A Pleasant Disposition
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2025
Greetings niggers, kikes, and faggots alike.
In the unfortunate current circumstances of such a Multi-ethnic Society that exists in America, and the lack of foreseeable expulsion or neutralization of certain anti-white and anti-male elements who have thoroughly entrenches themselves into the fabric of said society, there need to be clear steps to re-normalize race relations in a way the is mutually beneficial to all of those who legally call this place home.
(If it isn't clear that I oppose what unchecked immigration has done to the United States, then let me be explicit here and say fuck the pro-semetic individuals who made things the way they are.)
I'll define "soft racism" as a general point in the "spectrum of racism." "Absolute racism" would be something like simply killing someone of another race upon observation, where as a lesser version being "hard racism" of restricting access of certain races from living or working in a given society, down to "soft racism" which would just be acknowledging racial and ethnic differences, but not necessarily acting up on those acknowledgements. Absurdities of "neutral racism" or "anti-racism" would be denying the existence of racial and ethnic differences.
A comment on Dec. 23, 2025 in response to The Quartering caught my attention, from BlackieChan7.62.
One of the main driving factors that has led to the villification of soft racism isn't even racism itself, but the general feminization of all aspects of culture.
There are important psycho-social implications of a gynarchal society, or in other words, a society that defaults to observing and judging phenomena and events with prevailing female-psychology views, rather than male-psychology. As an example, the most common delineation between these two view points is the tendency to evaluate ideas, events, and people with emotional, subjective responses (female) rather than intellectual, objective responses (male).
But that's just one aspect. A corollary characteristic of female psychology is an idealized concept of unconditional inclusion and positivity. This is a very ideal mindset for child rearing, yet a disasterous one for society, especially when it's on a multi-national stage. The reason being, ideally: in a family, all children are loved by the parents, they are included in family activities, they are accepted for who they are, all for the maximized psychological and emotional maturation of said offspring. As a child, who unconditionally loves their parents, this would in theory lead to positive growth.
A caveat of female psychology and emotional evaluation is it's often very binary in it's application, as can be seen how female friendship works: other females who are in close proximity are either friends or enemies, with very little wiggle room otherwise. That is, the female perspective in this sense is very binary.
The problem arises when this is applied unconditionally to immigrant populations who, simply, are not children looking to be loved as part of a family. There is endless evidence of the destruction they bring, so I won't bring that up here.
To make it more difficult, the majority of female brains are not equipped to discern these differences, which is clearly illustrated through the joke of "the female urge to counter statistical generalizations with an anecdotal experience." Women, as a biological urge when autonomized as they have been today and in recent decades, will be vulnerable to emotional appeals of the noble savage, as evidenced through decades of entertainment by our matriarchal Jewish benefactors. The non-discerning female, especially high-empathy white females, who are both vulnerable to having their maternal instincts hijacked and believing false ideas of racial self-loathing, will thus regarding third world individuals as poor, unloved children, who need support, rather than see them for the general low IQ, social-Darwinist lifestyle they solely know how to live. And since they are poor, unloved children, they must receive unconditional love and support, as referenced above. Thus, racism in any degree from casually joking about a stereotype to outright ethnic cleansing, are all equally evil to the binary female view of unconditional support.
That is, support is either absolutely given, or absolutely restricted. If, for a female, when observing a male making a comment about another males ethnicity, the emotional evaluation process is not "Hmm, does his comment align with current FBI statics?" No, rather, "he is showing binary opposition to this poor, unloved child."
Therefore, the perception of racism appears truly evil to the non-discerning woman, regardless of objective reality.
But restricting the employment of this spectrum of racism is to fundamentally deny human nature. Research, both supportive and adverse to racism, show that people tend to group together with those who look like themselves. Racial grouping is prisons is the easiest example to cite as a non-research phenomenon.
So what we see on places like /pol/ or here, is the slow acceptance and leakage of different degrees of racism back into society in a necessary shift for the current Multi-ethnic state of American society to continue, as doing otherwise is to deny what it is to possess human pattern recognition.
Being able to be critical of ones race and the stereotypes around it are a necessary aspect of men to build those reliable friendships and vent about social ills. It also excludes low-tier men who aren't able to mesh into a system that has been forced to reconcile those differences (i.e. the delusion gloating plus petty defensiveness of jeets and their need to explain how American they are). That behavior simply begs for exclusion.
This is also prevalent in the hyper-feminization of education and legal rulings. For school, the most telling example is that in the past, physical fitness was praised, as well as having rifle ranges at schools.
In terms of legal rules, consider that men would agree to duels in the past and outright shoot eachother, to the screeching cell-phone-in-eachothers-faces modern version to attempt to catch someone's fault, akin to taking a dive in soccer. That is, it's using the system as a weapon and solution to one's problems, rather than relying on oneself to solve said problems. This takes away a great deal of autonomy and inherent drive in men, as the inherent masculine tendency is to be proactive and manifest oneself.
So, when society not only outright restricts commentary on one of the most readily observable discrepancies, skin color, but also forces those discrepancies into every facet of life, it results in an extreme (albeit slow building) opposition. And, as we're seeing with Minnesota, when that very system is outright detrimental to certain groups of men, it's no wonder that Weimer conditions bring Weimar solutions. Yes, the Jews turned the golem onto themselves. Oy vey.
Ideally, America could return to the original idea of a citizen only being a white male, as that foundation is what empowered the country so much. Since Hitler Mk. 2 might not show up, there has to be a contingency plan of rebalancing the and readmitting the idea of white supremacy as an honor rather than an insult. The least destructive pathway to that is what we've been seeing: the increasing prevalence of soft racism, how it's become more and more observable with each generation of young men.
That's all to say, there is a necessity for a return to a male-psychology based society, and a major pathway to that is acceptence of soft racism. It's up for debate whether or not going to "hard racism" in the long run would be better; that is, turning anyone who isn't white into a second class citizen, since historically, most societies tended to be homogeneous anyway. Anyway, to make a joke of it: Save America by Saying "Nigger."
In the unfortunate current circumstances of such a Multi-ethnic Society that exists in America, and the lack of foreseeable expulsion or neutralization of certain anti-white and anti-male elements who have thoroughly entrenches themselves into the fabric of said society, there need to be clear steps to re-normalize race relations in a way the is mutually beneficial to all of those who legally call this place home.
(If it isn't clear that I oppose what unchecked immigration has done to the United States, then let me be explicit here and say fuck the pro-semetic individuals who made things the way they are.)
I'll define "soft racism" as a general point in the "spectrum of racism." "Absolute racism" would be something like simply killing someone of another race upon observation, where as a lesser version being "hard racism" of restricting access of certain races from living or working in a given society, down to "soft racism" which would just be acknowledging racial and ethnic differences, but not necessarily acting up on those acknowledgements. Absurdities of "neutral racism" or "anti-racism" would be denying the existence of racial and ethnic differences.
A comment on Dec. 23, 2025 in response to The Quartering caught my attention, from BlackieChan7.62.
The comment was highlighting that racism was the one thing that helped him and others serving in the Marines to become closer. I think there are very simple, yet profound implications in this statement for normalization of male interaction dynamics.
One of the main driving factors that has led to the villification of soft racism isn't even racism itself, but the general feminization of all aspects of culture.
Cultural Feminzation
American society has been becoming increasingly gynarchal. The pace has become increasingly rapid since 1960s. Fortunately, it seems things have hit their peak, and the shift away is finally materializing in the main stream. I'm also not saying that females are the source of this way of thinking, but this thinking aligns more closely with female psychology.There are important psycho-social implications of a gynarchal society, or in other words, a society that defaults to observing and judging phenomena and events with prevailing female-psychology views, rather than male-psychology. As an example, the most common delineation between these two view points is the tendency to evaluate ideas, events, and people with emotional, subjective responses (female) rather than intellectual, objective responses (male).
But that's just one aspect. A corollary characteristic of female psychology is an idealized concept of unconditional inclusion and positivity. This is a very ideal mindset for child rearing, yet a disasterous one for society, especially when it's on a multi-national stage. The reason being, ideally: in a family, all children are loved by the parents, they are included in family activities, they are accepted for who they are, all for the maximized psychological and emotional maturation of said offspring. As a child, who unconditionally loves their parents, this would in theory lead to positive growth.
A caveat of female psychology and emotional evaluation is it's often very binary in it's application, as can be seen how female friendship works: other females who are in close proximity are either friends or enemies, with very little wiggle room otherwise. That is, the female perspective in this sense is very binary.
The problem arises when this is applied unconditionally to immigrant populations who, simply, are not children looking to be loved as part of a family. There is endless evidence of the destruction they bring, so I won't bring that up here.
To make it more difficult, the majority of female brains are not equipped to discern these differences, which is clearly illustrated through the joke of "the female urge to counter statistical generalizations with an anecdotal experience." Women, as a biological urge when autonomized as they have been today and in recent decades, will be vulnerable to emotional appeals of the noble savage, as evidenced through decades of entertainment by our matriarchal Jewish benefactors. The non-discerning female, especially high-empathy white females, who are both vulnerable to having their maternal instincts hijacked and believing false ideas of racial self-loathing, will thus regarding third world individuals as poor, unloved children, who need support, rather than see them for the general low IQ, social-Darwinist lifestyle they solely know how to live. And since they are poor, unloved children, they must receive unconditional love and support, as referenced above. Thus, racism in any degree from casually joking about a stereotype to outright ethnic cleansing, are all equally evil to the binary female view of unconditional support.
That is, support is either absolutely given, or absolutely restricted. If, for a female, when observing a male making a comment about another males ethnicity, the emotional evaluation process is not "Hmm, does his comment align with current FBI statics?" No, rather, "he is showing binary opposition to this poor, unloved child."
Therefore, the perception of racism appears truly evil to the non-discerning woman, regardless of objective reality.
But restricting the employment of this spectrum of racism is to fundamentally deny human nature. Research, both supportive and adverse to racism, show that people tend to group together with those who look like themselves. Racial grouping is prisons is the easiest example to cite as a non-research phenomenon.
So what we see on places like /pol/ or here, is the slow acceptance and leakage of different degrees of racism back into society in a necessary shift for the current Multi-ethnic state of American society to continue, as doing otherwise is to deny what it is to possess human pattern recognition.
The Male Perspective
And from a certain perspective, soft racism is very healthy for male interaction and friendship. Again, the Marines example from above. It's not only a process of embracing male-psychology, that is, observing and acknowledging objective phenomena, but also a foundational male friendship basis of banter. In total opposition to female-psychology and friendship patterns of showing unconditional support and praise for loved ones, men do the opposite and generally build comraderie through shit talking and one-upsmanship. It would be fucking gay otherwise. An example of male/female difference in this respect is men speaking negatively to eachother face to face, and positively of that person behind their back. Women are the opposite: positive face-to-face, and negative behind their back.Being able to be critical of ones race and the stereotypes around it are a necessary aspect of men to build those reliable friendships and vent about social ills. It also excludes low-tier men who aren't able to mesh into a system that has been forced to reconcile those differences (i.e. the delusion gloating plus petty defensiveness of jeets and their need to explain how American they are). That behavior simply begs for exclusion.
This is also prevalent in the hyper-feminization of education and legal rulings. For school, the most telling example is that in the past, physical fitness was praised, as well as having rifle ranges at schools.
In terms of legal rules, consider that men would agree to duels in the past and outright shoot eachother, to the screeching cell-phone-in-eachothers-faces modern version to attempt to catch someone's fault, akin to taking a dive in soccer. That is, it's using the system as a weapon and solution to one's problems, rather than relying on oneself to solve said problems. This takes away a great deal of autonomy and inherent drive in men, as the inherent masculine tendency is to be proactive and manifest oneself.
So, when society not only outright restricts commentary on one of the most readily observable discrepancies, skin color, but also forces those discrepancies into every facet of life, it results in an extreme (albeit slow building) opposition. And, as we're seeing with Minnesota, when that very system is outright detrimental to certain groups of men, it's no wonder that Weimer conditions bring Weimar solutions. Yes, the Jews turned the golem onto themselves. Oy vey.
Ideally, America could return to the original idea of a citizen only being a white male, as that foundation is what empowered the country so much. Since Hitler Mk. 2 might not show up, there has to be a contingency plan of rebalancing the and readmitting the idea of white supremacy as an honor rather than an insult. The least destructive pathway to that is what we've been seeing: the increasing prevalence of soft racism, how it's become more and more observable with each generation of young men.
That's all to say, there is a necessity for a return to a male-psychology based society, and a major pathway to that is acceptence of soft racism. It's up for debate whether or not going to "hard racism" in the long run would be better; that is, turning anyone who isn't white into a second class citizen, since historically, most societies tended to be homogeneous anyway. Anyway, to make a joke of it: Save America by Saying "Nigger."
