Western Common Ground

Retpoŝtadreso
Komento *
Dosiero
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

File: 1425602087487.jpeg (203,83 KB, 720x938, 360:469, heroes.jpeg)

Western Common Ground Carl von Clausewitz 03/06/15 (ven) 00:34:47 f316c2 No.88

This a clone from /pol/; I think it might be more relevant here.

Is there a de facto white religion?

I mean, pic related contains some figures that are regarded as heroes in the west. At first glance, they seem disparate, but I think there's actually a common thread running through all of them.

I think whites are humanistic. They want what is best for people, they want peace, and they want evil to be defeated. Now you might be thinking, "well, who doesn't?", but I think many cultures don't. The chinese are notorious for only looking after themselves and their kin, Muslims have no tolerance for anything but Islam, Jews have only fought for Jews since Joshua's times. Some other groups have no intractable, abstract notions of honor, sacrifice, and morality. We don't often live up to these ideals, but other groups flat out don't have them.

My point is that whites whether liberal or conservative actually share innate cultural values. They revere Ghandi and MLK because they are thought of as advocating for their people in the face of evil. Just as Joan of Arc and Saint George did. The modern paradigm hasn't shifted our values really; it's shifted how we see the players of history and the current day.

White people still want evil to perish, not as a means to any concrete material gain, but as a moral imperative. They admire sacrifice for others, and want to see all people live well. The only thing that's changed is that the liberals see the church as evil.

But the reason why is kinda ironic. They think the church puts the interests of its owners and powerful groups before all else. Why is that bad? Because we're all supposed to love each other as ourselves. Why? Because in MAT 22:35-40, Jesus tells us to love our neighbor as ourselves and God above all else.

Even liberal whites cling to traditional Christian values, they just apply them to history and politics through a weird point of view.

Carl von Clausewitz 03/06/15 (ven) 06:30:42 0d7f5c No.89

File: 1425623442186.jpg (130,14 KB, 1024x1024, 1:1, Knight_Templar.jpg)

Maybe I should complete my thought here.

It's pretty clear with stuff like the Rotherham scandal and the institution of sharia law in Dearborn, that Muslims are spreading, that they are harmful, and that the current culture of PC speech policing doesn't work.

95% of Britons think multiculti is a failure,as do the majority of Germans, and Merkel herself said that it's a fuck up.

We need a church to rise again. A humanistic Christianity with a focus on helping people instead of being a cult of martyrdom. Such a church would appeal to the liberals' ideals of human impact, while giving them an opportunity to come back into the fold of white culture. If anyone's interested, I can go through my (admittedly shaky) theological justification for such a church, and we can speculate about the feasibility and/or specifics of what it could be.

Carl von Clausewitz 03/06/15 (ven) 22:29:41 307f2f No.127

File: 1425680981343.jpeg (8,91 KB, 194x300, 97:150, knight.jpeg)

Self bumping with more diatribe.

I think we can really capitalize on the modern sense of isolation that liberals always whine about. By making concessions to their aversion to tradition on the one, and appealing to the comfy feelings they get from community and ritual, we could open some to the notion of an identity instead of their post modern moral malaise.

I think if the church just did simple shit like make walking around the neighborhood picking up trash or something, it would be able to distinguish itself, garner positive attention, and build community at the same time.

I know this is a pipe dream, but I'd love anyone else's thoughts on this or any of the themes this post addresses.

Carl von Clausewitz 03/06/15 (ven) 22:53:34 671f16 No.131

File: 1425682414236.jpg (96,54 KB, 640x845, 128:169, Wien-_Parlament-Tacitus.jpg)

>>127
I don't think any amount of good will towards liberals will make them change their mind.
Poverty and a lack of character creates liberals and how do you build character in a complete stranger?
Imho, the only way to reach liberals is by showing them that they are digging their own grave and that their solutions are a problem
Their marxist economic policies do not spread poverty around, not wealth, and their cultural marxist warfare tactics do not increase
liberty, they destroy it, by destroying all points of reference. The freedom to live in a prison or to commit suicide is no freedom at all.
Having said that, i must admit that i have trouble wrapping my mind around liberals and left-wing thought in general.
Its virtues and stated goals nevermind the hidden agenda and "unintended consequences" are completely foreign to me.

Carl von Clausewitz 03/06/15 (ven) 23:16:11 307f2f No.132

File: 1425683771286.jpeg (125,86 KB, 400x310, 40:31, Look At My Invisible Chal….jpeg)

>>131

I understand completely.

I'm not really trying to talk about explicit concessions to liberal philosophy, I meant using their emotionality as a back door into their minds. By talking about humanistic issues, we can grab their attention, but by careful crafting of a church/ organization we can offer them the emotional comfort of being on the moral side of history and of being in a community.

I guess I'm not looking to convince die-hard SJW's to luv jeebus, I'm trying to clean up the perception of the church, and put it's money where liberals think it's mouth should be. I think we could attract the more moderate from each wing. Kinda a liberal christianity, to gain the middle ground from each faction. The goal is to let people get acclimated to having their own identity again, and then slowly using Biblical justification to garner resistance to Islam and Marxist influence.

I can totally see why you'd think that this will fail. Could be that they think the church is icky. Could be that I've mis-identified what makes liberal tick. Could be that there's about three of them that actually care either way. But I think it's a good discussion to have because if we don't at least try to rally the West, then we'll only see our mistakes when New York is under Sharia law.

Carl von Clausewitz 03/06/15 (ven) 23:51:40 24853e No.133

>>132
There's no question that the lack of spirituality is making people sick
If you don't think the way you act, you'll act the way you think and that's becoming the dominant way of justifying ones own nonsense.
"I'm a brony, i guess that means i'm an atheistic hedonist"

I think one way that christians have reached people throughout the ages is by not accusing them, but by showing them that there's a better way.
The devil is the accusing business and we're in the business of saving souls.
This board focuses on (culture) war, but one key way to win this fight, is by not fighting and instead encouraging better ideas,
creating beauty rather than destroying uglyness, because when you try to destroy uglyness you become ugly yourself,
If you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you, etc, etc.

I think preaching and evangelism as a strategic option are probably dead, because you can only reach people who are already listening and want to better their lives.
The bible is also outdated in the way it is told. We need a new bible, a carrier medium brings all the teachings of christianity into a new format that people can actually understand.
Even many christians today have trouble understanding the true meaning of the bible.

I'm a metaphorist, so i don't have a lot of sentimental feelings towards the church and the bible.
They have a miserable track record of reaching people in the 20th and 21st century.
Churches are empty, almost completely irrelevant.
The church is completely inept and has completely failed when it comes to reaching the current generation.
Christianity is in a major down turn. Sure, there are two billions of christians around the world, but how many of them practice christianity and how many will pass their virtues on to their children?

>I guess I'm not looking to convince die-hard SJW's to luv jeebus,
Probably not, but i think can convince him to love Jesus without mentioning his name or even without mentioning religion.
I think we can turn the tide of "religion is responsible for evil in the world", but in the meantime we have to reach people
and that can not be accomplished by telling people that jesus performed miracles, increased wine and fish to feed the masses. Major Metaphor
They're going to think that you are crazy.
The most important thing of course is to educate yourself and your children and your family and friends.
These are the people you have the most influence over.

Carl von Clausewitz 03/07/15 (sab) 00:29:54 307f2f No.134

>>133

I agree on some things, but I think we might have different goals on others.

First thing, I don't want to bother finding stats, but allegedly conversions have been increasing lately all over, so make of the what you will.

I think your stuff about creating good rather than destroying evil is excellent. I think this kind of thought will give us some great insights into how to hook new people.

It seems to me that you, as with many others, think that most conventional Christians don't really follow the teachings of the Bible, and that the use of the Church by creepy hegemonies has left a pretty substantial and legitimate wont for morals and action on the part of Christians. But this is actually and opportunity in disguise.

By just making overtures at being better (like making part of each mass involve community service somehow), we can show that we are a new kind of church. By using Biblical sophistry, we can champion issues du jour like science education, or environmentalism. Once we've established our image as the church that actually does nice things, we can start to use that same sophistry to push back against Islam. We can use sneaky wording to co-opt the instincts that the left uses to sub divide us. We all know that feminists and MGTOWs are people who want to be part of a team and are angry (probably just generally).

If we can launch a humanist church that makes allowances for the liberals' notions of morality, we can slowly use the communities that it offers to garner philosophical support for Western ideas and laws.

Carl von Clausewitz 03/07/15 (sab) 00:38:53 307f2f No.135

>>134

As a follow up, this is what the Unitarian Universalists are doing. It's just that their organization is spineless, and it repels Christians by being explicitly secular, and lacks the cultural oomph of Biblical evidence and imagery.

Carl von Clausewitz 03/07/15 (sab) 02:30:45 24853e No.139

File: 1425695445692.jpg (60,48 KB, 572x800, 143:200, 1414787607114.jpg)

>>134
Imagine a man who is 99% christian (if there is such a thing),
but he is an adulterer and he rejects that adultery is a sin and no matter what you say or do, that is his view.

Now imagine that this man had an accidenty and lost a lot of memories, including his christian memories.
You decide that you want to pay him a visit and teach him about the prince of peace.
You visit him in the hospital and and the first thing he tells you is what he wants to commit adultery.
Should you argue with him? Should you annoy and upset him? Should you risk being thrown out by him or one of the nurses?
To me, it makes more sense to teach him about the 99% first, rather than arguing with him about the 1%

That's how i feel about spreading christianity.