Go to any of the Canadian Reddit forums for example that allow discussion and man, it's fuck the government, fuck immigrants, who do you think controls everything, etc... it's not what it was like 5 years ago.
Meanwhile on here it's like hello KIA2, I'd like to have a discussion on... Banned. DOM didn't like your haircut.
I'm not against sacrifice but I reject false sacrifices. Many wars are in fact examples of false sacrifices. Some men convince other men of a duty toward their civilization so these men throw their lives away in sacrifice while the men who took no significant risk benefit from it. A sacrifice to risk your life away should be rooted in some sort of gain. For example, say you join the military but raping and pillaging the enemy is allowed as well as taking on slaves and war brides. You may risk your life and sacrifice for your community but you're also doing so for your own benefit as well as the benefit of others. This is fair. To ask for pure altruistic sacrifice is often a game of manipulation. Those who take no risk manipulate others using the value of altruism for their own benefit. It's not a good thing. If it is truly good then the risk will have appropriate potential payouts in the end.
When it's not your life you're risking, you may sacrifice your time and effort to help a friend move. You expect nothing in return directly but you still expect to enhance your friendship such that perhaps another time you need a favor your friend will be there even if it's not expected. It's still not purely altruistic. I am all for paying things forward and expecting nothing in return to build good karma for example but that ultimately is a choice up to the individual and there's no wrong or right choice. If someone doesn't want to act in that regard then so be it. There isn't necessarily a right or wrong choice here but when people try to manipulate others for their own gain by asking others to sacrifice while they themselves sacrifice nothing then that's a negative, always and people should be cognizant of falling into other people's games. What did the American soldier who fought against the Germans in WWII gain? They were misled and risked everything to benefit their enemies. Don't fall for "duty" or altruism to the benefit of others rather than to your own benefit.
Lastly, I believe in God but I don't think God is inherently good or evil. I think God is True Neutral and our perceptions of what is good or bad don't pertain to God. People dying is not something God cares about at all.
How can these both be true?
Isn’t the perpetuation of your civilization, where people aren’t forcibly raped, enough of a “gain” for a civilized man? I just don’t see the implicit necessity of linking these two things. I think back to the gentle place, ringed in spears.
Hmm…not sure I’ve ever really come across an ideology of God like that which didn’t ultimately boil down to “do as thou wilt shall be the whole of law”… what separates your view from Crowlyism or more generically satanism?
Humans are good and evil aligned even if God is not. And if we don't use good and evil because everyone wants to be good rather than evil we can say humans essentially have two alignments, A and B.
From the perspective of clown world they are doing everything in their interests. There are no problems. Call them alignment A. I am aligned B. Of course all individuals have a spectrum and aren't wholly A or B. From my perspective, I wouldn't want to promote A if I had the power to promote anything but I have to adapt as a B to an A world. What the hypothetical ideal for me is, will be different than the hypothetical ideal is of any other individual.
I am fine with rape depending on the context. I don't think rape is always bad. I don't even think most instances we may consider to be rape today to be in fact rape. Things aren't so objective to me. Most of what people consider to be civilization is just chains to me.
Out if curiosity, when is legitimate rape ever acceptable?
Also, do you believe raping children is objectively evil?
Well, the idea that women should have autonomy such that they could be raped is not a sound concept for me. An ideal civilization for me would recognize male supremacy such that all women are merely properly of a man or free game for any man. If she has no owner, then she has every right to prevent a man from forcing himself on her but if she can't stop the man, it's not rape. If a man violates a woman who belongs to another man then that's essentially vandalism and punishable but not rape because the woman has no right to consent in an ideal civilization.
When it comes to people of a different group, I don't care what happens to them. I would think it would be decent incentive to conquer foreign lands if one were to allow men to take the women of foreigners and do whatever they want with them. Sounds good to me.
As for raping kids. Personally, I am quite against it. Kids likely belong to their father or guardian and violating them is violating another man's property. Kids in foreign lands of foreign people? I don't care. That's up to the individual in question. Personally, I wouldn't force myself sexually on kids so young but I would take kids for slaves including sex slaves to train for when they're older.