We have to really think about this, because White Nationalism is going to face some interesting new challenges in the future.

I predict a lot of normies and SJWs/liberals jumping on the White-rights bandwagon and defending Whites as the new wave of anti-racism. If we don’t get on top of how people think now and try to steer them in the right direction, White Nationalism will just be dissolved into a new era of anti-racist civic nationalism that just makes multiracialism safer and more inclusive for Whites.

Another way to understand what I’m trying to say: you can’t change someone’s worldview by also confirming the reality of their current worldview.

You can’t get people onboard with White Nationalism by saying “yup, I’m a racist!” It’s like trying to convince someone that the Holocaust is a hoax and that Jews are the bad guys by just saying “yes, I’m a Nazi! Nazism is cool bro.”

Language is one of the main pillars of it all. If you don’t knock down the pillar of their language — ideas like racism — but instead hold up that pillar (the language, the existing moral paradigm) then they won’t understand you, and they won’t change. You’ll just be a character within their existing worldview, the one created by Jews.

It’s not about “sneakily” changing definitions, or running away from their accusations; AGAIN, that’s not what I’m advocating for at all. Racism doesn’t have a solid definition to begin with, but it still forms the core of their worldview.

What I’m saying is that we actually need to take a wrecking ball to the foundation of their worldview, which is propped up by false ideas like racism. We can’t combat and destroy their worldview by adopting (thus confirming) its core tenet (racism).

We won’t win over everyone, I understand that, but a lot of normies are still thinking “yes we need change… but I still don’t want to be racist!”

BREAKING: Artificial intelligence company Anthropic has suggested a global pause on developing the most powerful AI systems, as the latest models are beginning to show signs that they could escape human control.

➡️ @RealTimeDailyNews

"we can't get it to do what we want it to do without it turning racist so we need to stop and think it over"

AI is designed for pattern recognition, why wouldn’t it become racially aware? The efforts to make it not racially aware but still retain its high abilities at pattern recognition is mainly why AI needs so much energy and computing power.

If only gamers knew that THIS is the reason why GPU and SSD-card prices are so insane right now. It would be gamergate 2.0 on steroids.

“Sorry gamers, gaming PC hardware prices are through the roof because we do t want AI to be racist!”

They're not whites anymore, they're communists.

At this point, I could imagine having a conversation like this within the “Dissident Right.” I think I’ve had such a conversation already but forgot about it.

DR chump: “you know, gun rights aren’t that important, I think it pacifies us… and creates a false sense of security.”

Me: “Okay. How about we just take away your right to keep and bear arms?”

DR chump: “Hey now, wait a minute. That’s not fair!!!! 😤 “

Indians are celebrating the murder of Henry Nowak

We just can’t hate British police enough. They’re vile beyond all measure. They make American police look like saints, and that’s saying quite a lot.

A better way to think about the Bill of Rights is that it is a set of constitutional limits (laws) on what the government may do to you, punish you for, or force you to obey.

Calling the amendments “rights” in themselves can create confusion. People will criticize the Bill of Rights by saying our rights do not come from a piece of paper, and in that sense they are technically right. The Bill of Rights does not create our rights. It recognizes them and restrains the government from violating them. The problem it is meant to address is simple: governments do not truly grant rights. They more often take them away, restrict them, or sell them back to people as privileges.

Another major misunderstanding is the idea that the Bill of Rights always protects you instantly, on the spot, in real time. It does not always work that way. A police officer can still arrest you unlawfully, search you unlawfully, or otherwise violate your rights. Like other laws, the ultimate force of the Bill of Rights often appears in a courtroom, after the violation has already happened. But that does not make it worthless. We do not say laws against theft are meaningless just because theft still happens. We understand that laws can be broken, and that their purpose is to provide a standard for judgment and accountability.

The same is true here. Sometimes the government breaks the law. The Bill of Rights gives us the constitutional standard by which those violations can be challenged.

In other words, the amendments in the Bill of Rights are not a list of granted rights, they are laws protecting rights.

Posting this satire woild land you in prison in Great Britian.

Zul Mohammed showed up and was confronted by more Americans than the new arrivals who he invited to the "rally".

Notice how the police arent jumping at the throats of the Americans, if this was happening in Great Britian everyone in the frame other than Zul Mohmmed would be shoved to the floor and handcuffed due to Speech Crimes.

Keep your home defense weapons close and ready to go. Your home could be next.

https://t.me/realblaircottrell/7170