The "Church" of this religion is mainly composed of the Media, the Universities and Multi-national corporations.

The people must listen to and obey the commands coming from the religious leaders, no matter how absurd (e.g., inject your 5-year old with an experimental vaccine to protect him for 6 months against mild side effects of what would most likely be a cold for them; homosexuality is good; families are bad; whites are bad, etc.).

It's a sad state of affairs, but it seems like this Beast is over-taking the world completely.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44075734)

This except "the shift to SJW is going to be permanent". That is absolutely 100% false, we will end up with a return to authoritarianism in one guise or another but it will *not* operate under the auspices of this super gay and retarded faggotry. Neither Nazi Germany nor Soviet Russia were Weimar Germany, and there's a very good reason for that.

(((SJW))) is inherently self-defeating / doomed ideology because it both ignores basic biological realities -- "IQ is a myth! Everyone is equally smart! JaBron can be a nuclear scientist just like Eugene! Men are women and 'having a family' is stupid and old fashioned!" -- and also actively fetishizes literal and mental and spiritual weakness (oppression olympics, "OMG look at the brave and beautiful crippled Downs Syndrome model isn't she so hot publicly agree of else you're fired", etc.). That's a guaranteed lethal combination that has no future under any conceivable timeline. I don't think the Jewish commies will win, but maybe I'm wrong and smart people can and do disagree with me about that. By contrast, anyone who thinks that (((SJW))) will ultimately win and become the longterm dominant ideology is just a fucking retard who can't see past the nose on his face.

It is currently ascendant because, as you note, Christianity is dying and good times create weak men and we are coming off of literally several decades that will be looked back upon as the *best* times in all of human history, period. Those times have created the weakest men in human history. But hard times are unquestionably coming, and hard times always -- always -- create strong men, and strong men will NOT abide (((SJW))) faggotry for very long. The idea that a inherently unstable coalition of wheezing neurotic kikes, dumb violent blacks, limpwristed screechy faggots, extremely mentally ill trannies, and frigid bitter physically weak middle aged shrews who literally *no one* likes (including other shrews) will just run the planet for the next 1000 years or whatever and straight white/asian/brown men who build shit and fight wars and do math and engineering and fundamentally dislike all of those groups will just shrug and be like "oh well whaddaya gonna do?" and keep working hard to make the lives of their ruling class easy and wonderful as the ruling class shits on them and blames them for everything bad in the most obnoxious ways possible is so unfathomably stupid that I don't even know what to say. Haha, yeah, haha!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44076043)

I agree that there is a lot of gangrene that needs to be chopped off.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44076203)

people are waking up to the spiritually vacant evangelical mega-churches in the face of widespread degeneracy. they want traditionalism which is a product they don't sell

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44076224)

the problem runs deeper than that. tradchurches that define themselves as against culture have some commendable traits but ultimately it’s not a sustainable disposition for the church—because it’s not consistent with Christianity’s DNA as a religion purporting to be the universal religion.

the church at all levels has profound institutional problems. the problems have to be addressed there.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44076234)

You're right that Christianity's DNA makes it difficult to combat its own decline. The American mainline protestants and the English Anglican church thrived for centuries because on an institutional level they pragmatically understood to stay out of politics and not moralize too much. But when you get to the heart of the matter, it's hard to separate true Christianity from both politics and moralizing.

Without the restraint of old, is inevitable the churches will slide towards intensive and political moralizing once again. This briefly happened with Temperance in the past, and we also saw the growth of the evangelicals, but this time it's also distinctively left-wing. That's why the old guard of moderates and conservatives have faded away from the mainline churches, who are now also faced with the problem that their target adherents in the progressive left no longer believes in faith and even sees it as complicit in the structural systematic oppression of the day.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44078615)

Amazing how I get called a copium smoking whitepill faggot by the actual blackpillers, and then draw comments like this from you guys.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44076539)

You have it backwards -- those in power remain in (or rise to) power by shrewdly backing the right ideology for the time/society/moment, they do not just command power and then select an ideology. They can push or pull a little within the Overton window and sometimes they can even expand the Overton window itself, but there are hard limits on that, *regardless of how "powerful" a group in power is*, that are set by way of basic biological realities, impulses inherent in human nature, the absolute truth that "strength is power", etc.

Thanks for acknowledging that I "might" have a point, but (((SJW))) is doomed under all timelines because it inherently exceeds those hard limitations. Indeed, it revels in purporting to repudiate and even invert them. But it will lose that battle 100% of the time, and by even picking a fight with those hard limitations it sows the seeds of its own demise. That's a fact, not an opinion. Source: The entirety of human civilizational history.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44076558)

it’s not only a shift in cultural ideology or rise in SJWism. the concept of the religious has changed. a person carrying a bible around a city would be viewed as doing something simultaneously religious and political in a way a person carrying a yoga mat would not.

there’s an implicit debate being had about the religious character of public life. it’s not just a SJW thing.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44076627)

You may be right as has been evidenced by history, and I've never disagreed with that, but you must admit they create hellish societies lasting for generations that are almost completely contrarian to Christian culture. Moreover, the more they take over the world, the longer the hellscape will last. And it seems that GlobalHomo is almost completely dominant at this point. Furthermore, it resembles more of a religion than anything else, with the Church leaders being those within the Universities, Media and MNC's.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44076632)

It goes beyond that. Soviet Russia was not "(((SJW)))", because the Soviets were serious about staying in power, which is why they succeeded in doing that for generations despise the economic idiocy of their ideology which ultimately doomed it in the long run. Soviet leadership was smart and cunning, and they grew up in hard times which created strong men. How many proudly transsexual Soviet Generals were there?

By contrast, much of the current leadership in the West really buys its own bullshit and drinks its own Kool-Aid on this horseshit, and that's because they grew up in incredibly good times and they are incredibly weak men. That's actually very good for anyone who hates this gay and retarded faggotry, because not only is "(((SJW)))" an inherently deeply unstable and unsustainable ideology in its own right, but the leadership figures who are aggressively pushing it (because they foolishly actually believe in it) are so weak that a power struggle sooner rather than later is inevitable. Who will fill that power vaccuum? Ruthless ethno-nationalists? Evil Jewish globalists? Some combination of both, in different places in the West? We'll see, but that's where the intelligent debate is -- not whether "(((SJW)))" is "here to stay" as the "new state religion". "This is the SJW millennium, just like the last one was the Christian millennium!" No it's not and you're fucking dumb if you believe that for even a second, for reasons outlined in detail above.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44076675)

Sorry, I owe you an apology: I didn't realize that you're a total fucking retard who can't follow a point. I shouldn't have engaged and wasted both of our time. Yes, (((SJW))) = New Christianity, already here, it's the new religion, yes yes very bad. Got it thanks for explaining all of that wow huh really "makes you think". Glad we talked. My apologies.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44076859)

No matter how pervasive SJW and Globohomo might appear to you, do you really think Queen Kamala and Mayor Pete can actually run a society over even the medium term?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44078328)

You're just a schizophrenic Jewish man.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44076640)

I think we're seeing this phase happening now. And lol this was from the 80s

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44078590)

She actually is pretty cute but it feels like it would be statutory rape to even think that.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44080453)

"But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived."

i despise the pervasive evil of this world but take joy in witnessing God's plan and am grateful for its effect on my faith

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44075758)

something new has taken over. it’s against a lot of what you’re describing including cute easter bunnies and displays of eg the American flag unaccompanied by the LGBTQ flag(s). it’s not fully coherent (neither was the boomer state religion) but it will be American culture for a generation.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44076039)

What does "American culture" mean here? There was an "American culture" in 1970 because everyone watched the same news, consumed the same media, ate the same food, etc.

That's not even remotely close to being true now. If you go strictly by what "mainstream" news and media selectively put on their platforms, then you're correct. And if you put stock in those platforms, then everyone also loves Democrats -- except for a tiny fringe of literal racists -- and Biden is waaaay more popular now than Trump ever was at any point and all parents who aren't Neo-Nazis agree that we need CRT (which also doesn't even exist to be clear) in our Kindergartens. Haha, yeah! That sounds right!

There is absolutely no reason to think that what "mainstream" news and media shows is anything approaching a dominant shared cultural outlook in America, and indeed even "mainstream" media has become so fragmented and varied that almost no no two people who are still regularly watching it (which is already a relatively small subset of the total population) is consuming exactly the same shit.

All of which points to the obvious underlying point that "America" as a society/nation state no longer makes any sense. More and more people are waking up and realizing (and accepting) that every day, and that process is only going to speed up from here. The rest flows naturally and the end result if that's correct is inevitable -- it's really just a question of when and how.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44076122)

Libs should get to have a society with gay marriage and abortion and critical race theory in public schools and affirmative action and trannies in women’s sports/locker rooms/prisons and mask mandates and vaccine mandates and high taxes and a high minimum wage and a ban on private gun ownership and campus rape kangaroo courts and abolition of the death penalty and abolition of the police and violent criminals let out of prison and open borders.

I sincerely believe that libs richly deserve to live in a society with all of the above.

Likewise, reptiles should get to have a society with none of those things.

There’s no reason why both societies can’t exist simultaneously as two separate countries.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44076193)

Actually there is: Liberals don't want to have a foil for their insanity. Just like they don't want a control group for the vax. They are, right now, threatening Dominican Republic politicians with cutting visas if they don't legalize sodomy and abortion and all the trappings of globohomo.

This is why the have been on a warpath and fly gay flags across most embassies and focused on the women's robotics team in Iraq rather than building up a country that wouldnt just bow down to the Taliban.

Any nation that resist globohomo is attacked, physically or economically.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44076202)

Very true, and this works beautifully and is devastatingly effective... right up until it's not.

"Why does TBF shill for Russia so hard what a faggot"

I don't give a single fuck about Putin or Russia. I give all of the fucks about weakening the current global hegemony of (((Jewish globohomo))) and creating alliances and power centers across the globe that can -- and will -- challenge it and erode its ability to pull of what you describe here. Jews will never control China, they will never control Iran, and they will never fully control Russia. Thousands of years of cultural history basically ensure that in each case. And that's all I need to know to support those three countries in their efforts to gain and exercise power, regardless of whether I "agree" with their "political" or "social" "policies" on any given issue at any given moment in time.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44076309)

But prior to this mid 20th century era, America wasn't so much a land of common uniformity. Regionalism was still a powerful factor. The Southeast was almost a different country unto itself. There was a lot of social tension over various immigration waves. Rapidly growing income disparities marked 1900-1930. There was a lot of class divides. There were big progressive movements. Catholic versus Protestant dominated many outlooks. Socialism even played a role in populism. And, of course, there was a catastrophic civil war in the 1860s.

Having said that, I don't want to over exaggerate it either. The initial founding fathers' view of America was a land that would accommodate a wide range of beliefs and ideas and kinds of people as the inevitable outcome of free will liberalism. But it was also based on the idea of a shared belief in the free-will creed and core principles and tenets. The distinct difference between today and the somewhat chaotic and restless nature of 19th century America is the failure of a significant portion of the country's population to have any faith or acceptance of the liberal creed: liberty, free speech, free will, sanctity of civil rights. The failure of the progressive left to base their arguments on these principles and instead for many of them to actually argue against them is the source of the underlying tension and a dividing population.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44076465)

Any structure that can coax labor into selling itself below the price of goods sold will be perpetuated, and those that cannot will fail. Corporations lean towards liberal appeasement because black and brown labor is more disposed to entering workplace hyperreality than are entrenched whites.

These deplorables are recalcitrance to a labor system premised on exogamy and a rejection of the primacy of the bio/physical -- multicultural workplaces, social hierarchies that include women, and a work product from which they are alienated. global capitalism, once premised on outsourcing, now sees the labor once subjugated as competition (see China). as this (ethnically-, gender-) foreign labor competition makes the bio-physical increasingly irrelevant to the production of capital, so too, as an expression of biological fundamentalism, is "christianity"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44076769)

The social populism from both right and left is certainly originated in the feeling of betrayal by an economic model that no longer cares for them. Corporate America turned its back on the working classes because the Democrats co-opted corporate America and allowed it to happen (or corporate America co-opted the Democrats? I still argue it was the former).

The big and fascinating question of our time is why the woke left suddenly somehow now believes in capitalism. It pays lip service to marxism but 99.99% of its language is utilizing GC for its benefit.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44078310)

the only thing wrong with communism is the idea came before it had even a chance of being realized

communism is the end goal, but it needs to slowly dismantle capitalism's baggage

DEI, ESG, b corps, and that crap which pretends to elevate something before profits is the first step

clever opportunists know how to ride on the back of the prevailing system

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44078491)

Lacking any comprehension of the fragility of civilization or the tragic character of history, he lived unthinkingly in the "assurance that tomorrow [the world] will be richer, ampler, more perfect, as if it enjoyed a spontaneous, inexhaustible power of increase.' He was concerned only with his own well-being and looked forward to a future of 'limitless possibilities' and 'complete freedom'. His many failings included 'a lack of romance in his dealings with women.' Erotic love, a demanding ideal in its own right, had no attraction for him. His attitude toward the body was severely practical: He made a cult of physical fitness and submitted to hygienic regimens that promised to keep it in good repair and to extend its longevity. It was above all, however, the 'deadly hatred of all that is not itself' that characterized the mass mind, as Ortega described it. Incapable of wonder or respect, the mass man was the 'spoiled child of human history'.

All these habits of mind, I submit, are now more characteristic of the upper levels of society than of the lower or middle levels. It can hardly be said that ordinary people today look forward to a world of 'limitless possibility.' Any sense the masses are riding the wave of history has long since departed. The radical movements that disturbed the peace of the twentieth century have failed, one by one, and no successors have appeared on the horizon. The industrial working class, once the mainstay of the socialist movement, has become a pitiful remnant of itself. The hope that 'new social movements' would take its place in the struggle against capitalism, which briefly sustained the left in the late seventies and early eighties, has come to nothing. Not only do the new social movements - feminism, gay rights, welfare rights, agitation against racial discrimination - have nothing in common, but their only coherent demand aims at inclusion in the dominant structures rather than at a revolutionary transformation of social relations."

from Christopher Lasch's Revolt of the Elites

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44090833)

There's no such thing as a secular society. Liberalism feigned a conversational plurality - the problem is that this whole time there was no such thing as an actual neutral marketplace , there was still people running this whole thing, people with belief systems - so slowly and surely the belief systems that were allowed to operate inside the market outcompeted the belief systems that were banned from the market.

"Separation of church and state" - removing religious ideas from school and the public square just meant that other ideas without that explicit connotation were the only ones allowed to compete, and the people who were running the whole thing had those - so this whole time everyone was being told that there was a separation b/w church and state, and that liberalism was doing what it was intended to do - minimally arbitrate between various identities, religions, values. There's no ethic - just this neutral system of *equality*, a neutral arbiter - when in reality it was actually someone's values

All liberalism did was hide the friend / enemy distinction that was actually playing out underneath in the ideas that were allowed to flourish and compete - but ***liberalism increasingly comes to see culture and values as the key battleground** and is no longer content to play fake mediator of a pluralistic demos, but instead seeks to refashion it.

What we're seeing is this become obvious / visible - and so one the reason the Intellectual Dork Web looks stupid is they imagine we can go back to this good liberalism of the 90s or whatever, when they themselves weren't pushed out of the left - without realizing it was "illiberal" the entire time, but was just chugging along hidden enough while other to their right were being pushed out of the 1990s left in similar fashion

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44081185)

- Progressivism is rooted in original sin. Humans in their natural state are depraved and carry the stain into all their enterprises

- Individuals are ensouled, but at the same time must unify into one body

- Sinfulness can be redeemed, but only through the mediation of the church's priestly class

- Redemption takes the form of repentance, public shame, acts of contrition, and recitation of dogma

- The church marches forward through time towards the eschaton, always progressing, always perfecting

- Central to the project is the overturning of perverted hierarchies. The faithful must not trust their own sense of hierarchy and must expect their shepherds to revolutionize them: blessed are the losers, healthy are the sick

- Heresy exists in a way that cannot be reasoned with. There is nothing to gain from indulging sin, it can only be eradicated. The in-group has nothing to learn from the out-group.

This is an extreme and outlandish Christianity to be sure, but perhaps no more extreme or unbiblical as medieval Rome or Charlemagne or something, in which holy emperors burned heretics alive, nationalistic armies marched under the banner of the cross, and the holy secrets of scripture were guarded by the 2% of people who knew how to read. Both would be equally unrecognizable to the apostles

Our "christianity" too will pass, but its substitute will also be rooted in original sin, redemption, church and heresy, and a march through time towards heaven

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5048299&forum_id=2#44082192)