Post: #876

(07-15-2016 11:22 AM)dispenser Wrote:  Kona: Either thought is free, or it isn't. If Norse mythology enthusiasts were banned from government for suspected racism, then that would logically be extended to all European mythologies and religions. How is that different from saying that white people should have no authority in the US?

Should all culture then be banned? We'd need a lot of robots. I suppose Rubio can be president then.

And if you stick to banning white culture specifically... Are white people really so terrifying? It's not as if we breathe fire and belch Zyklon-B.

I don't think you actually believe any of that, but ideas have implications. Knock one domino, and others follow.

I believe crimes should be punished based on their outcome.
Niggling over the nooks and crannies of an accused person's soul is a waste of time. To be blunt, it's womanish.

And there's the post that proves my point.

Its not racist, its Norse mythology.

I didn't say nigger I said niggling. Now tell me to check the definition or maybe give me a link to a dictionary.

You guys made a lot of big words out of a few of mine.

If you want to be who ever you are, own it. If you want to be a full out nazi, go for it.

Have some balls. Don't hide behind some big words.

To be blunt, its womanish.

Aloha!

Post: #877

Kona is bored.

Sláinte!

Post: #878

(07-15-2016 01:40 PM)Kona Wrote:  Its not racist, its Norse mythology.

Is Norse mythology racist and/or Nazi?

Let's boil this down to its essence. We're all moderately intelligent.

I bet that we can do this in very few small words as long as no one meanders off into rationalizations that no one wants to read in order to get the point across. Though, in actuality I'm dubious that no one will rationalize. "It's not racist, but...blah, blah, blah".

Now that "womanish" has been haphazardly applied broadly to everyone participating in this sub-thread, let's avoid being womanish. Yes?

Post: #879

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Völkisch_movement

Post: #880

(07-15-2016 01:40 PM)Kona Wrote:  Its not racist, its Norse mythology.

I didn't say nigger I said niggling. Now tell me to check the definition or maybe give me a link to a dictionary.

You guys made a lot of big words out of a few of mine.

If you want to be who ever you are, own it. If you want to be a full out nazi, go for it.

Have some balls. Don't hide behind some big words.

To be blunt, its womanish.

Aloha!

Following this line of reasoning to it's conclusion, this means that anyone who expresses any interest or identification with a unique culture is viciously racist.

If you express an interest in Polynesian history, culture, even start using cultural identity words like "Aloha", you are a racial supremacist who secretly wants to gas the Jews.

Is this what you're trying to tell us Kona? Come now, have some balls and get it out already.

Or are we supposed to believe without a hint of irony that as a society we treat Whites drastically differently solely because of their race, because to do otherwise would be racist?

Re-read what you've written again, except this time try replacing the word "white" with other groups, and see if it still makes sense.

Post: #881

(07-15-2016 02:00 PM)hydrogonian Wrote:  Is Norse mythology racist and/or Nazi?

No.

Do racist based organizations use Norse mythology symbols a whole lot? Yes.

Aloha!

Post: #882

(07-15-2016 02:25 PM)Kona Wrote:  

(07-15-2016 02:00 PM)hydrogonian Wrote:  Is Norse mythology racist and/or Nazi?

No.

Do racist based organizations use Norse mythology symbols a whole lot? Yes.

Aloha!

Okay. So, there is no evidence that this guy was a supremacist.

The justification for the logic of this test excludes the fact that his beliefs have no bearing on the justice of his death to begin with; no matter what they were.

I know that you probably would not condone auditing the Honolulu PD for officers with Hawaiian nationalist sympathies.

Post: #883

(07-15-2016 02:25 PM)Kona Wrote:  I know that you probably would not condone auditing the Honolulu PD for officers with Hawaiian nationalist sympathies.

Is that a joke?

Of course I do not want the Hawaiian nation people working for HPD.

I want a completely impartial person trying to help my family out of burning cars, or assisting them with any emergency. I want the guy giving me a field sobriety test to have only my sobriety on his mind. Not anything else.

The same way I don't want a skinhead cop patrolling a black neighborhood.

Mahalo to all of you for recognizing my heritage, and bringing it to this discussion.

I am an American above all else. You are having this discussion with LCDR Kona, USN.

Unfortunately, due to my luxurious dark skin, I cannot take part in too many "nationalist" activities.

Aloha!

Post: #884

(07-15-2016 02:55 PM)Kona Wrote:  Is that a joke?

I wish that this discussion had remained jovial, but unfortunately I view a double standard across races in that some members here view it the participation in a celebration of ethnic heritage as less legitimate for some than for others, at least in their application of political stigma.

Quote:I want a completely impartial person trying to help my family out of burning cars, or assisting them with any emergency. I want the guy giving me a field sobriety test to have only my sobriety on his mind. Not anything else.

The same way I don't want a skinhead cop patrolling a black neighborhood.

Fair enough. I don't think that ethnonationalists should patrol neighborhoods of differing ethnicities either. I'd also go one step further to state that cultivated biases against the patrolled community are probably common regardless of the officer's sociopolitical opinions when he starts, due to the fact that he sees the worst of them every day. Should officers of differing ethnicity be assigned to other ethnic neighborhoods regardless, given that he will never have the feeling of inclusion that would likely inspire a feeling of care and devotion that would head off any distaste that he might otherwise cultivate?

Black communities, and their current political vehicle in BLM, cannot figure out if they want no white cops, and hence a measure of segregation back, or all white cops because they feel as if the policing is better when anomalous events (that are actually rather statistically predictable events across all races) are ignored.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/upshot....html?_r=0

I'd be all for white cops being banned from policing Black neighborhoods, unless they volunteer because they feel drawn to the work. How else can it be assured that these cops will be less likely to become resentful of the people who they patrol, given basic human tribal nature? Insofar as white cops don't volunteer, the police force will either be filled with volunteers of other ethnicities or black cops.

Now, the interesting thing to take note of, should this occur, is whether or not thee will be a clamoring for a return of white police officers.

Unfortunately, it's going to be a lot of work to divest the nationwide police of these ethnonationalists, to also include: La Raza supporters, Black nationalists, Jewish nationalists, and likely many East Asians.

Quote:Mahalo to all of you for recognizing my heritage, and bringing it to this discussion.

If you're being sarcastic, your heritage is relevant to the discussion because we are attempting to map a consistency of belief in the discussion that seems to be somewhat inconsistent. Other members are having their heritage attacked as generally invalid to indulge in insofar as it is absent any stigma. So, why isn't someone else's heritage also relevant to the discussion when they have a strong opinion about the heritage of others?

Quote:I am an American above all else. You are having this discussion with LCDR Kona, USN.

Okay, so Whites are as a part of Hawaii as are you? You have no resentment toward the white presence in Hawaii?

I'm not asking to judge your feelings on this, only to map a consistency of belief. Personally, I feel as if you have every right to your feelings on the matter either way.

Post: #885

(07-15-2016 01:32 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  Most of us are reading from the same script while arguing about the font.

No dice. BLM and their MSM enablers have blood on their hands. They have been stoking the fires of hate and now that one of their boys has upped the ante it's all getting a little bit real for them, so they want to defuse the situation with their generic fallback of "aren't we all a little to blame for this?"

Fukkem. Keep pushing the idea that the MSM is tearing America apart and keep dropping hints that the MSM traitors and race hustlers need to be made to pay for their actions, by any means necessary. For cowards like them agitating from the sidelines sometimes even the thought of getting their cumuppins is enough to make them check their mouths before they speak.

Agreed. I love this guy....

Post: #886

Post: #887

   

Post: #888

^^^ You should explain the reasons for posting your picture lest you be accused of trolling.

I'd guess that you are attempting to compare thug-life gun pics to this pic, which has no thug imagery. The guns aren't being pointed at the camera, nor are they aren't being held in the stereotypical sideways gangster pose. In the pic that you posted, the weapons are being held properly.

You won't be successful in comparing the low-crime second amendment gun culture of mostly white rural America, but also of others, and low-lifes who instill their kids with gangster, ghetto values that encourage high crime.

Show me a picture of a minority kid who is holding a weapon properly and without ego and you'll find no criticism here. Find me a pic of a white kid holding a weapon improperly, posing inappropriately, or attempting to otherwise convey a gangster persona, then you'll find plenty of criticism here.

But mostly I'm tired of debating your nonsense. Your equivalencies are laughable, but I do agree that traditional gun culture is not for poor urban groups that tend toward high crime. You'll get no sympathy from me or anyone else on the right when you try to make a case for cultural equivalencies between high crime groups and low crime groups; or justify any policies for one group based on the behaviors of the other. The cultures are not equal when we use outcomes as measurement, and that includes the pertinent gun cultures between groups. One group can statistically handle their guns responsibly, the other cannot. Your photo speaks more to evidence for this assertion, rather than against it.

Post: #889

Little white trash 4 yr old girls have better trigger discipline than a 40yr old black man.

Post: #890

(07-15-2016 06:16 PM)hydrogonian Wrote:  

(07-15-2016 02:55 PM)Kona Wrote:  Is that a joke?

I wish that this discussion had remained jovial, but unfortunately I view a double standard across races in that some members here view it the participation in a celebration of ethnic heritage as less legitimate for some than for others, at least in their application of political stigma.

Quote:I want a completely impartial person trying to help my family out of burning cars, or assisting them with any emergency. I want the guy giving me a field sobriety test to have only my sobriety on his mind. Not anything else.

The same way I don't want a skinhead cop patrolling a black neighborhood.

Fair enough. I don't think that ethnonationalists should patrol neighborhoods of differing ethnicities either. I'd also go one step further to state that cultivated biases against the patrolled community are probably common regardless of the officer's sociopolitical opinions when he starts, due to the fact that he sees the worst of them every day. Should officers of differing ethnicity be assigned to other ethnic neighborhoods regardless, given that he will never have the feeling of inclusion that would likely inspire a feeling of care and devotion that would head off any distaste that he might otherwise cultivate?

Black communities, and their current political vehicle in BLM, cannot figure out if they want no white cops, and hence a measure of segregation back, or all white cops because they feel as if the policing is better when anomalous events (that are actually rather statistically predictable events across all races) are ignored.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/upshot....html?_r=0

I'd be all for white cops being banned from policing Black neighborhoods, unless they volunteer because they feel drawn to the work. How else can it be assured that these cops will be less likely to become resentful of the people who they patrol, given basic human tribal nature? Insofar as white cops don't volunteer, the police force will either be filled with volunteers of other ethnicities or black cops.

Now, the interesting thing to take note of, should this occur, is whether or not thee will be a clamoring for a return of white police officers.

Unfortunately, it's going to be a lot of work to divest the nationwide police of these ethnonationalists, to also include: La Raza supporters, Black nationalists, Jewish nationalists, and likely many East Asians.

Quote:Mahalo to all of you for recognizing my heritage, and bringing it to this discussion.

If you're being sarcastic, your heritage is relevant to the discussion because we are attempting to map a consistency of belief in the discussion that seems to be somewhat inconsistent. Other members are having their heritage attacked as generally invalid to indulge in insofar as it is absent any stigma. So, why isn't someone else's heritage also relevant to the discussion when they have a strong opinion about the heritage of others?

Quote:I am an American above all else. You are having this discussion with LCDR Kona, USN.

Okay, so Whites are as a part of Hawaii as are you? You have no resentment toward the white presence in Hawaii?

I'm not asking to judge your feelings on this, only to map a consistency of belief. Personally, I feel as if you have every right to your feelings on the matter either way.

Well I put up a really great rebuttal to all of those big words before I went to the bar for a while.

I get home, and thanks to CloudFlare Ray ID: 2c315a3ef9de514c nobody will ever get to read it.

Its too dab because I solved all of the country's racial problems.

The main point was, that there's a massive difference between a group celebrating their culture, and a group that just exists to hate other cultures.

Every word I typed in this thread got twisted and spun and in some cases enlarged.

Skinheads are bad, but then they become ethnonationalists and they are OK???

If the kkkk didn't burn crosses, but instead engulfed in flame sections of milled coniferous pines assembled in a pattern of four right angles, I guess to some it would be socially a-ok.

If hydrogonian or anyone else would like to hear my thoughts about native Hawaiians, whites in Hawaii or any Hawaiian sovereignty movement, feel free to start another thread. If its doubletalk free maybe I'll participate.

I'll close by saying I love white people. They probably invented CloudFlare Ray ID: 2c315a3ef9de514c which saved my warning level here on the his great forum.

Aloha!

Post: #891

(07-15-2016 10:18 PM)BassPlayaYo Wrote:  ...

Cute kids. At least they will be able to defend themselves in a non-thuggery way.

Your race baiting post won't work on me because the word "racist" has truly lost its meaning.

There is no point in having a rational discussion with someone who clearly supports BLM. The picture I posted obviously triggered you in such a way that it caused you to turn everything into another race baiting post.

Post: #892

I have a feeling that threads like these is one of the reasons a lot of good posters don't bother with EE anymore. When I joined this place, I thought it was about lifestyle, travel, game, and masculinity. However, a lot of discussion is controlled by a cartel of politically-obsessed LARPers. That's fine, but I wish some of you guys would tone it down a tad.

I think people should be free to have their own opinions on race and culture, and this forum definitely shouldn't force members to patrol their language and thoughts-- that's what SJWs do. However, I cringe every time I see somebody criticize other posters who don't agree with their point of view as "liberals", "fags", "cuckservatives", etc. Those are unfair cliches and it's not how reasonable, mature men debate.

Let's all be friends.

Keep it real!

Post: #893

https://www.facebook.com/TrevDon/videos/...937432896/
I can't figure out how to embed facebook videos. Anyways, milwaukee police chief talking to reporters, they ask him why he was on phone during something, he lets them have it, this is from march.

Post: #894

(07-15-2016 11:18 PM)Space Cowboy Wrote:  



I have a feeling that threads like these is one of the reasons a lot of good posters don't bother with EE anymore. When I joined this place, I thought it was about lifestyle, travel, game, and masculinity. However, a lot of discussion is controlled by a cartel of politically-obsessed LARPers. That's fine, but I wish some of you guys would tone it down a tad.

I think people should be free to have their own opinions on race and culture, and this forum definitely shouldn't force members to patrol their language and thoughts-- that's what SJWs do. However, I cringe every time I see somebody criticize other posters who don't agree with their point of view as "liberals", "fags", "cuckservatives", etc. Those are unfair cliches and it's not how reasonable, mature men debate.

Let's all be friends.

Keep it real!

I agree. Kona and several other posters have done a great job of pointing out the hypocrisy and double standard of the language used to describe opposition. Calling SJWs delusional or feminist or ascribing the word 'cuck' or 'liberal' to someone leaning left in their viewpoints. Other posters have even gone as far as suggesting that these reactionary elements may be the result of something deeper, likely personal, in their lives. As such, the forum does serve as a prescriptive measure to counteract these occasional hiccups we have.

Game and weights and travel seem sufficient enough, but not evidently since these same problems keep coming up. One thing I have come to realize is that you cannot save Western Civilization from itself (harsh, I know), either in your own neighborhood or at-large. However, we can still continue to get the positive male-centric message out there and live our lives the best we can.

Post: #895

(07-15-2016 11:27 PM)spokepoker Wrote:  https://www.facebook.com/TrevDon/videos/...937432896/
I can't figure out how to embed facebook videos. Anyways, milwaukee police chief talking to reporters, they ask him why he was on phone during something, he lets them have it, this is from march.

Here you go. Found it on YouTube.

Post: #896

Kona:
I'm not going to start avoiding words that contain the letters N and G because those letters give you the vapours.

I will also not "block" the letters B, L and K from my vocabulary, which presumably would be next in line for deletion.

I'm trying to think of a word related to polynesians, but all I can come up with are coconuts and palm trees, so I guess you don't have much to worry about when it comes to suspicious phonetics. If I name a parrot Polly, maybe that would be racist?

I'm so worried about this that I'm going to fall asleep.

Post: #897

(07-15-2016 11:55 PM)dispenser Wrote:  Kona:
I'm not going to start avoiding words that contain the letters N and G because those letters give you the vapours.

I will also not "block" the letters B, L and K from my vocabulary, which presumably would be rnext in line for deletion.

I'm trying to think of a word related to polynesians, but all I can come up with are coconuts and palm trees, so I guess you don't have much to worry about when it comes to suspicious phonetics. If I name a parrot Polly, maybe that would be racist?

I'm so worried about this that I'm going to fall asleep.

Nighty note. Dream of something womanish.

Aloha!

Post: #898

(07-16-2016 01:10 AM)Kona Wrote:  Nighty note. Dream of something womanish.

I've never seen a mahu, so it'd be hard to visualise.

Post: #899

(07-15-2016 11:31 PM)Il Bersagliere Wrote:  I agree. Kona and several other posters have done a great job of pointing out the hypocrisy and double standard of the language used to describe opposition. Calling SJWs delusional or feminist or ascribing the word 'cuck' or 'liberal' to someone leaning left in their viewpoints. Other posters have even gone as far as suggesting that these reactionary elements may be the result of something deeper, likely personal, in their lives. As such, the forum does serve as a prescriptive measure to counteract these occasional hiccups we have.

Game and weights and travel seem sufficient enough, but not evidently since these same problems keep coming up. One thing I have come to realize is that you cannot save Western Civilization from itself (harsh, I know), either in your own neighborhood or at-large. However, we can still continue to get the positive male-centric message out there and live our lives the best we can.

I was under the impression that Space Cowboy was actually addressing Kona's use of ad hominem, as he's the only one calling people 'women' for disagreeing with him.

Keep in mind that we're in the "Politics and War" subforum, so sometimes people will discuss politics here. If it triggers you, don't follow it.

From my experience, men like to discuss and share notes. It's how we gain new information and learn from each other. Occasionally there will be disagreements and differences of opinion, particularly on political topics. Some topics deeply affect separate groups differently, so it's reasonable to assume there will be different perspectives, and at times emotion may creep into the discussion and it will cross the line from the purely logical argument. If that's the case, then it's up to the mods to reign in the discussion.

What's more concerning to me is a recurring pattern of many people here who have a complete lack of ability to overcome their personal bias, forum identity politics, and need for acceptance among 'senior members'. This creates a willful blindness in recognizing their own double standards, and creates an environment where the forum descends into nothing more than a cesspool of meaningless identity politics and virtue signalling.

Rather than a place where men can escape thought policing and are held to objective standards, the same inherent nature of SJW thought policing exists, only the topics which are forbidden have been replaced. Either way, it's a minor difference to those of us who care about concepts like truth, the pursuit of knowledge, and mutual respect.

This forum has it's own preferred narratives it pushes, and third rail opinions it polices. Posters will virtue signal their devotion to the preferred narratives, and shame or attack those who hold "the wrong side" of a debate. In other words, disagreement with the narrative is used to justify attacking that person in order to encourage group conformity.

It's a recurring pattern:

• User posts something that questions one of the forum narratives
• "Senior" (i.e narrative friendly) user responds in a condescending, dismissive manner to police the topic. Nobody notices that the senior poster is attacking the other poster, since the one being attacked holds an opinion they disagree with.
• Despite being addressed with a complete lack of respect, user responds to condescending attack with logic, and when that fails, with sarcasm to illustrate the blatant irony
• Fanboys attack user while ignoring the initial attack from the SU. Cue virtue signalling their adherence to the narrative hoping to get approval from the SU.
• Fanboys passive aggressively AMOG the original poster by trying to re-frame their mere disagreement to the narrative as "being mad". In reality they're uncomfortable with people disagreeing with them, and wish to enforce group conformity.
• If user fails to recant and accept the groupthink when his rational argument hasn't been addressed, accuse him of being overemotional, having a meltdown, and so on.

Whether we like it or not, there is a political aspect of this forum. Many people have come here looking for a place where they're able to discuss things freely, among men, without fear of SJW style thought policing. Occasionally that discussion will venture into the political (especially on the Politics subforum), and it's normal for disagreements to pop up. When that happens, those disagreements should be held to an objective standard if we want to create a healthy environment for logical discussion.

For those who get uncomfortable or angry for people merely disagreeing with them, well, you should probably stay out of hot button topics. While most politics are a meaningless diversion, there are some issues which are worth attempting to understand when their significance extends into your legal status as a human being.

Germany, 1937

David: Jake, I've noticed that the Germans are growing increasingly hostile towards people with a Jewish identity. There's been instances of vigilante mob violence aimed at Jews, and I've heard rumors that Jewish businesses will be targeted soon. Should we be worried?
Jacob: Nah bruh, that's negative thinking. Hit the gym, bang some hos, and book a trip to Amsterdam for a few days. You'll feel much better.

If murder against someone is considered justified because they belong to the "wrong group" and happened to express an apparent interest in that group identity, I think that's something for members of that group to be very concerned over.

Predictions that this post will be re-framed as being mad.

Post: #900

(07-16-2016 08:08 AM)thoughtgypsy Wrote:  

(07-15-2016 11:31 PM)Il Bersagliere Wrote:  I agree. Kona and several other posters have done a great job of pointing out the hypocrisy and double standard of the language used to describe opposition. Calling SJWs delusional or feminist or ascribing the word 'cuck' or 'liberal' to someone leaning left in their viewpoints. Other posters have even gone as far as suggesting that these reactionary elements may be the result of something deeper, likely personal, in their lives. As such, the forum does serve as a prescriptive measure to counteract these occasional hiccups we have.

Game and weights and travel seem sufficient enough, but not evidently since these same problems keep coming up. One thing I have come to realize is that you cannot save Western Civilization from itself (harsh, I know), either in your own neighborhood or at-large. However, we can still continue to get the positive male-centric message out there and live our lives the best we can.

I was under the impression that Space Cowboy was actually addressing Kona's use of ad hominem, as he's the only one calling people 'women' for disagreeing with him.

You'd be wrong, amigo