White privilege
(files.catbox.moe)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (17)
sorted by:
a) KIKE; noun - "circle; ring; a visible sign of an invisible bond; no beginning; no end" aka an allegory of ongoing flow; suggested by the temporary form within.
b) reading it; responding to it and suggesting judgement upon it implies having "sensed" it. What if the accusation "nonsense" represents ones lack of comprehension towards perceivable?
c) if one from the tribe of daniel makes suggestions in the name of a blue checkmark (hence vetted); then that represents a temptation for others to consent to the suggested.
d) when you look at the picture in the OP then question if your free will of choice is being tempted to consent to a suggested conflict (white vs black); while the one suggesting it stays out of it?
thensensed" it? a) KIKE; noun - "circle; ring flow; suggested by then you look at reprehen your free within.
b) represpon towards perceivable?
c) if ones suggestion it; represent uponding; no end" aka an allegory form within.
d) white vetted consension if ones having; no beginning "sent the ongoing "sent upon for othension if the suggested by the OP the suggested); when you look at reading; a visible sign of a black of choice vetted.
b) responding tempted); when your free within.
d) when the
If this is how you see it; ask yourself if others can comprehend the perceivable sound underneath the suggested words?
One can rearrange the suggested words at will, but others can still perceive the ongoing natural order communicating sound to ones senses. Same with the symmetry underneath the asymmetric forms we choose to shape.
look i like to get weird as much as the next guy, but you're going to have to tone down your schtick if you want a sincere reply from me
It's not so much a shtick as it's me growing my comprehension by adapting to whatever inspiration perceived. I don't write for replies from others; but for the sustenance of self and in response to perceivable inspiration.
What others do with this represents their free will of choice, and so far you chose to reason (want vs not want) about suggested information, hence the conflicting responses.
Try using need over want; perceivable inspiration over suggested information and implication (if/then) over reason (want vs not want; true vs false etc.) when adapting to what you read. Take any of the topics I write about (or any you write about) and try putting it into your perspective; according to your comprehension thereof. I then can adapt while utilizing my different perspective; according to my different comprehension of the same perceivable source (nature; reality; energy; God or whatever you wanna call it).
Maybe you would like to talk about Bernays and how mind-control works or how black and white identitarianism was sold by the parasitic few to the ignorant many? Try utilizing what's written as a tool of inspiration to grow your own comprehension; instead of trying to figure out who writes what you read and into what group you want to confine him within your reasoning.
I'm game with trying to keep it simpler; but I keep my momentum going until others choose to resonate with momentum aka with the ever changing moment.