Such a tough choice:
Decentralized and anonymous currency that doesn't get inflated by the money printing jewish bankers, upholding the consumer debt and usury based economy
or fiat.
Nobody supporting WW3 or Bitcoin is another big advantage for the people.
You went full retard there. Almost fooled me you'd make a sane post.
Verily I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you - John 6:53
There's no life without the divine sacraments Baptism and Eucharist as found in His Church.
Christianity is the continuation of the Hebrew messianic tradition of the Torah and the prophets. Christ and His Apostles were jewish. They formed the Church and preached the Gospel all over the world. Byzantium fell but the Church was kept alive and Christians preserved their faith and identity in the Ottoman Empire. This is why after its disillusionment, all the Balkan countries gained independence and returned their Christian monarchies. Enslaving people doesn't necessarily convert them. See the jews in Egypt and Babylon.
With 40k subscribers and that dumb name this nigga ain't going anywhere.
Sure, if you mean Satan has many faces. It doesn't matter if they're atheists, freemasons, jews or outright satanists - they're all worshipping the same being in the end.
The ancient Greeks and southern Italian from Jesus’ time are more like Shem than Japheth.
Is this why Romans got along so well with the Jews?
They aren’t genetically white. Just because they accomplished a-lot doesn’t mean they’re white. You can’t just claim every civilization that accomplished a lot as white just because you feel like it.
Don't strawman me - I didn't say they did a lot, I said they are the fathers of European (WHITE) Civilization.
Considering who the jacobins were (illuminists), I'd guess he's a Satan enjoyer.
You literally can't understand what I'm saying - why do you assume the Nordic people or the Slavs are the standard of whiteness and not the Greek and the Romans? Of course people from the Levant would be genetically closer to southern Europeans because they live in similar climates and are close to each other. That doesn't make them less white though - it makes Levant people closer to whites and not vice versa.
Imagine going to a Julius Caesar and saying to him he's not white because he's not like the barbarians or the vikings. This is the most retarded bs I've heard in a while.
It’s luck that made every civilization great. Some civilizations have a string of great leaders and the right resources to go out and conquer other nations and make advancements. They do and then become great.
Thanks for destroying your own argument which was that the greatness of a civilization was tied to how smart its people are. Turns out it's all about luck.
Only populations that are white are Slavs, WASP, celts, and Nords. They are genetically closer to each other than any other population group. Deal with it, the southern Italians and Greeks aren’t white.
Lol, WASP is a socio-economical term. And that's surely the case because you said it - no need to support that claim.
Btw, did you know Hitler didn't consider slavs to be aryan/white? Turns out everyone's making up the category as they please and I'm actually right in saying it's a metaphysical construction and not a reflection of biological reality. I refer to the Biblical origin of the races originating from the sons of Noah where white people are descended from Japheth. Why should we go with your definition? Go tell the Greek - the people considered to be the fathers of Western civilization - they're not white and see how it goes. I dare you to show me any scientific or academic publication that backs up your claim that Italians and Greeks aren't white.
Greeks during alexanders time were closer to levatine arabs than germans genetically. Roman italians from the time of Christ were also closer to the levant. They weren't white genetically, deal with it.
What kind of argument is that? Greeks were white. So were Romans. So are today's Greek and Italians. I don't care who they were close to - why are Germanic people the criteria of whiteness? How do you determine who's white genetically? Is there a "white gene"? Whiteness is a metaphysical category, not just a biological set of traits. Don't you get you're being ad hoc?
The same criteria white supremacists use, which ethnicity had the highest living standards, most power, and advancements.
The point is that there's no direct comparison. Carthage dominated Africa but were crushed by Rome when they were confronted. The same happened to the Indian empire, China, Japan, the Aztecs, etc. You have an overly simplistic view of history and economics as if civilizations are pokemon cards with explicit stats that can be compared.
Btw, how do you rule out luck? You appealed to luck as being the reason for white hegemony - how do you know it's not luck that made those other non-white civilizations great? Maybe it has nothing to do with being smart and capable? You only dig yourself deeper.
Dude, persian people are white. Only a small percentage of Iranians are arab/kurdish. Go to google and take a look yourself. You continue to disprove yourself. Do you understand that muslim≠arab - one is religion, the other is ethnicity? Not all muslim nations are arabic. Why do you even talk about ethnicities when you have no clue about the subject? You literally thought South Italians were not white...
Cut the bs with that "non-white people" where you can plug all kinds of white people because they don't fit your narrow category of nordic people. If all non-white people are on par, prove that blacks are as smart too.
Can you back that claim? Do you have any paper that can corroborate this?
The historians literally described the Roman’s as looking noticeably different from the “white” Germans.
No shit. Does that make South Europeans (Italians and Greeks) not white? Where did you get the idea that all white people are nordic vikings?
It’s backed up by the fact the smartest ethnicity has changed throughout history and hasn’t been whites for most of it.
How did you determine what the smartest ethnicity at any given time was?
Such a poor argument. There's an assumption that at any given time, the "smartest people" formed the most powerful empires. First off, most of the empires you listed existed parallel to each other in different parts of the world without destroying each other. The white Christian European civilization dominated the whole world for a very long time. No other civilization achieved global hegemony.
Mediterranean people are still white except for the arabs living in Africa. Have you seen Roman statues and images? Dudes were white, deal with it.
My point is that what determines the smartest ethnic groups are just circumstantial luck which allows the populace to take over neighboring countries, trade routes, and to acquire knowledge and advancements. Whites aren't just better than everybody else, contrary to what white supremacists would want you to believe.
Great assertion. How do you back it up? Do you think appealing to luck and chance is a good argument when discussing large scale historic events?
I mean, even if modern astronomy isn't fake it still pretty much proved life on Earth to be unique. It's been 60 years of space exploration and still nothing. But no amount of evidence will make one a believer. Christ Himself said that even if one rose from the dead, they would still not believe. It' a moral problem having to do with pride and not an intellectual one.
"The goyim know! Quick, release the UFO disinfo."
Soylent green anyone?
The Middle Ages were pretty anonymous and everyone believed in free will back then, being a Christian. Also jews were mostly excluded from civilized society. I wonder what changed...
and then trying to use my low-effort insult in an attempt to debunk my main argument.
That' a cope. The one sentence you focused on has nothing to do with the following paragraph I wrote debunking your argument. You're obviously filibustering trying your best not to address my counter.
And I replied to it in a single sentence. And in that reply I addressed your argument after that.
Dude
Let me guess: you have your money in bitcoin and are down 50%
If they spent it in the village the wealth is still in their economy so it's fine. Spending gold doesn't make it disappear. Rome did that and it worked well. It's fine unless you have jews living in your village.
No, it's a retarded incoherent premise that betrays lack of financial understanding. Nothing to do with how bitcoin is performing currently.
People use both gold and bitcoin, as well as other assets to store value. They invest their fiat money into those assets. You may say bitcoin is a poor store of value, and you'd still be wrong, but at least it's a coherent claim. Your causal reasoning is wrong too - the reason for inflation is increase of money supply. That extra money is either spent, invested or saved. People who buy bitcoin do so to save money and have more money in the future (and not be slaves to the central banking system eventually) - even if it weren't for bitcoin this money would go to other assets that do that like gold, property or stocks and not spent for consoomer goods. But even if all the bitcoin money (~1-2 trillion) suddenly flooded the global market, it would still be very insufficient to cause hyperinflation. There are ~$150 trillion broad money in existence and the US debt is 39 trillion - It would hardly move the needle at this point.
Some crypto isn't. Bitcoin is though. If it's centralized, hat's the central institution that creates and controls bitcoin?