7 Research Subjects That Became Taboo After Cultural Marxists Took Over

Aristotle said that wonder and astonishment are what lead men to the state of pondering and ratiocinating otherwise known as philosophizing (Metaphysics, 982b12). What seemed at first evident, once interrogated through asking for a precise definition and details, becomes troublesome and unclear. What are justice, morality, duty…? Philosophy starts from common-sensical notions by taking a hard, interrogative stance on them. If maintained and underpinned with the proper methodology, the philosophical attitude can lead to a long path of reflection and to many things to say.

Likewise, out of philosophy in the narrow sense, a particular conundrum or the right question can push us a long way. Red pill is just like that. Years ago, I was thinking, “How can I get a notch?” and “What’s our identity?” Today, I got some substantiated answers, but there is still a long path ahead in both thinking and doing.

The left knows the power of question-asking, careful framing and putting forward convenient theories. This is why they methodically chastised several issues, no matter how relevant or legitimate, from the academia, and pushed forth a mixture of Marxism, minoritism and contrived “postmodern” stuff instead. If you cannot ask the right questions, how can you find out the right answers?

Here is a list of such relevant questions I crossed path with in pre-cultural Marxism hegemony era.

1. The destiny of the West and of Western peoples


From the Enlightenment philosopher Nicolas de Condorcet to Rudyard Kipling, one can spot a golden thread. The former, in a “sketch of the future progresses of mankind”, claimed that Europeans had a duty to spread the so-called Enlightenment principles to the whole world. Such a claim is often derided by contemporary Leftists as a mere mask for particular interests, yet Condorcet really believed that all inequalities were caused by custom, false beliefs and forgotten abuses: Europeans had to spread lack of religion, free trade and technology everywhere so that everyone could develop, thus ending the “artificial inequalities.” A typical secularist optimist, Condorcet thought Western particular interests and other peoples’ interests would be immanently reconciled and united through “progress.”

Rudyard Kipling, coming one century after, had a more balanced and experienced view of human nature and diversity, nonetheless he still clung to the idea of a global well-being whose Europeans would be responsible: such is, he said, the “white man’s burden.” A heavy weight, a chore, something that could cost money instead of actually earning it—yet still a calling and an identity.

When easy illusions about the nature of modernity started crumbling, the identity of the Western civilization was also at stake. If “progress” shows unable to play God’s role, what should we turn to instead? Can there be a modern civilization without perpetual growth? If the “white man’s burden” should be thrown away, does the West still have a higher calling?

2. The destiny of middle classes and the equilibrium of society


While going through some of Lothrop Stoddard’s writings, I was warmly surprised to meet with a summing-up of the situation of middle classes in Europe after 1918. “The plight of the middle classes has attracted much attention from students of contemporary affairs”, he wrote in 1925. Reading these lines I couldn’t help but feel some nostalgia. Academics who cared about the middle classes!

Today, the topic is mostly thought of through Marxist glasses—middle classes are blamed as “bourgeois”, egoistic, unduly privileged, philistine… It hasn’t always been like that. And the university was not always a den of underhanded Leftists trying to indoctrinate promising children against their own social identity.

Just like many of the contemporary red-pill thought, Stoddard’s portrayal shows honest but quite uncomfortable. At the end of the Belle époque, middle classes were slowly getting screwed by a handful of wealthy bankers and industrials who squeezed them from above, and underwent rising taxes from governments who would rather pressure dispersed individuals than well-connected cronies. Their members were amongst the bravest soldiers at war. As a reward, those who survived faced inflation, unemployment, and although many of them had supported social State programs, they were directly threatened by the rise of hateful Bolsheviks.

On a bright note, Stoddard shows how middle class members answered to Bolshevism by developing a class solidarity of their own. It seems, though, that middle-classers being together and strong was a problem to the powerful, for middle class unions got repressed by the States in the name of “antifascism” and denied as “bourgeois” by the new masters of the academia.

Cultural Marxism also leads to consider classes as entities at war with each other. The more classes you split society into, as they have done with any new “minority” that got hyped-up in the media and academia, the more antagonism and mistrust you create. From a Marxist view, and we know that feminism conceives “women” not as a sex but as a class in that sense, classes have irreconcilable interests and must be at war all the time.

Ironically, Marxists never seem to think that their own view may be responsible for class wars, and that one can perceive interpersonal relationships the same way—loaded with irreconcilable interests. It has escaped them that a fine society succeeds at equilibrating the interests, not at dividing them pointlessly.

3. Human biodiversity, races, and the sexes


It seemed rather evident and commonsensical at all times that human individuals and peoples differed from each other. The traditional world knew well about both peoples, or nations, and castes, which reflected the individuals’ vocations and peculiarities. The multiplicity of categories one could find in European Middle Ages or pre-British rule India makes most modern thinkers dizzy, yet they were handled casually and did not seem overly problematic.

In fact, problems with categories of people appeared with modernity. Nationalisms developed along with big States, crushing regional differences underfoot, whereas eighteenth-century philosophers such as the aforementioned Condorcet tried to reduce human differences to effects of the environment.

These remarks do not imply that modern thinkers are unable to understand human diversity, biological or not. Empirical approaches showed repeatedly that ingrained differences between the sexes, just like between races, exist. Our own views on hypergamy or, say, women’s conformism-prone tendencies stem from rediscovering a socially taboo but persistent wheel.

Human biodiversity was a prime target of ferocious leftist assaults since at least the Boasian trend in anthropology. Centuries of empirical data were rejected, flesh and blood individuals were replaced by abstract units. The “gender” trend is merely another outgrowth of this abstract individual push: sex is disconnected from biology, turned into a kind of psychological sex, chosen out of a mystically undetermined will.

Thanks to genetics, and to evolutionary and comparative psychology, human biodiversity can still be studied in scattered places amongst the academia. Science recovered a bit from the Marxist assault. However, it is powerless at struggling alone against Leftist hegemony, and scientific views on human biodiversity remain enclosed in ivory towers whereas the same universities also breed “studies” department that wield much more cultural influence. Should I add that humanities departments maintain a strict taboo on any empirically—and commonsensically—informed view about races and the sexes?

4. Genetic deterioration and betterment

If you have watched Idiocracy, especially the first minutes of the movie, you know what genetic deterioration is. The problem reached scientists’ awareness in the nineteenth century: as modern technology saved and healed people who would have been selected off on earlier times, wasn’t modern civilization undermining itself?

Individuals and peoples are not equally excellent at creating and maintaining a civilization. When the least able breed more than the excellent, civilization is at risk of being overrun with idiots who will dumb it down to their level if not destroying it altogether. Genetic deterioration can take other forms, such as when people with genetic disease are allowed to breed and, if they do, propagate it through the next generation.

Incidentally, this idea is also relevant when considering various groups inhabiting the same territory: if some groups breed more than others, the latter are at risk of being replaced or swamped down by the former.

This theme became taboo at the same time than eugenics got massively smeared—by the same who would distort and curse the idea of race a few decades later. If interested, take a look at Richard Lynn’s books Dysgenics (1996) and Eugenics, a reassessment (2001) that give a fine introduction to the topic.

5. Jewish power


The biggest elephant in the room. Whether you look at Hollywood, at the academia, at the legal world, at Wall Street or at Leftist stirrers, you will see a lot of Jews. They occupy the institutions, decide on cultural orientations, organize so that such and such a cause is suddenly everywhere in the media and university. The theme has been evoked sometimes, mostly by Jewish individuals—non-Jews are busier avoiding tripping on the carpet.

Those who built the Western civilization are supposed to keep quiet facing the most blatant examples of nepotism and tribalism. As children, we were fed a steady diet of “muh Holocaust muh poor innocent victim” narrative with plenty of pathos, and we grew up in a world where only mentioning the Jewishness of powerful people is enough to be labelled an “anti-Semite.”

The topic has become risky since Jews started taking over culture. When the European youth were dying by the thousands every day, in 1915, the Boasians—extreme environmentalists, mostly Jewish—reached absolute power over departments of anthropology. Skeptics like Madison Grant were marginalized in an increasingly Jewish-dominated academia. Later, in the 40s, Jewish journalists would also play a crucial role in demonizing Charles Lindbergh. All these are important metapolitical manipulations, yet if you mention who did what, be careful of the “anti-Semite” smear hanging over your head!

Kevin MacDonald’s brilliant trilogy about Jewish communautarism and influence is a shining exception to the general academic taboo. Even Hannah Arendt (herself a Jew) got a lot of heat from her own community after she dared mentioning the existence of Jewish kapos in German concentration camps—that is, how the “all-Jews-are-innocent-and-pure” narrative showed false.

6. Freemasonry


Masonic lodges are less of a taboo, today, than before. They are still shrouded, not in mystery, but in social pressure. If you want to talk about the eighteenth-century Masonic lodges and how they relate to the so-called Enlightenment, fine. However, if you want to pursue the inquiry into how Freemasonry played a crucial role in anticlericalism, secularization, or overlapped with the radical Left in the nineteenth century, most teachers will retreat.

The topic has been clouded by fakes, contradictory theories and cryptobabble. Some hypothesize Masons are the first responsible of this claptrap—nothing better than a chaos of contradictory theories, lies, and a general air of paranormal to daunt wannabe investigators and maintain secrecy.

In truth, one does not need to dabble much in esotericism to uncover influence trafficking, corruption and metapolitical manipulations carried in at least some Masonic lodges. The topic still remains taboo. Studying power relationships and privilege in Leftist academia remains synonymous of crafting an elaborate fiction where “straight-white-males” are thrown into the role of the bad guy.

7. Indo-European history and aryanity


As a friend of mine once said, “identifying as an Aryan may be the ultimate thought crime nowadays.” In the nineteenth century, scholars discovered that Europeans shared a deep brotherhood amongst themselves, with some Asiatic peoples such as the Kalash, and with the upper castes of India.

Linguists unearthed common roots behind Germanic, Latin, and Hindi words. Anthropologists found striking physical similarities between Europeans and some Easterners. Historians like George Dumézil put forth what has been called the Indo-European tripartition, not to mention how the Swastika, among other symbols, has been used on the East and West for thousands of years. National Socialist use of the symbol was merely an attempt at binding the party and its crusade to something much wider.

Now, Indo-European studies still exist, but they are confined in historical departments virtually devoid of cultural influence in the mainstream, and official scholars perpetuate frauds such as pretending that the word “Aryan” merely designated social classes—whereas it clearly had a hereditarian component as well—in order to neuter the potential metapolitical content of their field.


Cultural Marxism is hidden in plain sight, both in how some subjects are treated and in what can hardly be said. We are left with a mutilated anthropology, endless social and metapolitical divisions thanks to aggressive minoritism, unaccountable power-wielders, and an incomplete and twisted view of history that only worsened thanks to libtards’ obsession to tarnish Western history.

Many of our cultural problems come from self-perpetuating Leftist institutional power. By taking the field, they also shaped the norms, and did so without assuming the responsibility of what they did—instead they have put on the shoulders of those they were actually dispossessing and disempowering.

Time has come to take back the academia by asking serious questions and deconstruct the boundaries, double standards, taboos, framings, unsaid beliefs… enforced by these cultural supremacists. Intellectual diversity will make America and the whole West great again.

Read Next: Why College Is A Warzone For Young Men

200 thoughts on “7 Research Subjects That Became Taboo After Cultural Marxists Took Over”

  1. Speaking of taboo subjects, Winston Churchill saw the Muslim immigration crisis coming way back in 1899 –
    “How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries, improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensual-ism deprives this life of its grace and refinement, the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.”
    – Sir Winston Churchill, from a speech he delivered in 1899 (Source: The River War, 1st edition, Vol II, pages 248-250, London)

    1. He was almost right…the problem is that he was a drunken idiot that: 1) destroyed his own empire and 2: didn’t understand history and how the Christian ethos and Weltanschauung begot Science…

      1. I give him points for psychic clarity…if you can successfully predict long-term outcomes of such a drastic nature, you’re light years ahead of the rambling masses…

        1. I grant you that. But he wasn’t the only one of his time who foresaw such a turn of events…

          “There remains… another indirect supporter of Neo-Paganism: a supporter which indeed hates all Paganism but hates the Catholic Church much more…I mean Mohammedan religion: Islam.” “That was almost certainly a mistake. We shall almost certainly have to reckon with Islam in the near future. Perhaps if we lose our faith it will rise.”
          “Remember that our Christian civilization is in peril of
          complete breakdown. An enemy would say that it is living upon its past; and certainly those who steadfastly hold its ancient Catholic doctrine stand on guard as it were in a state of siege; they are a minority both in power and in numbers. Upon such a state of affairs a steadfast, permanent, convinced, simple philosophy and rule of life, intensely adhered to, and close at hand, may now that the various sections of the world are so much interpenetrating one and the other, be of effect.”

    2. Oh, no! Someone’s saying what everyone thinks, but we’re not allowed to think. I must perform my Globalist chant!
      *fingers in ears*
      Islam is the religion of peace. Islam is the religion of peace. Islam is the religion of peace.
      Muslims are better than us. Muslims are better than us. Muslims are better than us.
      Muslims and terrorism are unrelated. Muslims and terrorism are unrelated. Muslims and terrorism are unrelated.
      *fingers out of ears*

      1. What will the neighbors think? (News flash – they can’t think. Not for themselves, anyway…so who cares.)

      1. Even that’s not true anymore. We got petrol flowing out of our ears in this country. I really think the US and Canada were the ones to break the oil market.

        1. It just still somehow cheaper to take it from other there. Besides, when that’s gone we’ll still have what’s here.

        2. The US gets very little of its oil from the middle east. Nigeria, Canada, Mexico, used to get alot from Venezuela, not sure if we even get any from them anymore…so why are we in the middle east then??

        3. Specifically US shale and advanced extraction technologies. Furthermore, vast untapped shale and offshore/deepwater reserves exist all over the world. Saudi Arabia is already trying to prepare for the day when it becomes irrelevant in the global oil market, as it knows it will be.

        4. Your post sounds like a cut and paste from a Bloomberg or Fortune press release (I mean article).

        5. The oil is still the U.S.’ interest because of the petrol dollar agreement. The mafioso-esque pact they forced upon their “allies” to prop up the U.S. dollar in the world market. Why sjw say our soldiers are dying for money. Why america meddles in the middle east policies etc. It’s a money thing

        6. It is not oil, if you look at a map the silk route has been cut with Syria to the south and Ukraine to the north, which leaves only the possibility of traffic by sea, controlled by … USA and GB.

        7. There are lot of factors in what broke the oil market. Macondo happened (Deepwater Horizon, as it’s better known) in 2010, which put a moratorium on drilling in the Gulf for a few months, and lead to a LOT more restrictions (it’s a now hell of a lot easier, regulation-wise, to drill subsea almost anywhere else on earth). At around the same time, the “shale revolution” was happening in the US and Canada, due to newer and better hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) and horizontal drilling technology. So with it being a pain in the ass to drill in the Gulf, offshore having a much, much larger capital expenditure to bring wells online than onshore, and this new technology making onshore wells better and more productive, shale started to boom in the US and Canada. So much oil was being produced that OPEC countries, most notably Saudi Arabia, were losing market share. So the Saudis decided to raise production to flood the market and make the price of oil drop. Since the oil industry is government-run in Saudi Arabia, and since they have more proven reserves than anyone else (except maybe Venezuela), they made the political decision that they could just take a hit for however long it takes for the American companies to either die off or dial back production because it isn’t profitable anymore. And it worked (sort of). The collapse in the oil price made tons of E&P firms go tits up, and then it trickled up the supply chain to fuck everyone else in the upstream side of the industry.
          So, you are sort of right, the US and Canada did flood the market first. The Saudis just flooded it better and crashed the whole fucking thing.

        8. But the Saudies were very unfunded, will end up being bought by the bankers. The 911 reminder to the Saudis seems a slight threat. Why invade them if you can buy them with fiat dollars.

        9. To protect our (((ally)))…read: biggest political donor and coincidentally biggest aid recipient.

        10. Interesting. It reminds me of the franchise and fastfood restaurants killing mom and pop shops in the midwest… then raising prices.
          Is there some reading on this?

        11. Yeah, I think you have a good point there. Saudi Aramco (the state oil company of the KSA), has been planning it’s IPO for some time now, and the favorites in the running for the global coordinators and underwriter are JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley, and HSBC.

        12. I work in the upstream sector for oil and gas, that’s how I learned a lot about it. It’s amazing how many people I work with religiously follow the price of oil but have absolutely no idea where it comes from or what affects it. Most of what I’ve learned I’ve picked up through independent study, reading industry specific news sites (like RigZone) and talking to people who have been in the industry longer. I’ve only been in for a few years; started right as the downturn began and was really curious as to why the sky was suddenly falling for us.
          There are also some financial factors that I didn’t get into in my original post, but that article does a decent job of summarizing how shale affected the market.

        1. We even had Kuwait and Iraq.
          I’m surprised that the neocons didn’t take Iran after Carter let the Shah be overthrown by the fanatics. Maybe it works better for ’em when there’s at least one nutzo nation that they can vilify?

        2. Only if we go full Mongol on them. Afghanistan is ungovernable and therefore unconquerable. Except when they tried that shit with the Mongols. The Khan just put out the order to kill every living thing and burn everything that could be burnt. Leave no structure standing. To make conquering the middle east cost effective we would have to have the stones to kill all of them (not really that many).

        3. I can trace back every negative world situation to the feckless Carter administration. When bathhouse Barry took over I knew we in for it again, as his policies were exactly the same as the failed policies of Carter. So, I put BB’s failures on Carter’s ledger.
          Carter put in Khomeini because he was a man of god and therefore perfect in every way in the eyes of that low life born again asshole Carter. I add that he was born again because you would have to be born at least twice to be that much of a worthless scum bag.
          Next time I’ll try not to sugar coat it so much.

        4. I’d be completely fine with that. Innocents die in war, unfortunately. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the correct decisions.

        5. USA was full Mongol destroying Afghanistan’s little infrastructure and then wondering why poppy crop exploded.

        6. “I add that he was born again because you would have to be born at least twice to be that much of a worthless scum bag”
          You know what they say about born-agains: They’re a bigger pain in the ass the second time around!

    3. I’d say the Islamic Golden Age had its merits. They did introduce soap to the Europeans after all. And a lot of what Churchill said sounds complimentary. And the 20:80 rule coincides with 4 wives per man. (The richest man was a black Muslim btw)

        1. The Moors who invaided Europe were off-shoots of Roman empire colonies which kept alive and brought back into Europe Roman knowledge. One the the big example Muslims use, is introducing mirrors into Europe, but that, like most of their BS falls a part since Romans, and older cultures had them.

        2. “The Moors who invaded Europe…”
          Even the slightest mention of the Moors invading Europe always reminds me of one of the greatest scenes in film history: Dennis Hopper vs. Christopher Walken in True Romance.
          “Now, you tell me. Am I lying?”

        3. And what came from India – Vedic culture/ science, came from the North, as the Vedas description coould only be, in the astronomical location it mentions, in the Artic circle, i.e Norway, Sweden, Finland or Russia.

        4. All advancements are created from work of predecessors.The Islamic Empire lasted hundreds of years and math and science flourished- in that time, they invented nothing? Difficult to believe. A shame Rome fell to such weak people; they’re weaker, then. Macarther also made this mistake when he thought Chinese posed no threat: “Chinamen can’t fight.”

        5. Right, but most were not. I pointed that out bc of the whole “italians were spawned by moors” horseshit put forth by that noted historian Quentin Tarantino

      1. And to be fair the numeral system we use today is the arabic numeral system. But that was then, this is now and shit’s about to get real with all the lower primates that europe’s political elites are bringing in.

        1. Moammer Gadhaffi (sp?) predicted this, saying that Libya was a wall that prevented terrorists from getting into Europe. He was in process of uniting African nations until the US decided otherwise. If only the wars had never happened, such hatred against the West may never have been existed, or at least to this extent. The immigrants and host nation’s populations will be misdirected to each other, rather than the elite’s. But stupid people will pick evil leaders, and when immigrant nations get bombed, they will bring that hate with them.

        2. The number system that we use today is called “arabic numerals”, but they really came from the Indians.
          The muslim traders had a habit of passing off the advances of Europe and Asia as their own to the other party.

        3. The Arab world did not invent any thing that Europe “got” from them. They preserved much of the classical European culture that might have been lost to time during our dark ages (brought on in great part by the Arabs/Turks cutting Europe off from over land trade routes.) They did not invent Arabic numerals, they merely passed them on from India. There is a lot of questions about if they even invented Al Gehbra (Algebra), which was mostly made into a useful tool and greatly extended by Europeans.

        4. Thanks for the perspective. Based on how the sharia apes act today one has to wonder what did they contribute other than a slightly more refined method of severing human heads since they do this on a daily basis.
          But isn’t it not the way of muslims & arabs to destroy any trace of culture and customs not originally from muslim culture?
          Do you have any thoughts on what will eventually happen to the works of art in europe ? Do you see apes throwing the great paintings and sculptures out of the museum windows and into the fires?

        5. There is one caveat: In all likelihood the forefathers of today’s Jihadi “warriors” were a lot more smarter than them. I guess that’s what happens when you practice cousin marriage (partly tradition, partly because the chieftains, mullahs, sultans, great officials, etc. have hoarded all beautiful women and you are stuck either with banging your cousin or going bachi-baza…) for generations and polygamy. They are the victims of their own screwed up religion.
          Hence the men who reproduced and translated into Arabic the works of Greeks, Romans and Hindus and could appreciate them, do not belong in the same bracket as Ahmed the semi-retarded Jihadi even if the latter is a descendant of the former…

        6. Interesting insight. Do you have any speculation about what will be the fate of the artworks in europe down the road as Muslimification continues?

        7. In the unlikely case Europe is overrun (for the record, I think that even if certain countries do fall; cough France cough..Sweden; in the end most of Europe including Germany will end up kicking the Muslims out of the continent after thousands of innocent dead), I think there will be opportunities in the sector of artworks salvage operations…for mercenaries and other specialized people, just my two cents. But many of those artworks will be destroyed by these lesser sons of greater sires…
          A greater worry is a possible war with Russia in case Trump fails and the Deep State have their Say and the ability to enforce it…

        8. Interesting, man. What about Italy and Spain? Do you think the art done by western artists in these countries will be safe?

        9. I don’t know, I think both will start defending themselves faster than many imagine, the Spaniards a bit later since they have to get rid of people like “Podemos” and other deranged leftists.

        10. Italy supposedly had already taken some initiative with private neighborhood watch programs – all private though, no help from the italian government.
          What’s your take? Will the immigrant BS hit enough citical mass in countries like Germany, France and UK (along with already rigor mortis nations like Sweden) to the point where europeans will eventually revolt against their own governments anytime soon? If this happens the islanification if countries like italy and spain could be prevented.

        11. What’s your take? Will the immigrant BS hit enough citical mass in
          countries like Germany, France and UK (along with already rigor mortis
          nations like Sweden) to the point where europeans will eventually revolt
          against their own governments anytime soon? If this happens the
          islanification if countries like italy and spain could be prevented.

          In my humble opinion, yes, if a war with Russia doesn’t erupt first…

      1. “You anglosaxon hypocrites”?
        You’re really into collectivism when you speak, do you know that?
        A small elite did those things, most people, and that includes the majority of us “anglosaxon hypcrites” just want to be left the fuck alone to live our own lives.
        Say what you will about us “anglosaxon hypocrites” but at least we had the balls and gumption to conquer the world. Didn’t do much good in the long run, but it beat sitting around loafing in bars while calling it high culture and sneering at anybody who dared to do something in the world besides get by.

        1. I like it when you take full advantage and fire torpedoes into the prodigious holes of arguments afforded by Muslim-leaning sympathizers…it’s kinda like watching those old buildings collapse, when they do demolition work on ’em…nicely done.

        2. So, you agree that we met our war aims in every case? Since we didn’t want territory (and the headaches of managing/ruling a bunch of savages), and we didn’t get any, but did make money.

        3. You clearly don’t understand the function of the military industrial complex. A short list of what is about: 1) strip mining the American taxpayer for profit. 2) securing various corporate interests overseas. 3) creating instability in the world that undermines other people’s abilities to advance.
          All the wars have achieved their real objectives. There was no desire to create stable states or acquire territory or anything else beyond some corporate contracts for natural resources in some instances. In some instances it was about keeping the natural resources off the market and thus increasing the value of those held by the right people.

    4. IIRC, a while back you posted some information on Lincoln’s post-war repatriation plan.
      If so, would you kindly repost that?

    5. I’m no fan of Islam, but “every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property” is actually correct and Churchill is completely wrong on this.
      “Warned the world in 1899 that Muslims, if unchecked, might one day destroy European civilization” …with the well wishes of the European elites, unfortunately.

    6. ROK seems to have an unrequited love for the war criminal Churchil and the old harpy Tatcher, who as conservatives were the best employees of the bankers and his business the war, paving the way to current degeneration.

    7. Churchill was an atheist and pawn of the Jews who funded him.Whilst he stated that he was for a White England all of his actions did nothing but pit White nation against White nation in wars which bled us dry while empowering the Jew.Churchill is one big reason the British empire vanished and White countries were laid open to Jewish domination and mass immigration and secularization.

  2. Instead of “freemasonry”, it probably would have been more viable to talk about “secret societies” in general. Any networks among the elite (which freemasonry has long been, even if it’s more accessible now) breed power for the elite, and they do not enjoy exposure.
    Some of these topics became taboo more with the political and cultural disfavor toward eugenics (particularly relating to biodiversity and gene pools). Eugenics, as we all know, is the philosophy of improving the gene pool primarily through elimination of inferior elements, and once there were Americans like Margaret Sanger who worked toward eugenics (Planned Parenthood was created, in large part, to limit the reproduction of blacks and latinos in the US).
    When Hitler became “Literally Hitler,” eugenics fell out of favor as one of those things Hitler loved. As a consequence, topics like biodiversity, history and future of white peoples, and genetic betterment were cast into darkness out of fear.
    Truth, however, will always be truth. We limit knowledge when we restrict inquiry into topics that make us uncomfortable, and as a result we will come to suffer in ignorance.

      1. By a surprising twist, in countries that contraception is highly available the IQ drops faster, as only intelligent people with some basic foresight ability would use them!
        Second though it is the use of socialist policies in advanced states. These policies do not only act in a dysgenical way removing the consequences of bad reproductive and in promoting bad and under-normal-circumstances destructive choices, but by also attracting worthless-useless human garbage into the country by the charm of free goodies.
        Political Correctness protects Egalitarianism that allows that fiasco. The basis of all though is Humanism, the “religion” that puts man in the center of everything in the place of God, sanctifying him and in consequence all the instances of his existence, hence the reason why our laws protect convicted criminals and why we consider illegal immigrants of african and arab dissent, both peoples that are highly inbred and imbecillic, the more beautiful humans…

  3. There were many masonic lodges in the past(don’t confuse them with the Illuminati or the templars). Usually masons had at their gatherings all 3 holy books(tora, bible, quran), but the french avangarde wanted to prove that they were better than the other lodges, so they created the atheistic masons in the 19th century.
    People should also consider that secret mason organizations existed since Ancient Babylon.

    1. I’d say it’s more likely that the masonic organizations aren’t so ancient, but borrowed from the ancients.
      Consider the Mystery Cults of Rome. No less than Constantine belonged to one of these sects (something like the “Order of Mithra”), and it was popular among the elites to do so. These cults were not descended directly from Babylonian religious cults, as they supposed, but merely borrowed some themes and names from them.
      Rarely do we find unbroken lines among these orders. Even the masons died for a time and were revived at various points throughout history.
      EDIT: Why did I write “Constantinople” instead of “Constantine?” That was foolish.

      1. I’d say that the originators of contemporay masonry are Martinez de Pasqually & Louis Claude de Saint-Martin.
        Communists even borrowed terms from Claude’s work.
        I don’t think that current masonry has much to do with the original Scottish Rite.
        “Rarely do we find unbroken lines among these orders. Even the masons died for a time and were revived at various points throughout history.”
        Most of these secret cults have a lifespan that lasts 50-150 years before they expire.
        All the time u’ll see elites gathering & conspiring to bring forth a new goal.

      2. there is no real need for any real continuity for secret societies. Conspiracy theory is very good at positing rigid secret hierarchies on the assumption that power always operates vertically, and that the people at the top are literal puppet-masters. There may well be puppet masters, but I would say the reason masonic types of organisation work effectively (as networks of power and influence) is precisely because they may be highly fluid and inter-connectable. Conspiracy theory often fails because it misconceives how power and influence operates.

    1. I wouldn’t say it was taboo, just slightly less than respectable in an academia which isn’t keen on its conclusions

  4. …and chemtrails and whether jet fuel can melt steel beams and whether the Bilderberg group are actually Merovingian lizard people.

        1. I say, Thank god for Russian hackers. Note that the Dems never said what the Russian, or somebody, leaked was not true. So, what they object to so strenuously is having the truth reveled to the voters. We just can’t have that. If the voters knew the facts they might not make the correct decisions, and might actually have a thought that the Dems didn’t tell them to have.

        1. I’m just an ambassador from the peace loving peoples of Socialist Lizard Land. We really just want to eat humans. Um.. I mean peace, yes, peace is all we want with humans.

      1. i believe the lizard ppl stories are . . . incomplete. The full truth is that I believe they are demon posessed people. However, from the perspective of people who do not believe in God, those demons can easily be mistaken for lizards or aliens.

    1. Since (((Boas))) Anthropology is not a science but a political ideology in service of YKW.

    2. Im taking a cultural anthropology class right now and you couldn’t be more right. I want to write an article and post all the crazy things I hear our professor say. The actual study of cultures and humans has been replaced by the study of inequality and hurt feelings. Nobody is held responsible for their actions but white males. Everyone else is a victim.

  5. 5.5 Holocaust study. Questioning anything about it is pretty much a ThoughtCrime in Germany these days. Almost as bad in the US.

    1. jewish power is real. So is the holocaust. We should be able to talk about both, but focusing on the latter is more likely to prevent discussion of the former. Here is a link to an article I was reading today about an SAS hero who rescued a young jewish woman from a concentration camp, married her and remains with her. This is clearly not made up, even if it is anecdotal. The holocaust will remain an issue that is difficult to talk about so long as it is so fundamentally politicised – in both pro and anti- nazi directions.
      All groups with excessive influence in society should be open to full scrutiny. That has included white heterosexual male for quite a while now and now it includes women, jews, and any other group. The holocaust needs to become irrelevant in that discussion so that actual human suffering isn’t leveraged into the defence of power and privilege

      1. Its interesting that when credible experts and historians discredit Holocaust ‘facts’ they are usually imprisoned, fined, careers destroyed and ran out of town.
        So called Jewish victimhood is seemingly the most important history that trumps all other human suffering. The unspoken irony that Jews have in the past and are guilty today of committing acts of genocide on others.

        1. “So called Jewish victimhood is seemingly the most important history that trumps all other human suffering.”
          I imagine that increasingly the holocaust will function more as an archetype of martyrdom / genocide, rather than as it has done to some extent as a kind of unique historical event that nothing else was allowed to compare to. In a sense that exclusivity will weaken within a marketplace of competing events, and competing claimants to sympathy. The contest over ‘facts’ and the wider narrative will probably reflect those movements

    2. Not just a thought crime but an actual violation of a statute. Questioning the holocaust in Germany is a crime, plain and simple. I believe France has gone the same route.

    3. Dude, speaking anything other than the official 6 gorillion story is a jailable offense in Europe. …’course here in the Land of the Free you’ll only get fired or expelled, so…

    4. I don’t know if this is true or not, but a guy I know who isn’t prone to making shit up said that the Hasidic guys in Germany are running all the heroin at the highest level very out in the open with the knowledge that no german cop will ever risk a press photo of him putting cuffs on one them while they are dressed up like the blues brothers

      1. Quite likely. Even in your own back yard the Hasidim are above the law in their own strongholds.
        But they’d be no match for Illinois Nazis…

  6. The reason why liberals will never accept the race realism premise it’s due to the followup question, which is: Should humans reproduce based on eugenics studies?

  7. The fact that well over 90% of all “elected” officials are Masons should make everybody pause. It was the original “good old boys” network, but has become much more sinister in the past 100 years. Remember that the oaths they take with the lodge supersede all other oaths and vows they take.

    1. The fictional criminal defense lawyer Perry Mason almost never lost a case. (I’m sure it helps when the judge and prosecutor are fellow Craft members.)

      1. Primarily because he had a PI whose prodigious legwork solved the case prior to trial, giving him the intel needed to trap the guilty party into confessing.
        PM was surprising as, despite being a “wholesome” sort of show, it made it clear that the police & the DA are not working in your best interest, and Mason stretched the law as far as he could to get the drop on the cops.

        1. That, too, but Gardner was a Freemason as well as an attorney…too much coincidence there, at least for my taste.

  8. I saw a guy on a daytime talk show years ago who has done a basic study of the differences in races(white,black and asian). It may have been on Oprahs show, anyway I just recall it because the audience was about ready to have him drawn and quartered after the first couple of minutes. I was kind of interested in what he had to say but, they were too busy yelling “we are all the same,we are all the same!”. They just as well have put their hands over their ears and hummed loudly( I don’t like what you have to say therefore I’m not listening no matter what).

    1. Point race difference other than obvious physicals traits is a taboo, for Marxist race is only appearance. Studies that claim otherwise are racist, you can´t study the difference in intelligence between races. You can´t study difference in DNA either if is not for identify the genes for skin color. It is even racist to says that some whites and blacks get different risk in some deceases, Medicine is racist. Some
      Geneticist decades ago find a way to determine the race of a suspect with the DNA but the police don´t use it, it is 99% accurate. They fear the backlash of reveling that more blacks than white will be suspect of murders and rape.

      1. Couch it all in the language of dog breeds, have everybody nodding along, then note that humans are animals too and have the same ability for genetic differentiation. Pisses’em off, since most SJW’s are avid “dog people” and know when they’ve been trapped.

        1. They refuse to acknowledge that some breeds are more dangerous than other and put all the blame in the owner, pitbull have disproportionately the majority in dog attacks, The second place the rottweiler have a third of the pitbull numbers, the second place does´t even come close. Pitbulls are the Blacks of dogs there are doing all the killing but the blame is on whites in the black case and the owner in the pitbull case. People does n´t understand risk factor, it is the classic that will not happen to me or that happen only to stupid people. Every animal comes with a risk to the owner, obviously a small dogs the risk is minimal, but changing from a golden retriever to a pitbull your risk increase exponentially. The rule for the faggots is, it is good if it feel good. They are narcissist what do you expect? They have dogs for the same the virtue signal, it feeels goood!

      2. I’ve found its only politically correct or tolerated to talk about racial differences if you are somehow talking about the superiority of non whites.
        For example if I were to mention that West African’s genetically have faster twitch muscles making them superior at the 100m dash to other groups or Africans are genetically more resistant to malaria that is perfectly acceptable talk.
        Mention any European or white positive genetic aspects and you may as well have dressed up in a kkk outfit as the indoctrinated publics programmed trigger receptors would be activated.

        1. Black DNA Superiority, diversity, good. White DNA superiority, white supremacy, mein kampf, literally hitler, ubermensch, KKK, BAAAAD!.
          They suppress other research because they know the truth and don´t want to be exposed. There was a Japanese scientist who publish that black women are the least desired women, everyone knows it is true, but when you trigger the butthurts expect the backslash or better the blackslash riots, I bet you can use SCIENCE to prove that blacks are less intelligent and more violent and identify genes that make you prone to violence but that study will never exist.

        2. This is in a marketing book called microtrends. Research data from dating sites shows they are the least desired, and since the black male mortality rate, incarceration rate and promiscuity are so high, black women are also 1/4th as likely to ever get married.
          This same book showed that the most common interratial relationship was that of a white male and an asian female. It dwarfs all others of its kind. Its just never shown in the media or spoken about.

    2. On my way walking to my grandfather’s house this afternoon a truck rolled its window down and a black dude yelled at me “Fuck you white man!” and drove off.
      Thank god I have the media and government to remind me how racist I am or I would have been confused.

      1. Most blacks are easily brainwashed and provoked. Kind of like women.
        Joke: Why do blondes and black men get along so well? Similar IQs.

        1. It’s so strange.
          I looked around at the run-down neighbourhood and just thought to myself “This is my fault how exactly?”

        2. I’ve had worse. Man, it’s just their malleability. They are easily programmable. Make sure you have some sort of weapon if you have to spend time in those areas…seriously.

      2. Its not easy being superman. If I was you, I just woulda outrun his truck and flipped him the bird as you passed him

      3. Hearing That shit gives me the fire to go fuck a bunch of black and brown girls. Its so easy. Theyre all just so nasty, but I owe it to them.

    3. Lol I can picture them going apeshit now. In other news, I have demanded that the New York Knicks make me their starting center in the name of diversity (I am only 6 foot they are averagists) and the fact that all people have the same innate ability so really It shouldn’t make a difference

  9. Obsessed with eugenics but can’t get laid in a whore house with a fist full of hundred dollar bills. (((stormcucked)))

    1. I don’t know why the blacks on here even use that word. Spend time with white nationalists and you’ll see they’re the most prolific breeding whites. You seem to be projecting your inability to get a white woman onto white nationalists who don’t have that problem.

      1. John Derbyshire types who marry Asian women don’t count.
        They’re more common than you’d think…

  10. my kids school.
    every inch of every wall, every fucking book
    holocaust, holocaust in STEM — only 15% women, therefore less female managers STEM is awesome for attractive women Hedy Lamarr — heard voices invented the iPHone….and you can too. fuck the holocasitic patriarchy

    1. YUP.
      My friend’s kid’s school seems to have a semester about the holocaust every damned grade. AND they cant have anything Christmas related, but they decorate with blue and white and learn about dradles (sp?) every winter….

    2. Lamarr, just a prostitute: porn actress, super promiscuous, thief, liar, made false accusations(rape), married 6 times, etc. His husband invented something, that Tesla already invented decades ago, so nobody used that invention anyway.
      But she got the credit for being a woman, this happened many times, a new female scientist is invented, a husband or man/scientist is ignored….
      The fool of his (future)3rd husband included her in the patent just because they had these romantic conversations talking about his work, and the things he learned from her 1st husband. etc. etc.
      Lamarr like many women in history are a complete lie.

      1. thanks for the real background.
        they also laud marissa mayer — awesome, empowering, amazing, inventing scientist…
        but no real scientists marconi, tesla, wozniak…

        1. Aha, well, Marissa benefited from her relationship with CEO Larry Page(some kind of prostitution). You also have Elizabeth Holmes, or the new movie Hidden Figures, or Marie Curie who did a good work, but did not win a Nobel price, she was given one for being a woman too, “husband and wife”.. Or Ada Lovelace, etc. etc.

  11. search google for “women in tech”
    massive amounts of bigoted women only groups, and feels
    search for “men in tech”
    massive amount of evil men who support women in tech

  12. Speaking of Aryans, Iran means “land of the Aryans”, and men of the West are not far removed from the Persians in that respect. Cernovich may be signaling his Aryan bonafides when he overtly mentions his Persian wife.
    In addition credence is lent to the prediction by John Xenakis, that the coming “clash of civilizations” war will include Iran on our side, against the Sunni Muslim world (including nuclear Pakistan) and China. How could this be? The old guard of Iran are the ones who hold contempt for America, but their days are numbered.
    Younger Iranians dig the West, and love the cool Italian cats (inheritors of the Roman empire?).
    Food for thought in any case.

  13. 8 YEARS OF FAR LEFT EXTREMISM AND WHITE GUILT. It is going to take a year or two to get back on track. Do not feel guilty about real truth or offending the snowflakes. This is your last chance.

  14. Item 4 is silly.
    Idiocracy was a funny movie, but that’s not where society’s heading. The “dumbing down” sequence wasn’t based on any factual evidence, just the script. It’s about as realistic of a threat as godzilla.
    Intelligence is actually rising over time ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect ) , despite advances in medical technology that keep people alive longer ( it’s worth noting that the steady march of progress in this area is not new ).
    Our society is facing a lot of challenges, and always will be, but it’s not helpful to fabricate problems. Instead we should focus on real and solvable ones.

    1. “Intelligence is actually rising over time”
      Bullshit. Just plain bullshit.
      We know wikipedia is never wrong [/SARCASM]. The quality of IQ tests are dropping so a total imbecil will be able to sore a high number, but based on a lowered standard.

      1. That’s just an ad homimem argument, it doesn’t do anything to discredit the flynn effect.
        The test doesn’t really change, and the flynn effect can be observed by someone taking a test today and comparing it to a score from a decade ago. You’re suggesting today’s score would be higher, that’s simply not the case.

        1. I’m still not convinced – and far be it for me cite from progressive, lefties like young turks presentation on it:

          Or from non left sources:

    2. If we continue to invite people into this country who have lower IQ’s than the natives then the overall IQ of the US will drop. If rich intelligent people have small families or no children and poor people on welfare have large families then the overall IQ of the US drops. Unless of course you think that poor people on welfare and people living in mud huts will have offspring who suddenly find the cure for cancer and build colonies on Mars.

      1. Who is to say people on welfare have low IQ? Working hard all your life to pay taxes and buy a house then have it all taken off you in a divorce doesn’t seem ‘high IQ’ to me.

      2. You’re conflating wealth with intelligence, but there have always been more people of average or lower intelligence.
        Someone in the 90th percentile of intelligence will have 9 people out there dumber than him. He’s not going to out-reproduce them and yet the flynn effect persists. That’s a curious thing. There are a couple of theories on why but there’s not a consensus.

  15. In the USA at least, we are living “Idiocracy”.
    Hopefully Donald Trump’s election can stem the tide. But, the sheer number of fucktards out there, that shouldn’t be allowed to toast bread, let alone, reproduce, vote or drive an automobile is staggering.

  16. As to point 4, I do find it slightly hypocritical that people use this line of reasoning without thinking that perhaps they themselves would have been killed off without the aid of technology. All those that say “let the genetically inferior die!” are often themselves the first ones that would die. They think that they are somehow part of the elite genetic club. The problem is that everyone thinks this so who would you let die? If you want to let people die because they aren’t genetically fit then why not go right ahead?

  17. Do you want to know what I think? I STAND WITH ISRAEL!!! That’s what I think. What does it matter if Jews are successful? Seriously? What the fuck does it matter?! Israel is the only decent country in the Middle East, both in terms of Anglo-Saxon liberal values and as our allies against our enemies. So why the fuck is this site berating them?
    Perhaps why is because this site is fanned by a bunch of dumb as fuck white supremacists who haven’t yet realized the site’s owner is an Iranian Middle Easterner – Israel’s primary foe. Honestly, I though Roosh was just a confused mother fucker who was a traitor to his country and his people. Now I see that isn’t so true.
    It also pays to point out that anti-Semitic cards might constantly be played by the left to paint their foes as Nazis, but as Benjamin Netanyahu just pointed out Israel hath no ally like Donald Trump. It’s the left and Barrack Obama who have been a foe to Israel. Anti-Semeticsm is in fact a thing of the left and Iranians

      1. Israel doesnt give a fuck about you. They only look out for Jews, Azkenazi (sp?) Jews in particular. Why waste so much of your energy supporting murderous sociopaths that think you are cattle to serve them? Surely you have better things to do with your time.

        1. Where the fuck did you get that from, you dumb as shit inbred fuck? I’ll tell you something that might not resonate with RoK readers but paints the entire portrait: Gay men constantly flee Palestine for sanctuary in Israel because their own kinsmen want to kill them. Israel is an ally to all those who shares their values and offers them sanctuary, and I am the same to them. Jews are a good people surrounded by an impossible foe that threatens the entire West. They need our help

        2. They have the exact real estate they insisted on. It was the price they demanded for dragging us into WWI. And they already have our help, you fucking patriotard. 25 years of war and 10 billion per tear in aid….cuz hey, sometimes when you bulldoze peoples homes, they get pissed.

    1. I’m honestly indifferent to Israel.
      But pretty much everything you say in your second and third paragraphs are true.

    2. Im sure Israel appreciates your support, and will happily continue accepting foreign aid from your country. Hey if you wanna get your head blown off keeping their time zone safe, I’m sure there’ll be minimum wage in it for ya….sucker.

      1. I don’t think New Zealand sends anything to Israel. My country prefers to support the neighbor that wants to destroy democracy in favour of Sharia and execute fags and enslave women.

    3. I used to stand with Israel. I contributed thousands of dollars to the ALCJ because I truly believed they were, “God’s chosen people.” I was duped by my cuck church for years.
      After being RP’d, and also reading the Bible for myself, I learned the truth – they are SO-CALLED Jews, not real ones. They are fake jews as described in the Bible. Nothing but a synogogue of Satan, and that’s really what it comes down to. These people want to destroy our culture and enslave us so they can live rich lives. I am not against someone who wants to live the high life. But if it comes at mine and my family’s expense, that’s a no go.

  18. And the cognitive dissonance on this site continues.
    “HBD and IQ differences need to be made known to all. The genetic inferiority of the Negro and Mestizo must be firmly established. And yeah, those Asians score a bit higher, but they’re “not creative,” so whites are still better.
    But those IQ tests are clearly biased when they show Ashkenazi Jews consistently and significantly outscore whites. CLEARLY biased. Everyone knows Jews can’t be smarter than whites.”

    1. …yeah totally. That explains why refugees are beating down the door to grt into all those African countries.
      As for the (((Tribe))), if by smarter you mean having someone fight to save your skin and get you your own country, and STILL keep up the guilt trip, them yes, very smart.

      1. The IQ tests (which are completely culturally neutral, by the way) consistently show a significant gap between Ashkenazi Jews and Europeans in favor of the Ashkenazi.
        Either the tests are wrong or you’re wrong. But if the tests are wrong, then they’re also wrong about IQ gaps between Negroes and Europeans.
        Which is it? Can’t have it both ways?

        1. Nobody serious about an HBD discussion is going to say Jews are not very smart, very calculating, and very disciplined. The problem with them, if it can be summed into just one problem, is that they also extremely aggressive and morally particularistic; meaning they have a set of rules for themselves and a set of rules for you. But anyone who says Jews are “dumb” is right on par with someone saying they are always hapless victims of circumstance…you dont get 86’d 109 times by accident.

        2. Jews, then east Asians, then Caucasians, then Hispanics/Mestizos/Indians, then Negroes, then Australian Aboriginals, then Pygmy bushmen.

        3. Either way, I’m often curious why all the major developments of modern society were invented by European descendants in America. Electricity, the train, the plane, the car, the radio, microchip. my Asian buddies say it’s capitalism and democracy.
          Also, I think we’ll eventually find that Europeans have some kind of conquistador gene that drives them to build empires and rule over others. I know it sounds funny but I’m kind of serious.
          Btw I’m one of those darker skinned Italians so I’m not trying to make white people sound great or anything. Most people think I’m a tall Mexican . I’m probably mostly moor lol.

        4. Outbreeding. Northwestern Europeans have a long history of avoiding close cousin marriage. The rest of the world doesn’t really have this.

        5. Not every Asian has a high IQ, let alone do something with it. I’ve seen documentaries about Chinese who never visit the dentist and have rotten teeth, spitting on the ground every five seconds, look like bums. And those are above the others merely because of IQ? Don’t think so.

      2. The reason those immigrants desperately needed to leave the third world is because the third world is a disaster THEY let happen.
        Non-whites chase DOWN whites because Whites provide the social, moral and literal capital that subsidizes their lives and makes them better — at the expense of Whites

        1. Never thought I’d ever find myself agreeing with you, but this is true, to an extent. Give away free shit to anyone who shows up, don’t be surprised when you’re taken advantage of.

  19. “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.”
    A lot of these subjects have become taboo because those who rule over us, or seek to, have made them taboo because they invite speculation, criticism and even rejection.
    Cultural marxism has been the cancer of Western society since the Fabian socialists infiltrated over 100 years ago. It is the greatest evil this world has ever known because it is amorphous…it wears masks of academia, entertainment, education, social diversity or inclusion, economic equality (of outcome, not opportunity).
    The weak minded are quick to accept these at face value because they “feel” like good ideas….but as human nature has always shown, there is no chance at equality because people are naturally unequal.
    Cultural marxism is an orchestrated attempt where the few get to live at the expense of the many. And the many….willingly participate.
    Pure evil.

  20. Nothing wrong with Islam. Piss weak Christianity is the problem. As the man said: ‘The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?’

  21. It’s so adorable to see Euro-centric writers try to justify their egos, when prior to Christianity, Ancient Rome and Greece were the only civilized powers in that part of the world. The so-called Aryan race and other Europeans outside the Roman hold were, in the eyes of the civilized, nothing more than filthy barbarians who were good for nothing but for slavery and cannon fodder. Name me one cultural or civilizational innovation brought on by these non-Christian Europeans outside of Rome and Greece. Go ahead. Name one.
    Christianity is what uplifted the Germanic races out of barbarity, and prior to Christianity, the practices of these races outside of Rome and Greece were the kind that would put them on the same level as African warlords and Middle-Eastern despots that neo-reactionaries love to shit on today. Christianity and Roman civilization is what made the West great, and without them, the West would lag behind China and India in terms of civilization.

    1. Most European peoples have nothing whatsoever to do with the creation of western civilization when you think about it. Western civilization was created by the Greeks (who haven’t really done a whole lot in the last couple of millennia, sorry to say) and the Romans, who no longer exist genetically. Eastern Europe is not part of western civilization and the core nations of the modern west (Northern/western Europe) were barbarians until the Middle Ages. The west didn’t surpass the east (China/India/Persia/etc.) until roughly the 19th century.
      And by the way, contrary to what “experts” like Andre (lol) and Joseph Curwen (double lol) think, the Aryans probably looked a hell of a lot like this guy:

      1. The Romans still exist, considering their populations were genetically absorbed into Barbarian kingdoms. Also, I’d say they surpassed India and Persia in the High Middle Ages. Spain surpassed China in the Renaissance when they carved out an entire continent as an Empire and had the Jesuits spark an education boom.

        1. When I mean the Romans no longer exist, I mean as a coherent people. Obviously Roman genetics still exist, but extremely diluted.
          As for when the west surpassed the east, I am open to debate.

        2. I’d say the West surpassed most of the East outside Japan and China by the time of the High Middle Ages. By that time, Western weapons such as the longbow, crossbow, and cannons could total any fortification or pierce any armor, and the scientific method had been invented by Roger Bacon. They surpassed China by the time Spain conquered the Americas and the Jesuits expanded Western science. By the time the Jesuits arrived in China, they had wares and inventions that the Chinese did not have.

        3. Personally I’d put the date around the Renaissance, but I have also heard the 19th century as I said earlier.
          And anyway, history moves in cycles. It’s quite possible,, if not probable, that the east will rise again.
          Interesting times, no doubt.

        4. I’d say High Middle Ages, but to each his own.
          The East hast to get rid of Communism and radical Islam first. Perhaps embrace Westernization and/or Christianity.

  22. Taboo topics:
    1) Shape of the Earth.
    2) Hitler / NSDAP.
    3) True nature of women.
    4) Death (showing real blood and bodies on TV).
    5) How Hillary lost.
    And the list continues to get bigger every year.

  23. Ah, Dem Joos, Dem Fweemasions. Dese all out ta git me! Too many moany Wusses on this site. Man up, guys!

  24. One of the most obvious ones that should have been mentioned is research into helping gay people who want to be straight. Talk about a verboten subject in this day and age!!

  25. Excellent article.Its so obvious that the Jews are behind almost all of our ills that its incomprehensible that the average person is unaware.Thank you for educating us all especially those who had no knowledge of how deep Jewish control runs.Only God can save us or revive us but we must never give up and let these evil people wipe us out.I strongly feel that a reversal of fortunes is coming which most of us cannot see.Keep up the fantastic work and my prayers are with you.

  26. you know that Indo-Aryan is about a bunch of folks with only language and religion in common, that they are more brown than white, that they probably sprout from a place where is Pakistan and the Aryans were a sort of aristocracy, not a ethnic.

  27. RE: the Boasians – I think you meant extreme anthropologists, not environmentalists.

Comments are closed.