Guys, so all my relationships look like this. First they spread their legs, like on the first date, and then they try manipulating me for my money.
They can’t do the latter because I ain’t no simp. I ain’t spending my hard earned cash on some average broad with shit for brains. But I wonder where this behaviour comes from? Do women really consider guys to be fools? Are there too many simps that part with their money for the girls? Maybe…
But there are also women teaching these young chicks all types of garbage.
Imagine paying this post-wall slut money to learn anything? But from what I noticed, women are literally from Venus and the content they consume that fries their brain is vastly divergent from what you subject yourself to.
Guys, I feel like I am at a peak of my earning potential, i’m 39. This year I received a 3 year contract for work in local castle as a guide and in the depository. I was just translating a text about historical floors yesterday, this is totally my forte, I speak three languages, and am a history buff. I was elected into the municipal council, and I will finally be opening my airBNB apartment. My bank accounts are literally filling up, because I have large savings in the UK, together with my property portfolio in London. I am truly a late bloomer.
All I do is win!
However, women are only after my money and looks, my expensive Italian cloths. I meet these party girls that only want the coitus, and the cash. And you can’t wife that up. I know of two girls interested in me, and one of them is cute in the face but obese as a pig, and the other one is this timid girl that is not very pretty. And so I decided to save up for a surrogate mother. My last fling that still actually chases me, did not want any children, and she recently got tattoos everywhere, her daddy died last year.
Tattoos are a sign of low character, and I can’t make this girl into arm piece. Something ells me to done my best outfit and raid the clubs more of these arm pieces. I love nothing more than walking on the street with a girl that turns head, and makes both the and women envy me, I can also try going to clubs down and pull some party chicks for a smash and dash, this will be fun. Last time I did this was at the age of 16. Maybe I’ll also get a Tinder just for the fun of.
Really guys, a wife material is a woman that can cook, who will clean your crib, is not a party girl, is smart, respectful, and loyal. Good luck finding something like that. I’d rather bang some long legged blond bimbo with big tits.
And here we come to the crucks of the problem. Monogamy, relationships, dating were made for a different time and are promoting the illusion of marriage and happily ever after. The World has changed, women eat hormones that prevent them getting pregnant. People no longer treat sex as something shameful, in fact the reverse.
Hook up culture is the natural state of the human species
The statistics (both from genetic research and from dating apps) show that women only pick a select few men, this leaves many blokes in the dust. Women would rather just fuck around, there are very few marriage oriented women, and marriage and cohabitation is risky. Women are very volatile. This has always been the case. I propose a getter system, where the women are simply ignored and they need to come into a man’s life with full package, is feminine, cooks, cleans, is family oriented.
But there are ways around it. Want an heir like me, contact s surrogate mother. The latter women have figured it out. Women of the past had like 16 or even more kids. So why not make money popping up kids? This will save me the trouble of dealing with women beyond smash and dash, and my wanting of heirs to my estate.
Modern confusions, and frustrations, need modern solutions.
So, apparently Velma is gay and now she is also black. Take this load of creative writing up your ass, our characters are now intersectional…
I personally never cared about Scooby Doo but this shit made me cancel my HBO Max subscription. I am now officially not subscribed to any streaming service. I do not have Amazon Prime, Netflix, or payed YouTube. Because fuck you, you ain’t gonna see my dollars.
So I watched this short documentary on Vice about British aristocratic residences being built on the backs of slave labour. It is a typical left wing agitprop that shits on the traditional order and European history in my opinion.
In my opinion, every phenomenon needs to be seen in its historical context, including slavery and bondage. You know what else was built using slave labour? The pyramids and just about any other ancient monument. Slavery existed since the time of the Bronze Age, when the world was divided into those that had bronze and those that served those that had bronze.
Matter of fact, the vast majority of people in the pre-modern times lived in some kind of bondage, and there was very little social mobility. Everyone knew his place in the society. In the Middle Ages, the vast majority of people were enserfed peasants. In the cities, the guilds were hereditary affairs, where sons would inherit the father’s trade. The nobles were the warrior and priestly class, and they did not always live the high life of hunting and banquets. This high life came with the obligation of military service to the suzerain. The suzerain had to be strong because he could easily be deposed by ambitious rivals.
The transatlantic slave trade could be viewed as an injustice done against the Africans but the European choice of African slaves was motivated by their availability. Wars between the African kingdoms generated a large number of captives that the economies of the African states could not accommodate. It was wiser to sell them to the Europeans for exotic products such as guns. Without this African assistance, the transatlantic slave trade would not have been possible.
It was however the Anglo-Saxons and other West Europeans, who were the first abolitionists in the World, and were responsible for eliminating the practice in their colonies. This is an unprecedented historical development because the practice of slavery was common since the pre-historic times. And it all happened in the Western countries. From the eighteenth century onwards, various forms of bondage in the West began to be abolished. Serfdom, the guilds, noble titles and privileges…
The rest of the World was gradually assimilated to this development.
From the olden days, the Holy See in Rome sought to conquer the Holy Rus’. Alexander Nevsky had to repel an invasion of the Teutonic Knights but there was a much more fearsome foe than the knights, the Rzeczpospolita, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Both constitutive realms of this empire began expanding their domains into Rus’ already in the fourteenth century with the seizure of Halychyna by the Kingdom of Poland. Coincidently, a gene test my brother did shows we are descended from the Lithuanians that conquered Rus’ and there is family legend about a “Polish” ancestry on my Russian side.
There was a difference in faith, while the Westerners answered to the Pope, Rus’ answered to the Eastern Churches and eventually, Moscow became free of Constantinople following the Ottoman conquest, and the only rightful spiritual authority in Rus’. Fearing this Muscovite influence, the Polish masters of Ukraine decided to bring the Orthodox Churches under Roman Catholic control. In 1595 at the Union of Brest, the bishops of Little and White Russia under Rzeczpospolita accepted Roman domination. Several decades have passed and a rebellion erupted in Little Russia, which saw the Cossacks swear fealty to the Russian Tsar. This has plunged Ukraine into a destructive period known as the Ruin, which resolved itself really only in the eighteenth century with the Russian Empire coming to dominate the entirety of Little Russia, and the neutralisation of the Rzeczpospolita.
But unfortunately, the Russian Empire failed to take Halychyna in the division of Poland. Halychyna, or Galicia as it is also known, is a part of Rus. West of Lvov, there lies a town called Rava Rus’ka, that’s where Rus’ begins and it goes all the way to Vladivostok. Halychyna fell under the Austrian rule, and the Uniate Church survived there. This later served as the nucleus out of which will rise Ukrainian nationalism. Starting in the second half of the nineteenth century, the Austria-Hungary, as the Habsburg realms came to be known, entered into alliance with the German Empire, the Russian Empire joined France in an Entente. The Habsburgs became enemies of Russia.
Austria was faced with a problem of Russians on its territory. The Austrians viewed so called Russophillism of many of the inhabitants of Halychyna with suspicion. Thousands of people from Halychyna made annual pilgrimage to the Pochayevskaya Lavra, an Orthodox monastery right across the border from Austrian Halychyna in the Russian Empire. The Austrian authorities began repressing the local Russophiles. Maxim Sandovych, an Orthodox covert from the Uniate Church was tortured to death by the Austrian authorities prior to the First World War. After the Russian defeat by the Central Powers in 1915, the Austrians have interned the Russian population in concentration camps in Terezín in Bohemia, and in Thalerhof in Styria. Wikipedia has this to say about Thalerhof:
Terezín became the site of a genocide again during WWII, when the Jews were interned there.
Simultaneously with the repression, the Austrians have supported a development of a Ukrainian identity that would be different from Russian. Remember dear readers, national identities are always imposed from above and people can always be reprogrammed. Polish nobility long toyed with the Ukrainian idea. According to Mikhail Onufrienko, a blogger from Kharkov that now lives in Crimea in exile, the idea to rename the South Western part of Rus’ into Ukraine originated already in the sixteenth century with the Jesuit envoy, Antonio Possevino. Part of the reason the Polish rebellions against Russian rule of the nineteenth century failed was because the Russian peasants didn’t go along with their Polish masters. Many of these Poles and early adepts of the Ukrainian national idea fled to Austrian Halychyna, where they continued their work with Austrian support.
A good example of the Austrian support for Ukrainian nationalism is Mikhailo Hrushevsky, who was given a cushy job of a professor in Lvov and a hefty grant to write Ukrainian history, a historical conception that removes Ukraine from the common Russian history. If you were to write the true history of Ukraine, you would have to start with Nikolay Kostomarov, Ivan Franko, the afore mentioned Hrushevsky, and not somewhere deep in the past, like in the Cossack period. The Cossacks referred to themselves as Russians. I would not even speak much about Shevchenko, who also identified as Russian. But Hrushevsky did just that, relabelled them all as Ukrainians. I call the conception that Ukraine emerged out of Ukrainian nationalism, which was heavily supported by the enemies of Russia, “a short history of Ukraine.”
By the First World War, there was a sizeable community of newly created Ukrainians in Halychyna. The first time the nationality “Ukrainian” appeared officially was in 1916, when the future Emperor Charles I inspected the troops in Halychyna, and declared everyone in the camp to be Ukrainian. After the revolution in Russia, the Communists, who were opposed to Russian nationalism made the decision to break down the Russian nation by employing the Austrian project, and began a programme of mass creating the Ukrainians. For this purpose, they brought many teachers from Halychyna, including the aforementioned Mikhailo Hrushevsky. Russia’s Ukrainian headache is a bolshevik legacy.
Early Ukrainian nationalism was very much centred around the Uniate Church, the Austrians viewed the papists as loyal citizens. Ukrainism was therefore an extension of the previous Union, the Union of Brest. In more recent times an idea of a united Europe appeared, and since the 1990s, the European Union is bringing these ideas into reality. But parallel with the European Union that we all know from the European Parliament, and the European Commission, there is also a spiritual union and the ideological founder of European integration, the Pan-European Union.
The importance of union with Rome has slightly diminished in recent times with the decline of Catholicism and religiosity in the West, and the centre of control gravitated eventually to Brussels. However, there is a lot of “Habsburg” influence on the symbolic basis of the EU. You see, the Pan-European Union has given the European Union all of its symbols. The circle of twelve stars:
The twelve stars symbolise the twelve signs of the Zodiac, and the number 12 stands for completion and perfection. Note the Cross, as if indicating an inheritance from the Roman Catholic project. The secular EU, and the European Council of course do not have the cross in their flag. Furthermore, the anthem of the European Union, the Ode to Joy, was adopted by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in the 1970s on the suggestion made in 1955 by Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi, a son of a Bohemian Nobleman and an upperclass Japanese gaijin chaser, the founder and the first head of the Pan-European Union. Now check out the Ode to Joy on the Euromaidan, they even created new updated lyrics for it in Ukrainian. After Coudenhove-Kalergi, the head of the Pan-European Union was Otto von Habsburg.
It seems like the Austrian nobility found itself a new tool of domination. They have switched Catholicism for European integration. Ukraine suffers a new period of strife currently, Ruin 2.0, caused by a desire for another Union, as expressed in the Cargo Cult festival, the Euromaidan. Ukrainians seem again victims of some Austrian voodoo. And the EU is not even able to make Ukraine a candidate for membership.
Don’t be a cuck, don’t fall under the spell of an Austrian voodoo. Although, I have to say many adepts of Ukrainism are also adepts of another Austrian voodoo, created by the arch-opponent of Coudenhove-Kalergi.
According to private polling shared with Intelligencer by Democratic data scientist David Shor, roughly 30 percent of American women under 25 identify as LGBT; for women over 60, that figure is less than 5 percent.