texagbeliever said:

---

Cultures can be judged only if one believes in absolute truth.

Put another way, how well of a job does the culture do to reward good and punish bad.
Good: Sacrafice, selflessness, perseverance, respect, beauty (physical, arts, music, etc), valuing human life, valuijg the uniquness of life and valuing human relationships.
Bad: selfish, individualism, pride, destroy beauty, and greed.

It can be succinctly described as cultures that recieve and express love with repect. Those that do it better, are better. Typically those that dont use some sort of arbitrary authority (race, skin tone, male/female) to mistreat others.

---

See if you can expand on this a little. You may be onto something here. Test it a bit. Show some cultures compared to others (not in official terms, just general comparisons will do)

Also, are you using culture to mean a land and its people, or a given period of political rule? Is Germany of Bismarck superior to Germany of Merkel? Or the reverse?

One thing do think is something to look at -- I don't think the measure of a culture is how it treats its criminals or enemies. Simply in general terms, neither of those go toward its preservation or survival. But the current crop of "internationalism" puts way too much accent imo on that aspect.

texagbeliever said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

Cultures can be judged only if one believes in absolute truth.

Put another way, how well of a job does the culture do to reward good and punish bad.
Good: Sacrafice, selflessness, perseverance, respect, beauty (physical, arts, music, etc), valuing human life, valuijg the uniquness of life and valuing human relationships.
Bad: selfish, individualism, pride, destroy beauty, and greed.

It can be succinctly described as cultures that recieve and express love with repect. Those that do it better, are better. Typically those that dont use some sort of arbitrary authority (race, skin tone, male/female) to mistreat others.

---

I agree with your criteria of Good/Bad.

However, I don't find any culture that is good or bad by itself. All have something to do with surroundings and resources. I keep talking about how American culture is based on greed. Rich people who won't experience want in their lives, still lust for more millions and billions. We call it "capitalism" to give it legitimacy. Bribing is called "lobbying". It is easy to be a good person when one's stomach is full.

My basic question is: Is there any such thing as culture A is better than culture B? If so, why? My theory is only resource availability is the predictor.

---

Yes. I just outlined it. You are in a at best very cynical head space. Which is pretty common for a f16 poster.

Obviously culture is fluid and even more then that culture is not monolithic especially in a country of 300+ million with very different family cultural backgrounds. So yes America has flaws, but it culturally still beats every other nation. Now with America there are better spots and worse spots (Minnesota). But at that point you are arguing ik too vague a way to make an effective point. Random details can be weaved to tell many stories but the weaver needs to be masterful to weave the accurate tapestry.

---

I agree with you that America is the best place to live as of today. I don't know what will happen tomorrow or in later years. My theory is that the land of America was bountiful and resource rich, so the culture that grew from that reflected it. Things have changed in the last 200 years and I don't think we are at a similar point. I see things degrading in the coming years. Let's see how things pan out.

titan said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

Cultures can be judged only if one believes in absolute truth.

Put another way, how well of a job does the culture do to reward good and punish bad.
Good: Sacrafice, selflessness, perseverance, respect, beauty (physical, arts, music, etc), valuing human life, valuijg the uniquness of life and valuing human relationships.
Bad: selfish, individualism, pride, destroy beauty, and greed.

It can be succinctly described as cultures that recieve and express love with repect. Those that do it better, are better. Typically those that dont use some sort of arbitrary authority (race, skin tone, male/female) to mistreat others.

---

See if you can expand on this a little. You may be onto something here. Test it a bit. Show some cultures compared to others (not in official terms, just general comparisons will do)

Also, are you using culture to mean a land and its people, or a given period of political rule? Is Germany of Bismarck superior to Germany of Merkel? Or the reverse?

One thing do think is something to look at -- I don't think the measure of a culture is how it treats its criminals or enemies. Simply in general terms, neither of those go toward its preservation or survival. But the current crop of "internationalism" puts way too much accent imo on that aspect.

---

There is great difficulty in talking about cultures of the past because a culture "lives" in the sense that it changes and becomes easy to get bogged down on what specific time of the culture you might be comparing.

I think the simplest way to demonstrate this is to look at the individual family level. Which family makes for more pleasant company, a better neighbor and a better countrymen.

A family in which the husband and wife love and treat each other with respect. That behavior is observed and generally practiced by their children who the parents sacrifice for.
Or
A family in which the spouses dont respect each other. They are greedy. Their kids are a burden. Maybe the parents are even divorced.

(Keep in mind the above is at a macro scale so individual exceptions can be just that exceptions).


______

Id like to address the final paragraph separately. How you treat your enemies does matter. I think the treaty of Versailles is a great point on this. The treaty was so punitive that it guaranteed a WW2. That is not the only "Peace deal" which guaranteed a new war. Take the end of WW2. One could argue the ISA was very lenient with Japan. Yet now Japan and the USA arent enemies. The purpose of war is to ensure a better peace. Something most countries fail to execute.

First on this,

Quote:

---

Id like to address the final paragraph separately. How you treat your enemies does matter. I think the treaty of Versailles is a great point on this. The treaty was so punitive that it guaranteed a WW2. That is not the only "Peace deal" which guaranteed a new war. Take the end of WW2. One could argue the ISA was very lenient with Japan. Yet now Japan and the USA arent enemies. The purpose of war is to ensure a better peace. Something most countries fail to execute.

---

Agree fully. Meant during the war, and still mean, that it is not the primary way to judge a culture. This takes nothing away from there are better and worse ways to do a given thing, and your example proves it. Really love the bold, with the honest caveat that sometimes the war's purpose is to simply acquire.

Culture id take to mean a combination of:
Appreciation of beauty (arts, clothing, nature)
Value of life
Values masculinity
Values femininity
Balance of forgiveness and justice

I did my part

texagbeliever said:

---

Culture id take to mean a combination of:
Appreciation of beauty (arts, clothing, nature)
Value of life
Values masculinity
Values femininity
Balance of forgiveness and justice

---

Interesting. So perhaps, say Turkey, does have most of these traits as well. The last might be hard to quantify at present but not as hard not so far back.

What seems to be missing in your list is `values order' a sense of reasonably safe streets and places to practice those other things.

titan said:

---

First on this,

Quote:

---

Id like to address the final paragraph separately. How you treat your enemies does matter. I think the treaty of Versailles is a great point on this. The treaty was so punitive that it guaranteed a WW2. That is not the only "Peace deal" which guaranteed a new war. Take the end of WW2. One could argue the ISA was very lenient with Japan. Yet now Japan and the USA arent enemies. The purpose of war is to ensure a better peace. Something most countries fail to execute.

---

Agree fully. Meant during the war, and still mean, that it is not the primary way to judge a culture. This takes nothing away from there are better and worse ways to do a given thing, and your example proves it. Really love the bold, with the honest caveat that sometimes the war's purpose is to simply acquire.

---

That line is B.H. Liddell's big point he drives home.

Since war always requires at least 2 parties; one side is fighting for a better peace. You could make an awkward and roundabout argument the aggressor is also looking for a better peace but in their perspective.

infinity ag said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

YouBet said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

Colonel Kurtz said:

---

Our nation is permanently screwed unless we can reverse this and not allow Whites to become minorities in our own lands.

---

"Own lands?"

Didn't the gringos immigrate over here by boat and found there were others already living here?

I mean, maybe call England or Ireland or wherever your "own land," but this place was already occupied with others who called it their "own land" already.

---

Yes, they found nomadic Stone Age inhabitants scattered about and quickly assumed control of everything. It's been our own land for centuries.

---

Yes, rational people would not want to return to the "noble savage" era of cannibalism, tribal hit and run rape and murder, slavery, famine, etc.

I mean, the Muslims do and much of the brown world is used to it, but not advanced Western cultures built by whites. Will be a rude awakening for the minority of brown/black people who enjoy Western cultures when whites lose their power and much of the planet returns to the old ways.

---

You really think every brown is going to let the failures of the gringos keep them from doing better than the gringos did?

How would that happen? Are browns incapable of doing what, per se, that only whites can do?

Also, by browns are you including Hispanics in that category?

---

Are we talking Spaniards or the heavily Indian ancestry hispanics? If Spaniards, or mostly spaniards they can probably replicated a reasonable facsimile of our culture.

Again we are talking populations, not individuals. Having made that distinction. Outside of Spaniards, hispanics are not capable of replicating what white western europeans and their ancestors have created. It will be inferior.

---

But would they have to replicate it, as opposed to learn from the failures of the whites and adapt to move things forward?

And do you mean Hispanics can't replicate white culture, or the things whites created? And if the latter, why would they be unable to?

---

If they want to be as successful they would have to replicate it. Hispanic culture is inferior to white culture and has been subordinate to it for a millenia.

They will not be able to replicate the things either because they are not as creative or smart as whites. Again we are talking populations and not individuals.

Hispanics would be my second choice though and it is inevitable and preferable to any other alternative.

---

I am curious, how do you judge cultures to be superior or inferior? Just money? Power?
And even within a specific culture, there are superior and inferior people. And culture is so much related to the environment and history. You put people in a land of plenty and they will likely turn out to be "superior" too. You put them in a place where resources are scarce, then they behave badly too.

I am not calling anyone a racist, because maybe you do have a point. Maybe some cultures are better/worse. Science is above everything. Can we use the evidence you present to prove that other cultures are superior too?

---

Again we are talking populations not individuals. There are whites and significant numbers that are inferior. We are talking about how far right the bell curve apex is for each race.

As far as defining superior culture. It would include some combination of the following:

Martial prowess
IQ
Loyalty to country and family
Bravery
Integrity
Creativity
Determination
Driven to excellence
Reliable/punctual
Desires agency over collectivism
Prioritizes meritocracy
Seeks knowledge

These have been the values that have made America great. They are failing now through cultural rot.

titan said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

Culture id take to mean a combination of:
Appreciation of beauty (arts, clothing, nature)
Value of life
Values masculinity
Values femininity
Balance of forgiveness and justice

---

Interesting. So perhaps, say Turkey, does have most of these traits as well. The last might be hard to quantify at present but not as hard not so far back.

What seems to be missing in your list is `values order' a sense of reasonably safe streets and places to practice those other things.

---

I consider the balance of justice and forgiveness to include order.

Turkey's problems probably flow from how Islam can be used to distort justice and forgiveness.

texagbeliever said:

---

Culture id take to mean a combination of:
Appreciation of beauty (arts, clothing, nature)
Value of life
Values masculinity
Values femininity
Balance of forgiveness and justice

---

These are my friend Tom Fox's words.

Quote:

---

Hispanic culture is inferior to white culture

---

If you look at the qualities above, is hispanic culture inferior? Maybe on some aspects.

All of the above are eroding in America. Why? Maybe it had nothing to do with culture but just the quality of a bunch of people (founding fathers). Now that they are 200+ years in the past, things don't look as good.

There is zero question our current leaders are inferior to the founders. And we are only getting worse.

I'd be more excited if the population in general was declining. Way too many people here now. They are spilling out of the city and ruining the country. Need to get something in the water system quick.

Tom Fox said:

---

There is zero question our current leaders are inferior to the founders. And we are only getting worse.

---

I agree!!!

infinity ag said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

Culture id take to mean a combination of:
Appreciation of beauty (arts, clothing, nature)
Value of life
Values masculinity
Values femininity
Balance of forgiveness and justice

---

These are my friend Tom Fox's words.

Quote:

---

Hispanic culture is inferior to white culture

---

If you look at the qualities above, is hispanic culture inferior? Maybe on some aspects.

All of the above are eroding in America. Why? Maybe it had nothing to do with culture but just the quality of a bunch of people (founding fathers). Now that they are 200+ years in the past, things don't look as good.

---

1. That is his remark not mine. I wouldnt agree with it.
2. The idea that their is a white and Hispanic culture is laughable in how vague that is.

Yeah things dont look as good as when we were founded and tolerated slavery. Tolerated child labor. Directly discriminated against the Irish. The opportunity for education and advancement was really only possible for the rich.

Yeah I can see how we as a culture really regressed...

2 solutions to answer to the OP.

1. Stop giving women freebies for college and jobs and promotions. That is what makes them less interested in home and want to become corporate slaves. Most western women are like this and this disease has spread to Asia also. Let women compete fairly. Many will realize they can't cut it and go back to making sammiches (and babies) again.

2. Solution to white pop collapse is not to bring in more immigrants. That may alleviate the problem for the short term and make it a BIG problem in the long term. Look at UK. Besides, there are good immigrants and there are bad ones. Choose wisely.

Voila. Do the above and white pop will increase again.

texagbeliever said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

Culture id take to mean a combination of:
Appreciation of beauty (arts, clothing, nature)
Value of life
Values masculinity
Values femininity
Balance of forgiveness and justice

---

These are my friend Tom Fox's words.

Quote:

---

Hispanic culture is inferior to white culture

---

If you look at the qualities above, is hispanic culture inferior? Maybe on some aspects.

All of the above are eroding in America. Why? Maybe it had nothing to do with culture but just the quality of a bunch of people (founding fathers). Now that they are 200+ years in the past, things don't look as good.

---

1. That is his remark not mine. I wouldnt agree with it.
2. The idea that their is a white and Hispanic culture is laughable in how vague that is.

Yeah things dont look as good as when we were founded and tolerated slavery. Tolerated child labor. Directly discriminated against the Irish. The opportunity for education and advancement was really only possible for the rich.

Yeah I can see how we as a culture really regressed...

---

Good points. Thanks for sharing!
Slavery for some reason hadn't crossed my mind. That isn't a good sign of culture. Even now, we have H1B slavery so the mindset still exists.

Quote:

---

2. Solution to white pop collapse is not to bring in more immigrants. That may alleviate the problem for the short term and make it a BIG problem in the long term. Look at UK. Besides, there are good immigrants and there are bad ones. Choose wisely.

---

This is something both Europe and D.C. overlook. It matters WHO you bring in to "relieve population decline" -- we would probably be okay importing a bunch of Russians or Vietnamese (so its not race per-se) than any Muslims of fundamentalist bent or perhaps in general depending on your take.

The time with your kids is more valuable than anything else on the planet. It's finite and it runs out faster than you think.

After our second, my wife quit her job for a bit and then started her own business which has taken off. She was burnt out by everything you said and has thrived with her business partners. She has more free time now than at any point in her life. It's been a blessing for our family. If there is one thing that we pass onto our daughter it's a) have a family, a big one b) don't be beholden to the corporate rat race.

Ag with kids said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

Colonel Kurtz said:

---

Our nation is permanently screwed unless we can reverse this and not allow Whites to become minorities in our own lands.

---

"Own lands?"

Didn't the gringos immigrate over here by boat and found there were others already living here?

I mean, maybe call England or Ireland or wherever your "own land," but this place was already occupied with others who called it their "own land" already.

---

Don't leave Spain out of this...since you used the term "gringo"

---

I guess Portugal is still stuck at the kid's table. They never get a break!

Tom Fox said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

YouBet said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

Colonel Kurtz said:

---

Our nation is permanently screwed unless we can reverse this and not allow Whites to become minorities in our own lands.

---

"Own lands?"

Didn't the gringos immigrate over here by boat and found there were others already living here?

I mean, maybe call England or Ireland or wherever your "own land," but this place was already occupied with others who called it their "own land" already.

---

Yes, they found nomadic Stone Age inhabitants scattered about and quickly assumed control of everything. It's been our own land for centuries.

---

Yes, rational people would not want to return to the "noble savage" era of cannibalism, tribal hit and run rape and murder, slavery, famine, etc.

I mean, the Muslims do and much of the brown world is used to it, but not advanced Western cultures built by whites. Will be a rude awakening for the minority of brown/black people who enjoy Western cultures when whites lose their power and much of the planet returns to the old ways.

---

You really think every brown is going to let the failures of the gringos keep them from doing better than the gringos did?

How would that happen? Are browns incapable of doing what, per se, that only whites can do?

Also, by browns are you including Hispanics in that category?

---

Are we talking Spaniards or the heavily Indian ancestry hispanics? If Spaniards, or mostly spaniards they can probably replicated a reasonable facsimile of our culture.

Again we are talking populations, not individuals. Having made that distinction. Outside of Spaniards, hispanics are not capable of replicating what white western europeans and their ancestors have created. It will be inferior.

---

The Inca's, Aztecs and Mayans would disagree considering that they had technology that was equal or superior to the Europeans at the same time they did in terms of social constructs, architechtural capabilities, were actually more advanced in the medical field and several other aspects of their social structure.

They didn't have gunpowder though, nor could they ward off things like yellow fever, smallpox, etc. that helped do them in.

infinity ag said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

JWinTX said:

---

Quite honestly, losing the Western Culture we knew for so long is going to be well-earned and well-deserved.

The Western culture turned its back on God, went away from marriage/family, became very career-oriented, which is another way of saying materialistic and selfish, then opened the door to Pandora's box by allowing all things deviantly sexual to be pervasive.

We deserve everything that will happen. We ran up debt for stupidity and greed, as well as power. We lowered education standards and entertainment standards to the LCD. Propaganda is "news".

---

Nothing to do with God.

It is due to greed and stupidity. Plain and simple. And lack of common sense and foresight.
It is because of me me and more me. Not us.
Most people care only about themselves, not their kids of future grandkids. Most other cultures do.

It's funny when some here claim to have a superior culture, that their IQ is higher than some Asian people, etc. What good will that do when Muslims impose Shariah on us??

---

I really feel sorry for you and how you view the world. You are possibly the most jaded and angry person on this site, and that includes a lot of very angry people.

---

I think I am the most realistic person on this site. Many live in their own world of 1950s America while foreigners are chomping on their lunch.

And I have been proven correct so many times. It is up to you whether you want to heed the warnings or not.

---

Of course you would think that.

texagbeliever said:

---

Cultures can be judged only if one believes in absolute truth.

Put another way, how well of a job does the culture do to reward good and punish bad.
Good: Sacrafice, selflessness, perseverance, respect, beauty (physical, arts, music, etc), valuing human life, valuijg the uniquness of life and valuing human relationships.
Bad: selfish, individualism, pride, destroy beauty, and greed.

It can be succinctly described as cultures that recieve and express love with repect. Those that do it better, are better. Typically those that dont use some sort of arbitrary authority (race, skin tone, male/female) to mistreat others.

---

Tell us in detail how individualism is bad. Same with pride.

texagbeliever said:

---

Id like to address the final paragraph separately. How you treat your enemies does matter. I think the treaty of Versailles is a great point on this. The treaty was so punitive that it guaranteed a WW2. That is not the only "Peace deal" which guaranteed a new war. Take the end of WW2. One could argue the ISA was very lenient with Japan. Yet now Japan and the USA arent enemies. The purpose of war is to ensure a better peace. Something most countries fail to execute.

---

That is wholly a recent idea of war - less than 100 years old, which is a blip in time compared to the balance of humanity and our existence and dominance on earth. It's also very much a western idea of modern war.

Prior to that the prupose of war was to conquer and subjugate, and pretty much nothing else. There is a reason why almost all of history is told through the rise and fall of empires and kingdoms - because that is what man has done for 99% of our history on earth.

That whole "greed" thing that infinityag thinks is some newfangled modern invention created by those uber evil CEO's that have collars and chains around every one of us that only he can see? Yeah...not a new concept or invention at all. It goes back as far as what we consider modern humans go back too.

schmellba99 said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

Id like to address the final paragraph separately. How you treat your enemies does matter. I think the treaty of Versailles is a great point on this. The treaty was so punitive that it guaranteed a WW2. That is not the only "Peace deal" which guaranteed a new war. Take the end of WW2. One could argue the ISA was very lenient with Japan. Yet now Japan and the USA arent enemies. The purpose of war is to ensure a better peace. Something most countries fail to execute.

---

That is wholly a recent idea of war - less than 100 years old, which is a blip in time compared to the balance of humanity and our existence and dominance on earth. It's also very much a western idea of modern war.

Prior to that the prupose of war was to conquer and subjugate, and pretty much nothing else. There is a reason why almost all of history is told through the rise and fall of empires and kingdoms - because that is what man has done for 99% of our history on earth.

That whole "greed" thing that infinityag thinks is some newfangled modern invention created by those uber evil CEO's that have collars and chains around every one of us that only he can see? Yeah...not a new concept or invention at all. It goes back as far as what we consider modern humans go back too.

---

Not true. Scipio Africanus (the greatest general in recorded history) knew of this fact and brought about a long standing peace with Carthage and Rome. His peace deal with Carthage after he destroyed their armies showed restraint that could only suggest his desire was the ability for peace.

schmellba99 said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

Cultures can be judged only if one believes in absolute truth.

Put another way, how well of a job does the culture do to reward good and punish bad.
Good: Sacrafice, selflessness, perseverance, respect, beauty (physical, arts, music, etc), valuing human life, valuijg the uniquness of life and valuing human relationships.
Bad: selfish, individualism, pride, destroy beauty, and greed.

It can be succinctly described as cultures that recieve and express love with repect. Those that do it better, are better. Typically those that dont use some sort of arbitrary authority (race, skin tone, male/female) to mistreat others.

---

Tell us in detail how individualism is bad. Same with pride.

---

You need someone to tell you how pride is bad? Pride comes before the downfall. Pride is often written about as being folly (all over the bible).

Individualism is generally thinking about only ones self. Which does not a good society make.

schmellba99 said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

Id like to address the final paragraph separately. How you treat your enemies does matter. I think the treaty of Versailles is a great point on this. The treaty was so punitive that it guaranteed a WW2. That is not the only "Peace deal" which guaranteed a new war. Take the end of WW2. One could argue the ISA was very lenient with Japan. Yet now Japan and the USA arent enemies. The purpose of war is to ensure a better peace. Something most countries fail to execute.

---

That is wholly a recent idea of war - less than 100 years old, which is a blip in time compared to the balance of humanity and our existence and dominance on earth. It's also very much a western idea of modern war.

Prior to that the prupose of war was to conquer and subjugate, and pretty much nothing else. There is a reason why almost all of history is told through the rise and fall of empires and kingdoms - because that is what man has done for 99% of our history on earth.

That whole "greed" thing that infinityag thinks is some newfangled modern invention created by those uber evil CEO's that have collars and chains around every one of us that only he can see? Yeah...not a new concept or invention at all. It goes back as far as what we consider modern humans go back too.

---

You are putting words in my mouth as usual. I never said it is some new modern invention. It is an old human flaw. You just made it up.

It doesn't change the fact these evil CEOs have been greedy and selfish and have raised armies of bootlicking slaves who defend them at their own expense.

texagbeliever said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

Cultures can be judged only if one believes in absolute truth.

Put another way, how well of a job does the culture do to reward good and punish bad.
Good: Sacrafice, selflessness, perseverance, respect, beauty (physical, arts, music, etc), valuing human life, valuijg the uniquness of life and valuing human relationships.
Bad: selfish, individualism, pride, destroy beauty, and greed.

It can be succinctly described as cultures that recieve and express love with repect. Those that do it better, are better. Typically those that dont use some sort of arbitrary authority (race, skin tone, male/female) to mistreat others.

---

Tell us in detail how individualism is bad. Same with pride.

---

You need someone to tell you how pride is bad? Pride comes before the downfall. Pride is often written about as being folly (all over the bible).

Individualism is generally thinking about only ones self. Which does not a good society make.

---

Yeah, I do need an explanation as to how pride is bad. Because it isn't. Neither is individualism. Unless you are a white Christian it seems.

The idea that both of these things are evil or bad is a new line of thinking.

Now, if you were to make the argument that an excess of pride is bad, you'd have a point. Which is what the lessons in the Bible and all of the fables, etc. teach - not that pride in of itself is inherently bad, it's when you allow pride to override everything else that it becomes a weakness that can be detrimental.

Same with individualism, which is not greed. The notion that you should not be unique nor should you be self reliant as something bad is just stupid and it is a new concept that has been pushed to try to deter the idea that concepts like "America First" where we recognize that we are the best country in the world or that it is perfectly fine to be a straight white male that doesn't wear tutus and skirts and does things like hunt, fish, cook meat over a fire, etc. Because these things have been demonized via campaigns from mostly the left. They are not bad. It is not greedy to want to better oneself or to create a life for your kids that is better than yours was or even to make a choice to put your family and yourself above somebody else when it comes to limited resources you have and own.

The idea that these things are somehow bad is just stupid.

What does being white have to do with anything I said?

i got 5. highly recommend

Most women are content with;
-****ing the same top 1% men, when they know they are not monogamous. This is the Trust Funds, athletes, famous, influencers, etc.
-Living vicariously through social media
-Doom scrolling on TikTok
-Getting sexual pleasure from porn and vibrators
-Banging black dudes who will make the children fatherless

To add, insert feminism and the subsequent "girl-boss" message they were brainwashed for a generation.
That's how we got here.

We had 3! All boys!!!

The Shout Your Abortion IG post celebrates this book as a way to “normalize” abortion for children in kindergarten through 2nd grade.

But why even introduce such a violent, adult topic to kids who still sleep with stuffed animals and ask for night lights?

Because reshaping… pic.twitter.com/8MZ5WcSM9g

— Jenna Ellis 🐊 (@realJennaEllis) December 3, 2025

This won't help….

Keep recently born kids away from public school as long as you can; put it off as long as possible. Some new arrivals in the family are already speaking entire concepts and can tell one thing from another, and all this without having gone to school yet. Beginning to see the real arguments that home schooling may have much to recommend it.

In fact, starting to suspect that school slows down development as track the rapid learning of these rascals not yet in kindergarten, ha.

You're part of the problem if your family has less than three children.