War Room Lounge v63

[JDragon]

I am beginning to suspect 343 is a magical number

 

[Prokofievian]

I am beginning to suspect 343 is a magical number

A = 432 is for the international jewry.

F = 343 is the TRUE VÖLKISCH frequency.

 

[JDragon]

If you keep seeing number 343, what is the meaning behind the message?

This three-digit number is one of the most interesting angel numbers, because of its specific composition. It is consisted of digits 3 and 4, put in a specific order. This is a number of specific energy. Let us find out the secret meaning and symbolism behind this one.
https://angelnumber.org/343-angel-number-meaning-and-symbolism/

 

[JDragon]

So 7*7*7 = 343

 

[Prokofievian]

Just thinking carefully about things here, but cuckoldry is a moral imperative. The strongest genes are combined with the best providers. Those who disagree are emotionally rattled beta males unfit to be bulls, but who have yet to turn towards their mothers. I, an intellectual with a python cock, am just being rational by suggesting that these people who view cuckoldry as ''harmful'' submit to their natural positions as drones to the queens and warriors of our species.

 

[Trotsky]

lmfao. A left wing king.

I'm not familiar with @EL CORINTHIAN's argument, its context, or much about King George generally, but I'll give him some slack and assume he was speaking in relative terms. It is possible for an autocrat, such as Cyrus the Great, to be unusually liberal and left-leaning. Of course, it doesn't make them a leftist or a communist (I think the term "left wing" kind of necessarily precludes royalty historically, but Corinthian may not know that), but it may well support the argument that, relative to their time in history and the nature of their station, they were left-leaning.

@Jack V Savage

Continuing the Robin Hanson discussion, are you taking issue with this post and in particular the claim that "biologically, cuckoldry is a bigger reproductive harm than rape"?

You need to drop that turd. I wasn't impressed with...well, anything that I'd briefly read from him, but that Twitter thread with that enormous and embarrassing failure in logic by him should keep anyone from taking him seriously.

Well, he lets his female friends get drugged right in front of him...so what does that tell you?

I had to un-ignore to see this, so, knowing your dishonesty, lowness, and overall creepiness, particularly when you've found someone that you can cry about at the top of your lungs, I have to assume that you've been peddling this fairly often unquestioned. Of course, it's a complete lie, but I trust that most won't take the words of a sexless race warrior and mass-shooter-in-the-making to heart. I'd say that I don't care about it or the fact that the bumbling and shameless moderation here would sooner target people for returning accusations of stupidity than for openly spreading lies that someone is an accessory to rape, but of course that would be a lie as well.

 

[Trotsky]

Just thinking carefully about things here, but cuckoldry is a moral imperative. The strongest genes are combined with the best providers. Those who disagree are emotionally rattled beta males unfit to be bulls, but who have yet to turn towards their mothers. I, an intellectual with a python cock, am just being rational by suggesting that these people who view cuckoldry as ''harmful'' submit to their natural positions as drones to the queens and warriors of our species.

I'm...actually surprised I haven't seen this argument before.

 

[Tycho- Taylor's Version]

Just thinking carefully about things here, but cuckoldry is a moral imperative. The strongest genes are combined with the best providers. Those who disagree are emotionally rattled beta males unfit to be bulls, but who have yet to turn towards their mothers. I, an intellectual with a python cock, am just being rational by suggesting that these people who view cuckoldry as ''harmful'' submit to their natural positions as drones to the queens and warriors of our species.

Oh I like this turn.

 

[EL CORINTHIAN]

I'm not familiar with @EL CORINTHIAN's argument, its context, or much about King George generally, but I'll give him some slack and assume he was speaking in relative terms. It is possible for an autocrat, such as Cyrus the Great, to be unusually liberal and left-leaning. Of course, it doesn't make them a leftist or a communist (I think the term "left wing" kind of necessarily precludes royalty historically, but Corinthian may not know that), but it may well support the argument that, relative to their time in history and the nature of their station, they were left-leaning.

It's up to you but if you follow the initial quote it will lead you into the thread where it's all laid out before @Falsedawn decided he was above forming a cogent argument.

I'll save you time however if you decide not to but in a nutshell the fundamental disagreement we find ourselves in is that falsedawn fails to admit or cannot perceive that American conservatism, at it's core is rooted in individualism, anti-statism, and a largely unfettered economy. This is why to me any centralised authority that negates any of those central tenants is not inherently right wing by today's standards. No one in America is calling for the monarchy and it's stupid to think so.

 

[Tycho- Taylor's Version]

Really cuckoldry is maximised fitness from the female perspective only. Maxed genes and maxed resources, as prok said.

The male ideal would be something like a concubine of perfectly loyal young women funded by the State. Or maybe by a hugely profitable corporation owned by the male, if boosted ego/status is a component.

Real life will be a product of the tension between those.

 

[Falsedawn]

It's up to you but if you follow the initial quote it will lead you into the thread where it's all laid out before @Falsedawn decided he was above forming a cogent argument.

I'll save you time however if you decide not to but in a nutshell the fundamental disagreement we find ourselves in is that falsedawn fails to admit or cannot perceive that American conservatism, at it's core is rooted in individualism, anti-statism, and a largely unfettered economy. This is why to me any centralised authority that negates any of those central tenants is not inherently right wing by today's standards. No one in America is calling for the monarchy and it's stupid to think so.

Did you not go off about how you didn't care about the "warped American political sides", even bemoaning that I "kept bringing up Trump", while you're preaching to me about "American rightism"?

Dog, you know we can go back and read that shit right? Lmaoooooo

 

[Falsedawn]

I'm not familiar with @EL CORINTHIAN's argument, its context, or much about King George generally, but I'll give him some slack and assume he was speaking in relative terms. It is possible for an autocrat, such as Cyrus the Great, to be unusually liberal and left-leaning. Of course, it doesn't make them a leftist or a communist (I think the term "left wing" kind of necessarily precludes royalty historically, but Corinthian may not know that), but it may well support the argument that, relative to their time in history and the nature of their station, they were left-leaning.

The problem is that Concession thinks the founding fathers were the glorious liberty loving right wingers fighting against the angry oppressive leftist king.

This is after he declared ISIS, communists, and Nazis left wing, which really tells me the full extent of his thought into political divisions is "Left = Bad, Right = Good". Because anyone who can honestly say that Karl Marx had more in common with religious iconoclasts than Eugene Debs is out of his fucking mind.

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

I'm not familiar with @EL CORINTHIAN's argument, its context, or much about King George generally, but I'll give him some slack and assume he was speaking in relative terms. It is possible for an autocrat, such as Cyrus the Great, to be unusually liberal and left-leaning. Of course, it doesn't make them a leftist or a communist (I think the term "left wing" kind of necessarily precludes royalty historically, but Corinthian may not know that), but it may well support the argument that, relative to their time in history and the nature of their station, they were left-leaning.



You need to drop that turd. I wasn't impressed with...well, anything that I'd briefly read from him, but that Twitter thread with that enormous and embarrassing failure in logic by him should keep anyone from taking him seriously.



I had to un-ignore to see this, so, knowing your dishonesty, lowness, and overall creepiness, particularly when you've found someone that you can cry about at the top of your lungs, I have to assume that you've been peddling this fairly often unquestioned. Of course, it's a complete lie, but I trust that most won't take the words of a sexless race warrior and mass-shooter-in-the-making to heart. I'd say that I don't care about it or the fact that the bumbling and shameless moderation here would sooner target people for returning accusations of stupidity than for openly spreading lies that someone is an accessory to rape, but of course that would be a lie as well.

Your words, not mine. Own it.

 

[Prokofievian]

I'm not familiar with @EL CORINTHIAN's argument, its context, or much about King George generally, but I'll give him some slack and assume he was speaking in relative terms. It is possible for an autocrat, such as Cyrus the Great, to be unusually liberal and left-leaning. Of course, it doesn't make them a leftist or a communist (I think the term "left wing" kind of necessarily precludes royalty historically, but Corinthian may not know that), but it may well support the argument that, relative to their time in history and the nature of their station, they were left-leaning.

It actually is a stretch. The specific monarch in question here is King George III, who was not just a monarch (and thus as far right as possible), but was a contemporaneous monarch with the formation of the very left right metaphor that we still use today. This trend to completely redefine everything bad onto the left, and everything good, even if it never existed onto the right is an internet libertarian subterfuge aimed to bamboozle people who are unaware of political theory and history. There is no logic behind it, or end to the stupidity, they will define ideologies that have been in wars of extermination against one another as the same. Example:

Whatever the fuck this is supposed to mean.

 

[Prokofievian]

Really cuckoldry is maximised fitness from the female perspective only. Maxed genes and maxed resources, as prok said.

The male ideal would be something like a concubine of perfectly loyal young women funded by the State. Or maybe by a hugely profitable corporation owned by the male, if boosted ego/status is a component.

Real life will be a product of the tension between those.

It's also good for the affa males. They get to produce all kinds of lebensborn for the drones (betas) to look after. Fun for everyone! Cuckold a beta, today.

 

[Trotsky]

The problem is that Concession thinks the founding fathers were the glorious liberty loving right wingers fighting against the angry oppressive leftist king.

This is after he declared ISIS, communists, and Nazis left wing, which really tells me the full extent of his thought into political divisions is "Left = Bad, Right = Good". Because anyone who can honestly say that Karl Marx had more in common with religious iconoclasts than Eugene Debs is out of his fucking mind.

Okay, yeah, he gets no more sympathy. If you post that the Nazis and (good lord) ISIS are left-wing, then you are absolutely insisting on being stupid. I've never even seen that argument about ISIS and would be very morbidly interested to read it.

 

[EL CORINTHIAN]

Did you not go off about how you didn't care about the "warped American political sides", even bemoaning that I "kept bringing up Trump", while you're preaching to me about "American rightism"?

Dog, you know we can go back and read that shit right? Lmaoooooo

You seem to be having an extremely difficult time seperating what Trump does with the existence of American conservatism. Like if Democrats haven't voted in some Communist to lead then does that mean that communism all of a sudden doesn't exist? You seem to be taking that approach for what ever reason.

Anyways, this doesn't take away from the fact that you cannot answer what American rightism even is. Why, for instance, are many European. Right wingers considered left by American standards? Why has Trump, for example, been criticised for not being a TRUE right winger? If you have such a wrap on this argument it really shouldn't be difficult to answer these relatively simple questions....no you just want to equate American rightism to Nazism which is the identarian Tom foolery you indulge in due to your partisan bias.

Go on answer it. I'll wait. Lawlz.

 

[Quipling]

Attn haters and losers: boots for the office have been a huge success. I'll probably wind up getting another pair.

 

[Trotsky]

Attn haters and losers: boots for the office have been a huge success. I'll probably wind up getting another pair.

 

[Sketch]

Your words, not mine. Own it.

You should put his quote into your signature like I’ve done. It’s easier to read and it allows people to click the quote and bring them directly to his post.