This idea has been rattling around in my mind and it's driving me insane so hear me out.
The world can been viewed in terms of eras. Most people don't believe they live in an era, a slice of time, but view themselves as living in the "correct" time where morals, beliefs and values are accurate while every era before had particular morals, beliefs and values that are considered false. The current time is what I refer to as "The Civil Rights Era" without any affection for this name. Many people today notice the constant desire for people, especially leftist youth to demand "social progress", which is another name for change towards a society that is more tolerant for all kinds of trendy issues. These trendy issues always follow the pattern of revolving around a perceived oppressed group with the solution of increasing the standing of this group. This is the ultimate moral objective of a person in the Civil Rights Era and it relies on basic philosophical assertions like that all humans are equal and inequality is wrong. The proliferation of global, American popular media has assisted the complete domination of this Civil Rights Era morality globally in every western nation and somewhat in other developed nations.
My hypothesis is that _Modern society asserting the ultimate moral objective of equality and equity will result in the complete abolition of value in personal property_. What does this mean? It means that society will enforce anti-discrimination laws that exist solely to forward a social agenda that infringe on the rights of an employer or an accommodation manager to do what they want with their property. I see this as terribly immoral yet you will not find a single person in modern society in a position of power that could even potential advocate against these "civil rights" which infringe on property rights. The value that society places in the rights of those property owners to have control of their own property is non-existent. It is political suicide to advocate against such beliefs. This complete void of criticism of such ideals has resulted in a society without the ability to comprehend a counter-point to their Civil Rights Era morality. If you, as the modern man, hold the same beliefs as the men landing on the beaches of Omaha did, you will be labelled a Nazi. Jewish sensitivities and their power in American society have obviously played a role in such prevent rhetoric.
I believe this all ties into the debate of capitalism vs. communism that has raged on for over a century. The communist places no value in personal property. The communist believes in controlling property in order to forward a particular social agenda in society. The Civil Rights Era will see the complete destruction of capitalist principles in order to try and accomplish this social progress. The concept of inheritance of wealth was once popular if you think back to medieval times when royal families would dominate and pass on what they had earned to their children. This system is rejected by modern morality as immoral, perhaps due to a more pragmatic belief that it causes instability within a nation. The concept of owning a business for yourself will not be accepted by the end of this era. Your business will be an extension of society, as will all other property of yours, even your body.
I fundamentally believe this will make a miserable society. Everyone has a tolerance line of what they're willing, and possibly capable, of accepting based on their initial upbringing. The global society that exists today is so large that the rate of social change is exponentially increasing. Humour that replicates programs on television two decades ago may result in utter condemnation if performed in front of society today. Comments made by a celebrity on a social media platform that were accepted at the time will result in their ostracisation just several years later. You can track the various social movements over time and see how people involved in first wave feminism disagree with second wave feminism and second wave feminists disagree with the negro civil rights movement and those supporters disagree with homosexual rights and those homosexual supporters view the transsexuals as insane and the transsexual supporters view incest or bestiality as not even something to be argued for in decent society. People argue against homosexual marriage, saying that marriage is between a man and woman with complete sincerity. These people are mocked as bigots. Just try asking a gay married couple why a person shouldn't be allowed to marry their dog and have them explain why marriage is between two humans while considering the argument of interspecial marriage to be ludicrous. There is an incredibly high chance that people who protest for some rights movement in their teenage years will be viewed as immoral, intolerant monsters by their grandchildren's generation for simply not being able to comprehend their new beliefs.
A person's body is their property too. The Civil Rights Era society will ultimately value the interests of society more than the rights to one's own body. If the government can force a property owner to not discriminate against perceived oppressed peoples then these laws should be applied to all property. This means a future where laws govern what are invalid reasons for sexual discrimination. This sounds insane to the average person now but it is not far off. Just look at the social ostracisation that exists currently for people who say they are not attracted to a particular race. Watch the complete and utter condemnation of that statement by popular society. A society that does not value property over the social objectives of social progress will enforce sexual anti-discrimination laws. This is just one prediction that I haven't heard expressed before.
You're thinking that the current subverted world view caused by the jew is somehow representative of a common mode of thinking among people in general. You're entirely wrong. Without jewish influence "most people" would behave entirely differently, and more naturally, obviously. You have to look at the pre-christian ancient world to see how white people behaved without semitic influences. Hint: it was much better. Your time frame for examining human thought and behavior is myopic.
Liam Davis
My skelefriend, wait until you realize history is as fake as the holocaust and is burnt down by the victor. Half our histories are legends and half our legends are histories all jumbled up together in the wrong order with residencies of foreign accounts of local events. History is a lie agreed upon to justify the current regime that is ruling you, it is tailored to best justify their authority.
This is not a fight for capitalism over communism. Our struggle was always racial. The jews use both capitalism and communism as a yoke around our necks. Sure, one is more agreeable than the other for an autonomous white man, but both will destroy your nation and its morals.
Austin Young
I believe OP was explaining the narrative the (((puppeteers))) follow. You’re right, a lot of people don’t think Current Year = Good. But a large group of useful idiots bred from a Marxist indoctrination program do.
On that note, I believe “Crisis Actors” are just attention hungry children following the same script all of those sheeple do. In a sense, their all “acting” how they think they should. No need to pay them, just give them social media followers.
I'm not trying to explain some ultimate, overarching philosophy that explains a reductionist's view of life. I'm just focusing on a little idea that helps to make a prediction for the future.
I don't even believe that capitalism is necessarily good. I don't even think that capitalism or communism are terms to fully describe what I'm talking about but it relates to the debate that's been had this previous century. I was even going to write a little caveat about how nazism is the in-between of those who believe in social good and the abolition of personal property. Hitler often spoke about social justice and a fascistic society may heavily restrict what one can do with their own personal property for the benefit of society. The distinction in my mind is that this is usually for pragmatic reasoning, for the benefit of the nation, while the Civic Rights Era morality places absolute faith in the pointless, perpetual struggle towards absolute equality between every human for some reason.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that a future morality may bring about insanity most haven't even contemplated or could understand and the rapid increase in the rate of societal change will only bring instability and unhappiness. This is why nations establish constitutions. This is why I believe in a nation establishing a fundamental set of rules and morals that cannot be changed.
Isaac Nelson
Personally for me, the history of the world can be boiled down into 5 separate "peaces" wherein a specific country or Empire holds international recognition as the dominant global force if you can even call the past 200 years a peace:
Pax Aegyptiaca - Formed around the same time as Mesopotamia, lasted for over 3000 years until it fell to Rome in 30 BC Pax Romana - Until 476 AD Pax Byzantia - Until 800 AD Pax Europaea - not like the present one which is based on the Jewish Empire currently ran from Brussels, lasted for over 1000 years until the Napoleonic Wars ended it Pax Judaica - same time frame as "Britannica" and "Americana", ongoing to this day
Samuel Brooks
Its worth noting we only started labelling generations after ww2. Specifically they are attempting to track progress
Juan Murphy
Saved vid related from a redstick thread recently. It's great.
Read the Torah. The reason communism abolishes private property isn't due to some economic or value shit but solely because the goy BY DEFINITION OF GOD'S LAW CAN'T AND IS NOT ALLOWED TO OWN PROPERTY.
Also sage in all fields for plebbit focus group copy pasted commie posting. For all anons that might have fallen for this tract of red stained toilet paper, read Brainwashing in Red China.
See embed related. Former "conservative" leader of France, (((Sarkozy))), has expressed a desire for state-enforced compulsory miscegenation.
Brody Smith
They want a one-world-government, so they first wanted a bipolar world, a communist eurasia and a capitalist powerhouse US in an heroic defensive war against the red danger. The SU would starve and finally collapse, and the (((great savior)) USA would unite the world. The axis ruined this plan and Europe remained free, and suddenly the US was seen as the agressor and watched very closely. Non-white countries grew big and China dropped communism. Now jews have to deal with a multipolar world and their plan B is to pozz and (((diversify)) everything until its ready for takeover.
Zachary Price
Step 1 is reducing the banks to ashes. I cannot stress how critical it is for this to occur. The control over money across the globe is a double edged sword for the kikes - highly effective and yet a linchpin in their plan. Every day that passes brings them closer to a system of control that would be impossible to break free from. Pure digital currency, negative interest rates for when you have "too much" money, biometrics….they're going all out this time. (I have fam working parallel to this shit). I
The banking dynasties have to be erased. Their assets liquidated. Usury made an institutional sin against God and man. Governments restored to true sovereignty and control over the coin. It doesn't very much seem how this ties in to degenerative social diseases, but understand the madness the world is mired in now is not a natural occurrence of history. It is well financed & adaptive engineered solution where a free, happy & healthy YOU is the problem.
Eli Campbell
Read Spengler.
Carson Richardson
This, if you don't doubt the chronology you're in poor company. (((They))) waited until Newton was dead before (((they))) called his revised chronology a joke, so he couldn't defend it. Hardouin and Fomenko are also important to study if you want to see how badly history was faked.
Joseph Williams
This, if you don't doubt the chronology you're in poor company. (((They))) waited until Newton was dead before (((they))) called his revised chronology a joke, so he couldn't defend it. Hardouin and Fomenko are also important to study if you want to see how badly history was faked.
