Monolog of a [W]hite Supremacist Part IV

CIOne of the many recurring themes in his writing is his concept of “God-ordained Free Will.” Like all of his concepts he seems to have this underlying belief or expectation that I should know what he is talking about even though it is not a common term. If I express that I do not know what he is talking about he typically accuses me of feigned ignorance. As I said in Part III, I wonder if these terms are a part of a belief system with multiple adherents or if this is something he came up with on his own. There seems to be at least some overlap between his beliefs and what I could find about the Christian Identity movement. I suspect he would deny an association with them. As yet he has not clarified whether he is part of a larger movement or organization.

If one sincerely rejects God-ordained free will THEN he CANNOT POSSIBLY act as though he had it in his possession.

Here he seems to imply that I reject God-ordained free will. I do reject it to the extent that I do not know exactly what he means by it. He has never adequately defined this term to my satisfaction. As best I can tell, it seems to imply a relinquishing of actual free will (i.e., to act as one wishes to act) and instead to act according to God’s will. The problem here (in addition to being confusing) is that he seems to assume that it is perfectly obvious just what God’s will is. He rejects the notion that scripture is a reliable source of this knowledge when it conflicts with his ideology. Instead he falls back on notions that racial supremacy is a natural consequence of being born into a particular race. So from the outset this concept is illusive but he continues to talk about it as if it is not.

Let’s assume I do know what he means by God-ordained free and proceed from there. He says that if I then sincerely rejected God-ordained free will then I could not possibly act like I had it in my possession. By “reject” I assume he means that I do not believe God-ordained free will exists at all. It is unclear what he means by I could not possibly act as if I had God-ordained free will in my possession. I can assume he thinks his racial theories are in accordance with God-ordained free will and according to his radically circular logic, because I do not accept his racial theories I would not only therefore reject God but I would also not be able to act as if I did not reject God.

BUT, if one did believe in God-ordained free will THEN he could certainly ACT as though he did not.

But on the other hand if I do believe in God-ordained free will then I would be able to fake not believing in it. I hate to sound like a broken record but again, it is unclear why he makes these assumptions that one person could pretend to be other than he is convincingly and the other could not. It is also unclear why he feels this distinction is important.

Accordingly, whether this was attributable to his god… This false front was mandated by his god? That’s a question to be asked and answered by the rival worshippers of the competing gods.

I am ultimately not convinced this false front he describes exists. In essence he is castigating non-existent people for holding non-existent beliefs and worshiping non-existent other gods. This is why I wonder if he belongs to a larger movement. It would shed light on whether he is living in his own self-created fantasy world. If so, it would explain a great many things, chief among them, why he finds it so hard to believe that his concepts are not self evident to me.

For the white Christian, God-ordained free will is that “free will” which does not provoke the shame of the self-annihilating ethos NOR provides a false “peace of mind” for the toleration of said self-annihilation.

Here we find a clue (albeit an indirect clue) as to what exactly God-ordained free will means in his mind. If I read him correctly, a person knows when he acts in accordance with God-ordained free will because he does not feel shame. However, he must be on guard because he could merely be in a state of not feeling shame but still not be acting in accordance with God-ordained free will because he has somehow been able to undeservedly side step this shame.

So where does that leave us? I still do not know what he means by this term but I am sure in his mind this only confirms that I am a radical autonomist because a white Supremacist would know what this means. Circularity wins the day in his mind apparently.

Advertisements

63 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

63 responses to “Monolog of a [W]hite Supremacist Part IV

  1. thordaddy

    wS…

    “God-ordained free will” is that peace of mind GIFTED TO ONE by God.

    If one does not BELIEVE in such a God ORDAINED “free will” then one cannot REALLY ACT as though he received this most precious gift.

    On the other hand, one may believe himself to have received this gift AND DECIDED to not share it with others? He CAN ACT as though he never received this gift by simply refusing to communicate this exchange to the outside world.

    • Why is belief in the gift necessary to act in accordance with the gift? If one has peace of mind he will act like he has peace of mind, no?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        The same reason you can taste a cheeseburger because cheeseburger has taste. Just as there is no “purity” in racial facts OUTSIDE a belief in objective Supremacy, there is no real “peace of mind” outside the BELIEF IN A GIFT of God-ordained free will. In other words, what is “peace of mind” in relation to raw will? THERE IS NO REAL RELATIONSHIP. These are not coterminous states of being. Raw will abhors “peace of mind.”

      • I experience peace of mind. Does that mean I believe in GOFW?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        You claim to be a Christian and so a belief in God-ordained free will is axiomatic. It would be in your denial that one “sees” evidence of radical liberation and submission to liberal ideology.

        But the white Supremacist seeks absolute consistency… Seeking “peace of mind” to annihilate “piece of mind” is regressive. Peace of mind is FIRST FOUND in the true embrace of the Gift. Pieces of mind are found in the Gift’s rejection.

      • GOFW is a term I have never heard of before communicating with you. First of all I don’t know how you define the term. But second, if it was axiomatic to being Christian I think I would have heard of it before. At the very least you would be able to define it so that I understand what you mean.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        To truly seek Perfection, one need believe to be in possession of God-ordained free will…

        The secular substitute is to truly seek Equality, one need just free will.

        The liberal “Christian” “synthesis” is EITHER seeking Perfection with just free will OR seeking Equality with his God-ordained free will…

        I ONLY ASSUME THAT YOU’VE OBSERVED these general phenomena with MASS influence due their generality?

      • Again, where does this come from? How do you know this to be true?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        How do I know one must embrace Christianity willingly?. How do I know that one cannot be coerced into Christianity unwillingly?

        What do you mean how do I know? Are there law of physics that one must abide by? Does Christianity defy the laws of physics?

      • You are making claims about Christianity that are unique and ones I have never heard of before. You must have some basis upon which to make these claims. Where they taught to you? Do you have some other scriptural source that are not aware of?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        I have the dominant secular paradigm from which to work with. Christianity, from this secular perspective CANNOT defy the laws of physics. And so, where Christianity does defy these laws of physics in phenomena like conception and resurrection, the Christian must provide a plausible mechanism for these “things” to be REAL. Of course, the laws of physics ARE SUBORDINATE to the PHYSICAL ASSERTION… From nothing, something. Implicit is infinite malleable. So the first true law of the physical world is that infinite material configurations are possible. Ergo, there is a universe for EVERY conceivable reality.

      • So you made it up on your own?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        Made “what” up on my own?

      • Are you saying you made up all your racial theories that conflict with the plain meaning of the Christian message?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        How can there be a “conflict” between racial FACT and Christianity PER law of physics?

        YOU ARE manufacturing the conflict in your own mind and impressing it upon reality and then mistaking a consensual ethos FOR the whole of reality.

        Christianity CANNOT contradict Reality AND STILL be True…

        Agree or disagree?

      • What “racial fact” are you referring to?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        That you and I are “white” and white, respectively.

      • You and I can be white and love our non white neighbors in accordance with the 2nd commandment. They are not mutually exclusive.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        Perhaps… But how does this relate to racial self-annihilation and the fact that you are “white” per your interpretation of Christian doctrine?

      • What does Christian doctrine have to do with being white?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        What your race has to do with your doctrine is a relationship that you decide upon. I seek a harmony between my race and the truth of Perfection. Which is why I cannot understand how you get a mandate to racially self-annihilate in the name of Christ? Where is this doctrine of deracination actually come from? I say Liberal ideology and you say Christianity? Who is actually correct in their assessment?

      • When did I say Christianity mandates self-annihilation or deraciation?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        You haven’t been explicit because one cannot be explicit and be taken seriously. Instead, you have insisted on your indifference to things racial and then inexplicably attached this indifference to the teachings of Christianity. But your indifference to things racial is ideological… Mandated by your liberalism.

      • The parable of the Good Samaritan explains why a true Christian is indifferent to race when it comes to obeying the second commandment.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        I don’t believe Christians are asked to be indifferent to any reality. Such mandated indifference would be akin to denying reality and Christianity absolutely does not demand any denial of reality.

      • I would say Christianity values honesty. But it is quite a leap to say being honest equates to racial discrimination.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        Here you revert to liberal ideology AND I AM SUPPOSED to grant you this thing YOU CALL “racial discrimination?”

        I do not even know what “it” means and it has no equivalent usage in Scripture. It “sounds” like the stuff of modern liberal ideology?

        Can you explain to me what “racial discrimination” is exactly?

      • The Good Samaritan did not discriminate against the Jew based in his ethnicity.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        Ok… What does this have to do with white Supremacy?

      • You tell me. You are the one making the unfounded claim that your racial theories are somehow endorsed by Christianity.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        I’ve made no such claim… I only claim that genuine white Supremacy is in accordance with REALITY and therefore in accordance with Christian truth…

        You, on the other hand, keep claiming to be acting in accordance with Christianity when you assert an indifference to racial facts, but are in fact only acting out liberal ideology.

      • I understand that you define your racial theories as real and then adapt Christianity to fit within this “reality.”

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        Christianity is the worship of Perfection… It need not be reconciled to any racial fact.

        You deny white Supremacy because ultimately you deny white man’s God-ordained free will to seek Perfection.

      • Don’t you think “Christianity is the worship of Perfection” a pretty relativistic and equality based definition? Couldn’t any religion make that claim?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        I know of no other religion than Christianity that worships The Perfect Man either as empirical fact or mere concept.

      • Islam worships Allah. Buddhism seeks Nirvana, Toaism the path, Hinduism Nirvana, Jews worship God.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        Only Christians worship The Perfect Man as empirical fact.

      • Why does that matter to you?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        Why does what matter to me? That Christianity IS FUNDAMENTALLY different than all other religions?

      • What is the significance of the perfect man as opposed to perfection of divinity in a more general sense?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        Obviously, The Perfect Man as empirical fact falsifies “universal equality” and like the secular scientists “inspired” to find a Unified Theory, liberal “Christians” ARE HELL BENT on inexplicably harmonizing the FACT of the existence of The Perfect Man with a man-made ideological notion of “universal equality.”

      • It what way was he perfect?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        He did everything right… He was flawless in every action from conception to crucifixion.

      • Empirically speaking, how do you know he was flawless in action from conception to crucifixion?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        Ummm…. Scripture.

      • Scripture is not empirical. I ask you because you claim to have empirical knowledge that Jesus was the perfect man. Did you use the wrong word perhaps?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        Lol… There is no such “thing” that is and then IS NOT empirical.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        You do understand that the Perfection of Christ was the revelation to the believers of Perfection, Its Self… Revelation of The Perfect Creator God… Revelation of a God that DID CREATE perfection on earth.

        And because of the order of time and the subsequent fact that we didn’t bear original witness, we REQUIRE A faith.

        But there is a difference between faith and consequence of faith. There is a difference between believing Perfection exists and the consequences of believing Perfection exists. It is, quite degenerately, passé to consider Perfection extant. It is, to be so clichè, sophisticated to posit an underlying fundamental chaos to it all.

        White Christians stand at the precipice. Some choose self-annihilation and some choose to “force” Perfection back into the “spotlight.”

      • So you are saying because Jesus existed and was a perfect man that mean that perfection is possible to attain for certain men?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        I am saying that Jesus Christ proved that man can possess a will to do all right, ie., possess the will to be perfect. And at the very same time, it is impossible to TRULY imitate The Perfect Man to Perfection per known physical law. This inherent impossibility is simply in accordance with Natural Law. Once Perfection is empirically established, it is nonsensical to conceive its redundancy.

      • I can agree with that. I just don’t see how race factors in. In fact your racial theories contradict Christ’s teachings as illustrated by the parable of the Good Samaritan, the Beatitudes, Jesus and the Children, the 2nd Commandment, etc., etc.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        It is not a “racial theory” to state that a race of men can possess the will to Perfection thereby empirically validating their racial supremacy.

        BUT…

        This is not white Supremacy at the individual level either.

        Yet, your denial in the first case causes your inability to understand the second case.

      • Why do you feel the will to Perfection must be categorized at the racial level?

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        Not “must be,” but can be and those that deny the “can be” are in fact racial self-annihilators.

      • thordaddy

        wS…

        All anti-white Supremacists deny it including radical liberals and liberal “Christians.”

  2. thordaddy

    wS…

    In a closed system, ie., strictly material, all arguments must “circle.” Or square… Or in accounting terms, zero out.

    The base assumption of the radical autonomist is a closed system SUCH THAT his desire for absolute free will MUST CANNABILIZE ITSELF. In other words, absolute desire for “free will” on a finite playing field DEMANDS a self-annihilation.

  3. thordaddy

    wS…

    And no, I am not CI which I believe to be just another controlled opposition of anti-white Supremacists.

    The zeitgeist DEMANDS one be anti-white Supremacy. And so the stance of the anti-zeitgeist is clear.

  4. thordaddy

    wS…

    IF one sincerely BELIEVES that he is without possession of God-ordained free will THEN HE CANNOT POSSIBLY act as though he did… First, because he could not acknowledge the empirical experience of those claiming otherwise and secondly because he MUST NOW remain intellectually coherent.

    On the other hand, one can believe in God-ordained free will AND NOT ACT accordingly, ie., communicate nothing to the outside world. One may enjoy his Gift in near unanimous solitude.

    RAW WILL still beckons all.

  5. thordaddy

    wS…

    BECAUSE you reject EVEN THE POSSIBILITY of “racial supremacy,” you show yourself to be both anti-logic and anti-science…

    Understanding this…

    You must then GET MORE RADICAL…

    In order to neutralize the charge of anti-logic and anti-science…

    YOU MUST just plain DENY such things as “race” or “supremacy” AS ABSOLUTELY REAL…

    But BEING HIGH IQ…

    You HAVE ALREADY BEEN GRANTED TWO LOOPHOLES just for the sake of argument

    Now, one must enter into a state of “radical autonomy.”

    It is not good enough just to deny “race” and “supremacy” as real things WHEN they are clearly articulated concepts ROOTED in the physical world…

    No… Now one MUST ACT AS THOUGH these MERE CONCEPTS of “race” and “supremacy” ARE INCOMPREHENSIBLE…

    Ummm… One cannot EVEN SPEAK of such things… Write of such things… Even ponder such things… One has NO SENSE of these “things” labeled “race” and “supremacy” and “racial supremacy.”

    That is you… Radical autonomist….

  6. thordaddy

    wS…

    Even IF racial supremacy does not exist now this fact neither a) means it cannot exist per the laws of physics nor that b) it does not already exist in another universe within our multiverse.

    And because Christianity IS THE WORSHIP of Perfection…

    Then a race of men who fervently worship Perfection MORE faithfully than all other race of men IS THEREBY RACIALLY SUPREME… Per the laws of physics and IN COMPLETE accordance with Christianity.

  7. thordaddy

    “… a person knows when he acts in accordance with God-ordained free will because he does not feel shame.” — wS

    No… A person REALLY KNOWS that he is acting in accordance with his God-ordained free will when he is not killing himself, knowingly or unknowingly. In other words, one knows he possesses God-ordained free will when he is striving to perfectly exist. Shame has nothing to do with any of it.

  8. thordaddy

    You are a radical autonomist because you entertain multiple Selves under different metaphysical assumptions. This is the AFFLICTION of the modern high IQ “white” male, ie., NERD. Although, I am not necessarily calling you a nerd. You do though fit the profile (line of work, interpretation of Bible, hobbies, politics, etc). I have a particular avatar for the very purpose of linking message to messenger. You have provided no such linkage and so speculation is less certain.

    You are a radical autonomist because you are an OPERATIVE LIBERATIONIST who self-identifies AS JUST Christian.

    You are a radical autonomist because you believe in the “right” to sever all roots…

    You are a radical autonomist because you believe in the right to love thyself EVEN as your own worst enemy…

    You are a radical autonomist because you conceptualize the most omnipotent god as he who wills anything over and above that truly omnipotent God who wills all Right just for the sake of our existence however temporally significant.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s