Posts posted by Campion
Physics & philosophy are both quite pure subjects rather than applied ones like engineering, but I guess there are good careers out there as well as letting you research David's ideas. Will you get into a lot of student debt doing this course? That would make me hesitate going to uni now, unless I had a reliable income at the end of it.
3 hours ago, spideysensei said:
So here's a mainstream channel engaging in the same behaviour as that which they call racist in the space of an hour, without anyone batting an eyelid, and certainly no talk of court hearings. How can they get away with this? The only reasonable conclusion to draw is that our society is institutionally anti-white, and that media companies are complicit.
These broadcasts are poison for white people.
Yes it's out in the open now, and it looks like most of the whites are either too browbeaten to react, or hypnotised by the spell. Any whites who object are far-right radicals according to the MSM, and I too feel nervous talking about this stuff in public. Luckily there's a few safe spaces left, even tho Twitter did a screeching u-turn recently, re-banning some prominent Patriotic Alternative people only a few weeks after letting them back on.
18 hours ago, EnigmaticWorld said:
Nationalism and self-determination is better for social cohesion. Let each tribe rule themselves. World government is a dangerous idea. The criminal perverts that would run it would still be okay with their own criminality. Just look at hate speech laws, do they apply them to their own clique? No, that crap is just for the golems.
Yes very true. Social cohesion is the excuse for all of the woke agenda ... First they destroy the cohesion we used to have with mass immigration and persuade everyone to have competing identities and communities. Then they bring in all this stuff about hate speech, diversity quotas, antifa, white privilege, BLM, inclusivity etc etc to supposedly glue society back together again. And when it doesn't work, it's the fault of the gollums again.
All this stuff in the news today about ending the channel boat people will be cancelled out by increasing legal routes for them to come in.
16 hours ago, Gnostic Christian said:
I think all of us getting a 30% raise should be incentive enough, bank wise, with local representation.
If getting a criminals hand out of your wallet with a system governed by your own government, what can I say?
Enjoy getting screwed.
We might be getting our wires crossed GC, which criminals do you mean? Is it the bankers themselves who are the criminals, or is it that global banks can make it harder for gangsters doing their money laundering? Or maybe you mean both. Not sure how you get to 30% pay rise either.16 hours ago, Gnostic Christian said:
A monopoly run by whom, if not those who control the bank you presently use?
Yes, a monopoly being one bank controlled by the central world gov.16 hours ago, Gnostic Christian said:
I have personally done price fixing for big business, when those cases were being won by businesses doing price fixing. We criminals, past tense for myself, --- as usual, --- were laughing at the honest.
Theories are often wrong.
Good on you for reforming. I also think most advertising is hoodwinking us too, and especially brand names are a form of overpricing.
"In theory" I was being sarcastic, the free market capitalism is largely a myth with large global corporations.16 hours ago, Gnostic Christian said:
Do you not see or feel all the strings on you?
Yes, that's why I'm here (& elsewhere) doing research and learning about the strings so I can cut them. Also practicing things like mindfulness and meditation to be more aware of my own mind. It's a learning process.
17 minutes ago, Gnostic Christian said:
I only vote for winning propositions. A one world bank is a win win for all except thieves and liars.
I'm not sure what you mean. One single bank with a monopoly over the whole world? Or multiple world banks which (in theory) compete? We already have banks that span many countries like HSBC. If you want a global bank, go ahead and choose one. Leave the smaller banks and building societies to others that want them. What's wrong with giving customers the freedom of choice?
5 minutes ago, Gnostic Christian said:
A world bank does not care about local politics as it answers to all it's government masters equally.
All the more reason to have a choice of banks that do care about local people, instead of a global bank that's answerable to only one world govt.11 minutes ago, Gnostic Christian said:
The most favorable jurisdictions system will likely be the one the world leaders elect for their bank.
It would be silly to not follow the best systems our collective intelligence can produce.
Favourable for the banks or for us? I don't see how us ordinary folk can hope for a world gov that benefits us, it's already hard enough with the system we've got now.
1 hour ago, EnigmaticWorld said:
Interesting timing to drop a Rome related image with that symbol.
Yeah, I always thought that symbol originated in India but a quick bit of research tells me it was more widespread in the ancient world.
The article is also part of the "Britain's always been multicultural" narrative too, when it says:
“He’s described as this massively impressive ‘black-skinned’ person, this hero who comes from Troy. I’m wondering why Memnon would be chosen as the name of the gladiator. Is that because we’ve got a black gladiator who is from somewhere well south of Colchester – from north Africa?” Pearce speculated.
Just shows how long we've been victimised by imperialists like that.
22 hours ago, Gnostic Christian said:
Mind you, it will allow the bank to pay us better dividends over time,
Hmmm ... you're quite optimistic about the banks, I'm more sceptical whether they would share any extra profit with us. With a global govt, there'd be global rules & taxes for the banks too, so they couldn't shop around for the most favourable jurisdiction any more than criminals.22 hours ago, Gnostic Christian said:
I don't know what type of sovereignty you want, but taking a criminals hands off our wallets, ---- seems as a good thing for all of our sovereignties.
I don't want anyone to be a victim of crime, but I'm weighing up the pros and cons. Would a global govt give us better security and policing than international cooperation such as interpol? Even if it did, on the other side of the scale there's the extra tax to pay for this new world govt, extra corruption, loss of local culture and democracy because laws are uniform everywhere. Actually it's a big compromise to even have national govts, which prevent more local preferences, but we've got to compromise somewhere. I just think continental govts like the EU are going too far, let alone global govt.
8 hours ago, itsnotallrightjack said:
I've seen a few people online saying one should eat butter rather than margarine, but if one cannot eat butter due to intolerances due to the milk proteins and lactose, then margarine it has to be. Not all margarines are bad. I buy Tescos vegan olive margarine. But to cook with I use olive oil or sunflower.
I've started using olive oil instead of butter or marge on my sandwiches. Took a bit of getting used to, but I'm fine with it now. Doesn't need to be an expensive type either.
As an aside, I'm also trying a small amount of olive oil as moisturiser, after I looked at all the crazy ingredients in a regular moisturiser.
I realised the other day that it was the centenary of the partition of Ireland in 2021 but I saw no acknowledgement or celebration/commemoration of the anniversary. Did I miss it, or was it banned for some reason like covid or political sensitivity?
20 hours ago, Gnostic Christian said:
The bank want your wealth, not your sovereignty.
How would that work though? If I have no wealth, no savings, no property or investments, own nothing, then I'm living hand to mouth, renting everything and dependent on corporations for my whole existence. Similarly for the whole country. That's not the type of sovereignty I want.11 hours ago, sock muppet said:
Once again, capitalism is a better way than bartering, which is the only true capitalistic method of exchange, but fuked if i'm to carry a bag of chickens around, to pay for a cup of tea and a cheese sandwich, how about you?
What do you think about going back to the gold standard? That way, banks and governments can't just conjure up money on their computer screens, tho I'm not sure if there's enough gold to go round these days!
1 hour ago, Gnostic Christian said:
That is to all the various nations to deal with in their own way.
I totally agree, but that needs nations to have sovereignty. Which doesn't sound compatible with a one world government to me.
On 3/1/2023 at 9:15 PM, Gnostic Christian said:
If your government preaches against a One World Government, they are voting with the criminals who hate the idea.
Economically speaking; given that single source banking governance is easy, --- I think that moving a huge economic advantage from the black market to our white market, --- is a good idea.
Policing the world against criminals, terrorists, failed states etc is precisely how they justify the central technological control over us all, surveillance cameras everywhere, microchips, AI, DNA profiling etc etc. And to a certain extent there's a logic to it, we need protecting from criminals. However, who protects us from the police if they have bad intent towards us? Would you actually trust someone who wants to have that much control globally? It's pretty clear to me that the bigger the political system, the less democratic it is to the ordinary people in their local communities.
So I'd say this is an issue for a compromise between freedom and security. These are two poles of the spectrum.
22 hours ago, webtrekker said:
Is there still a war going on?
Strange how, day after day, for the past fuck knows how long, we have been bombarded with fake news about the 'conflict,' yet this last week or so there's been hardly a murmur, especially since the Hancock fiasco hit the headlines.
Yes, it's indeed strange. I was thinking the same thing about the Syrian war when the earthquake happened recently. It's not really a civil war any more since the Russians got involved, but it had completely disappeared from the mainstream news until the earthquake, and then it was, oh by the way this war is still happening too. It's like there's an agenda to have these long-lasting conflicts which come and go in the news when required, otherwise are allowed to simmer on and keep certain areas under military control. Yemen comes to mind too.
The UN is useful to the Illuminati because it gives a veneer of democracy so that the super powers can go about their business of global control unfettered by real accountability. It's also useful as a place to locate global institutions such as the WHO, UNICEF etc to advance their program.2 hours ago, Tetragrammaton said:
I have yet to see a single modern mainstream political movement challenge the purpose & existence of the UN in its current form. Itsnot fit for purpose.
Of course, mainstream anything is controlled by the global empire. Try looking into the alternative and smaller movements, the ones which get squeezed out by the voting systems and cancelled by the media.
On 2/28/2023 at 8:58 PM, alexa said:
Why not just keep it Simple, One God Almighty ? Lets face it, there is only him.
Don't get me started, I'll end up derailing this thread. I'll try and keep it relevant to Israel .. looking at it from the absolute pov (if you can see that) then yes there is only one-ness and to call it God is already saying too much. Judaism hints at this by having a taboo on saying Jehovah or using G-d instead of God. But then they spoil it by giving this one-ness a male gender as if he's a king of the universe or something. So it's really a dualistic God, and it creates a massive female shadow (equal in size to the masculinity of God) and to solve that we end up with things like the Catholics worshipping the virgin Mary. Muslims likewise claim to be monotheists but then create 99 attributes to multiply that unity.
Realising the absolute is achieved by only a few % of adepts and in practice religions create a relativistic God or Gods/Goddesses for the masses; but to then sneer and spit at those who do so openly, such as Christians, Hindus and pagans, is to be blind to your own limitations. Unless you are an enlightened adept in which case you wouldn't look down on anyone else. Because the truth is both absolute and relative at the same time.
1 hour ago, alexa said:
It's the worship of them, like the Catholics do with their so called Mary.
Do you mean worshipping the statue rather than the person or being it represents?
Well I have a theory about all the saints in a religion like Catholicism, that it's like a compromise with paganism because a lot of people do like polytheism and banning it completely only causes trouble. So they call the minor gods and demigods 'saints' instead to satisfy the polytheistic impulse and keep them within the mother church. Jesus is a demigod with a divine father and human mother, just like they have in the Greek and Roman pantheon.
The connection with Israel? Well, perhaps it just shows their preference for a strict unitarian monotheism and spitting at trinitarians is a way of making them unwelcome and trying to drive them out.
11 hours ago, alexa said:
He is right, God hates Idols. This is why God will destroy the Vatican & the likes of.......
What's the problem with idols, statues, pictures etc anyway? Everyone knows the difference between the image and the reality.
Liberalism has become a wolf in sheep's clothing. Even after all the huge expansion in higher education over the last 30 years there still isn't enough space to educate the minorities and the majority has to be squeezed out.
1 hour ago, Macnamara said:
“It’s really interesting that before Brexit we didn’t used to source anything, or very little, from Morocco but we’ve been forced to go further afield
Translation: now we have left the protection racket laughingly called the free market we are allowed to go shopping outside the EU.
20 hours ago, Michi713 said:
Such a society is easily compromised and doomed to ultimately resemble the city of destruction. This is what happened when Western society was secularized, and evidenced now by trans story time at the library.
Morality has been reduced to 'social justice' for minority interest groups competing for victimhood, and we are discouraged from looking at the state of our overall society. It's also a consequence of multiculturalism and liberalism breaking up society as much as secularisation (tho these are probably connected).
They're so late on this one, the James Bond franchise was parodying its own 007 / Bond girl archetype and bringing in feminists years ago.
3 hours ago, Truthblast said:
nearly half of all Blacks are not OK with White people –3 hours ago, Truthblast said:
Gannett, which publishes the USA Today Network of newspapers, tweeted that it aims to “lead with inclusion
hmmm ..... how to reconcile these?3 hours ago, Truthblast said:
Adams said Wednesday on his YouTube show “Real Coffee with Scott Adams.”
4 hours ago, alexa said:
Would these labels put YOU off your chicken? Scientists say gruesome cigarette-style warnings on MEAT could be used to shame buyers
I wonder what's the carbon footprint of those labels.
The criminal element hates a one world governance; that makes me for it. What do you think?
in Politics & Social Engineering
There's other threads about woke better placed to have this discussion but briefly, here's a definition from Wiki which is a generally progressive source so you don't accuse me of bias here too:
"Woke is an adjective derived from African-American Vernacular English (AAVE) meaning "alert to racial prejudice and discrimination". Beginning in the 2010s, it came to encompass a broader awareness of social inequalities such as sexism, and has also been used as shorthand for American Left ideas involving identity politics and social justice, such as the notion of white privilege and slavery reparations for African Americans."
There's an indication here that the term originated as reasonably open-minded name for racial thought amongst the African-American community. But in the last decade or so it has been co-opted by left-wing activists (cultural appropriation perhaps?) to further their anti-white agenda. I have been in diversity meetings where white people are expected to acknowledge their privilege, without even having an opportunity to debate whether it exists.
Another example of wokeness I came across recently was in the BBC's diversity recruitment plans:
"The new plan will enable the BBC to meet the 50:20:12 workforce targets - announced in September 2020 - in the next three to five years. That’s 50 percent women; at least 20 percent black, Asian or minority ethnic; and at least 12 percent disabled employees."
50% women is understandable, and 12% disabled is actually under-representing them, but at least 20% BAME when there are 13% BAME in the UK population? This means they are deliberately intending to under-represent white people.