all 10 comments

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

    [–]Fitter_HappierWhite Nationalist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    What the ancients lacked in intelligence knowledge, they made up for in intelligence and wisdom

    [–]Nombre27 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Yeah.

    Tradition/traditional knowledge/traditional wisdom, whatever you want to call it, at it's core is not that different from the scientific method. It's just that we got better at refining and isolating variables, new technology, etc. By definition traditional knowledge has to be acquired empirically, i.e. through trial and error, probably the use of crude hypotheses as well, whether this was a conscious decision or not. It's easier to understand these things in more primitive activities, e.g. hunting, farming, probably warfare when that was more personal, etc. We've become so removed from land skills with our day to day lives. I think this is one reason why being in nature is so therapeutic, rates of depression and what not.

    Because of our deracinated way of life, we often don't understand why we do things the way we do. Often this is a shortcoming of parenting where they either don't know either, or they don't care to explain. It's important to understand the "why" if you want to be committed to something. Common sense I know.

    A term that I came across the other day is Chesteron's Fence. You can see the harm that leftists are doing when they're ripping apart our traditional fences everywhere they go.

    https://fs.blog/2020/03/chestertons-fence/

    There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, “I don’t see the use of this; let us clear it away.” To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: “If you don’t see the use of it, I certainly won’t let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it.”

    [–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    This knowledge extended on well up until about 100 years ago when Jews started their long march through the institutions and began making anthropology, eugenics and breeding dirty fields of study. [hint: they wanted to be the exclusive hoarders of this knowledge. I wonder why?]

    [–]rightm 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    I remember some book/journal I read called something like "Global Studies in Antisemitism", the whole book was basically them justifying Jewish religious supremacism(justifying the existance of Israel, Jewish religious exclusionary practices, promoting Jewish inter-marriage etc..) in the face of criticisms thereof. All the while justifying why they then publicly promote the exact opposite of these behaviours for others to follow.

    [–]YORAMRWWhite nationalist, eugenicist 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

    Not only that, our ancestors also basically practiced eugenics, through sexual selection and by killing or expelling members of their communities who behaved inappropriately. This, in part, has shaped modern Europeans in the way we know them (and other peoples who created complex civilizations like Europeans).

    [–]SoylentCapitalist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    Sub-Saharans do this too though with much harsher penalties. Necklacing pedophiles today.

    [–]YORAMRWWhite nationalist, eugenicist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    Every peoples does this to some extent (at least naturally), and those who didn't probably mostly died off (or became the shitholes of today).

    As for the harsher penalties by sub-Saharan Africans, Europeans used to have penalties at least as harsh at least up to the middle ages.

    But then, a concept called human rights developed and spread throughout the West, and caused us to become ever-increasingly softer on scum, something ironically being in part product of the very thing it stopped (removing scum from the gene pool through harsh penalties, amplifying traits like high trust, low agressiveness and empathy in Europeans).

    This is another example of why we need eugenics, it's the only way to keep our people (or any human population, for that matter) in good shape genetically without the need for too harsh penalties and simply letting the weak die off.

    [–]SoylentCapitalist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    The point though is that whether Europeans did this more than Africans is unknown and how much this type of eugenics contributed to Europeans. Rather, the environment whites had to evolve to survive in makes much more sense to explain in whole the discrepancy with sub-Saharans. They would have also kept those in the tribe with traits better suited to the environment. In this case, such a thing could potentially be detrimental to sub-Saharans in the long term since their form of eugenics selected for fast runners more than intelligence in the short term.

    This, in part, has shaped modern Europeans in the way we know them (and other peoples who created complex civilizations like Europeans).

    Although you're also perhaps right because even Mali was a complex civilization.

    [–]arainynightinskyrim 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    To grow our subs try to crosspost on

    https://ruqqus.com/+DebateTheDissidentRight?sort=new

    [–]SoylentCapitalist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Same reason many people both left and right don't believe we're apes.