looksmaxxed
Fire
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2019
- Posts
- 15,663
- Reputation
- 24,386
is there anything more cucked than being anti violence or anti war? like when you completely close off yourself to the option of violence. now i understand the sentiment of not wanting to be involved in wars that don't serve your interest, or avoiding conflict in situations where you don't benefit, but the mindless reflexive "principled" universal pacifist stance adopted by midwits, libtards, and christcucks is nothing short of the most faggot abject cowardice in human existence. it is the tacit admission that they could never survive in an environment without armed men ready to do violence on their behalf. they are not anti violence, they are anti risking their own life and limb to commit violence. they are cowards with no capacity for self determination.
everything worthwhile involves violence, either through direct force or implication of force. things must be displaced or destroyed to make way for other things. actions and behaviors must be compelled via incentives, the most effective of which being the deterrence of deadly consequences. when people say they don't condone violence, how do they think the roads they drive on are built? through the coercion of payment by a legitimized mafia, the defiance of which could get you dragged to jail by armed men. how do they sleep safe at night? because they pay armed men to act as a deterrence. peace can only result from a history of war, because a nation with no capacity for war is instantly conquered. the nation with the greatest demonstrable talent for warfare has all the leverage in brokering and maintaining peace. violence ensures peace.
violence also ensures survival, the greater your capacity for violence, the greater your chance of survival. people who say they have evolved beyond violence are either completely ignorant of history being one long chain of conflict interrupted by brief moments of peace, or they are coping hard with the fact that they wouldn't last a single day in a society without mandated "don't be mean" policies, which are unironically enforced through state violence. there are many purported reasons for anti violence, either religious, ethical, or practical, but all are equally invalid. the universe doesn't care about these man made constructs, the only thing that matters is if you are capable of destroying someone/something before they destroy you. the only objective universal law is that the strong prevail over the weak
the major issue is not that violence isn't the only constant in life, but that violence committed stupidly or excessively by non whites has given it a very bad reputation and has dissuaded many otherwise based violent individuals from behaving as they should. violence through the filter of white cognition has forged the greatest civilizations and achievements of man. everything good comes from white violence. violence is good if committed by whites in furtherance of white interests. failure to commit violence is immoral. you have an obligation to commit violence.
everything worthwhile involves violence, either through direct force or implication of force. things must be displaced or destroyed to make way for other things. actions and behaviors must be compelled via incentives, the most effective of which being the deterrence of deadly consequences. when people say they don't condone violence, how do they think the roads they drive on are built? through the coercion of payment by a legitimized mafia, the defiance of which could get you dragged to jail by armed men. how do they sleep safe at night? because they pay armed men to act as a deterrence. peace can only result from a history of war, because a nation with no capacity for war is instantly conquered. the nation with the greatest demonstrable talent for warfare has all the leverage in brokering and maintaining peace. violence ensures peace.
violence also ensures survival, the greater your capacity for violence, the greater your chance of survival. people who say they have evolved beyond violence are either completely ignorant of history being one long chain of conflict interrupted by brief moments of peace, or they are coping hard with the fact that they wouldn't last a single day in a society without mandated "don't be mean" policies, which are unironically enforced through state violence. there are many purported reasons for anti violence, either religious, ethical, or practical, but all are equally invalid. the universe doesn't care about these man made constructs, the only thing that matters is if you are capable of destroying someone/something before they destroy you. the only objective universal law is that the strong prevail over the weak
the major issue is not that violence isn't the only constant in life, but that violence committed stupidly or excessively by non whites has given it a very bad reputation and has dissuaded many otherwise based violent individuals from behaving as they should. violence through the filter of white cognition has forged the greatest civilizations and achievements of man. everything good comes from white violence. violence is good if committed by whites in furtherance of white interests. failure to commit violence is immoral. you have an obligation to commit violence.
