94r You're actually proving the point of this thread by imitating 90sRF's debating style - that this movement has degenerated a circlejerk of insults and name-calling and no longer contains anything of substance.

Because his debating style has proven to be accurate. Answer our data and knowledge with its counter-data and knowledge, not just with judging. Your attempt to defeat us with it just makes you seen as unable to debunk us