L&G-

I want to give you a little course on international diplomacy. You need it in order to live in fascist, multicultural America. When people who aren't from Northwest Europe speak of "Christianity and/or Capitalism and/or Democracy" they are referring to white people. And if these people refer to white people, it correlates [perfectly]* with these institutions in their minds. I want to talk about where violence comes from. It is a philosophical argument but I need to lay the groundwork. Violence is endemic to ignorant people. There is a very strong positive correlation between one's level of education and one's respective inclination toward criminal behavior. Next, spirituality is necessary for forbearance. And every culture has a spiritual heritage. You can think of religion as a philosophy of coping, as it were. God, as I've previously stated, is neither religious nor political. That doesn't mean God condones Buddhist philosophy or Islamism, rather it simply means that you can't classify God according to a human conceptualization - since he is infinite, that would be essentially boxing him in. We don't want to pigeonhole God, do we?

Okay so you have the foundation of modern diplomacy. People do things according to what they believe; that is, what is in their hearts manifests itself into action. Violence comes from within. And I'll tell you the modern political correctness project seeks to limit what people can say, ergo think - which perpetuates violence. "Hate" crimes don't come from people who say things that are intentionally meant to be biased against certain other groups of peoples. "Hate" crimes come from people who hate other people. The French have a saying that to understand all is to forgive all. I can identify with that. Essentially, we need to understand where people are coming from in order to mitigate our differences. It doesn't mean that we need to compromise our values in order to appease people with whom we differ, rather we just need to understand where they're coming from in order to stand up to them. If you don't understand your opponent's argument, you don't understand your own.

That being said, let me familiarize you with a classic poem:


The White Man's Burden by Rudyard Kipling

Take up the White Man's burden--
Send forth the best ye breed--
Go bind your sons to exile
To serve your captives' need;
To wait in heavy harness,
On fluttered folk and wild--
Your new-caught, sullen peoples,
Half-devil and half-child.

Take up the White Man's burden--
In patience to abide,
To veil the threat of terror
And check the show of pride;
By open speech and simple,
An hundred times made plain
To seek another's profit,
And work another's gain.

Take up the White Man's burden--
The savage wars of peace--
Fill full the mouth of Famine
And bid the sickness cease;
And when your goal is nearest
The end for others sought,
Watch sloth and heathen Folly
Bring all your hopes to nought.

Take up the White Man's burden--
No tawdry rule of kings,
But toil of serf and sweeper--
The tale of common things.
The ports ye shall not enter,
The roads ye shall not tread,
Go mark them with your living,
And mark them with your dead.

Take up the White Man's burden--
And reap his old reward:
The blame of those ye better,
The hate of those ye guard--
The cry of hosts ye humour
(Ah, slowly!) toward the light:--
"Why brought he us from bondage,
Our loved Egyptian night?"

Take up the White Man's burden--'
Ye dare not stoop to less--
Nor call too loud on Freedom
To cloak your weariness;
By all ye cry or whisper,
By all ye leave or do,
The silent, sullen peoples
Shall weigh your gods and you.

Take up the White Man's burden--
Have done with childish days--
The lightly proffered laurel,
The easy, ungrudged praise.
Comes now, to search your manhood
Through all the thankless years
Cold, edged with dear-bought wisdom,
The judgment of your peers!


As I've previously stated, Capitalism and Christianity are considered 'White' institutions. That is not to say that every white person is a Christian and that every white person is a capitalist, simply that there is a correlation between [race/ethnography and institutions]. White people don't really think of institutions in terms of race. I'd even go as far as to say that white people don't categorize themselves by race. It is essentially a tool of those who wish to manipulate us [white people]. They (non-whites) point out differences in race to justify differences in behavior. Essentially, it is a way to 'explain away' injustice - e.g., cultural norms. Justice is a universal concept. Societies are formed to establish justice. That is why people even aggregate in the first place (i.e., to protect themselves from the injustice of savage, anarchical nature). E.g., if a lion kills your brother, is that fair? No, protect yourselves from lions by making weapons and setting up posts on the perimeter of camp. People herd for power and protection. I think I've said enough on that account.

Here is an excerpt from a poem called the "Black Man's Burden" which seeks to explain why capitalism is not suitable for [blacks] and why it is unfair to impose civilization on these people.


The Black Man's Burden by Edward Morel

"The African of the tropics is capable of tremendous labors. But he cannot accommodate himself to the European system of monotonous, uninterrupted labor, with its long and regular hours, involving, moreover, as it frequently does, severance from natural surroundings and nostalgia, the condition of melancholy resulting from separation from home, a malady to which the African is specially prone."


The second poem I've simply used as a metaphor to describe the [heart] of non-whites. The black civil rights struggle, etc. is a proxy for non-white [male] (including women's) empowerment in society over [white males]. The philosophical underpinnings of a welfare statist agenda (e.g., collectivism to help the less educationally, morally, pecuniarily developed at the expense of individual gain) is a fundamentally contradistinct notion opposing an individualist [civil rights] curriculum. That is why America is so divided against itself. Earlier in another message I said that enfranchisement of dependents polarizes the political process. This is so because, essentially, the new particularist collectivism makes dependents out of [the 'protected classes'] while simultaneously rendering said classes independent of [accountability to those on whom they are dependent]. In short, collectivism and particularism are mutually exclusive goals.


*perfect correlation. a generalization - perhaps hyperbole; logical extreme