Virile Crime?

The idea that committing crime is manly is distinctly a Black concept. In Black societies, the man who commits more crime is often admired as cool and virile.

In European societies, virility is seen as keeping society safe and just. If Europeans start accepting the idea that committing crime and ruining society is cool and virile, then it is essentially a move toward the Black ghetto model of society.

There is particularly an issue among WN’s that eating meat is manly. The key problem with this is that people who slaughter animals are clearly not of normal conscience. Slaughterhouse workers (as shown in the last post) are criminal elements, and towns built around slaughterhouses have high immigrant, criminal populations. Two of these towns are Little Mexico (Dodge City) and Mexington (Lexington).

Hunters have considerably less karma. Hunting kills animals that lived free-range and typically kills the animals very quickly, so it avoids slaughterhouse and farm pollution and slaughterhouse and farm cruelty. Hunting also does not automatically corrupt others in the process of harvest, as does using money to pay others for slaughtering does. However, hunting still adversely effects the environment as compared to allowing wolves or other predators to make the kills. Spiritually aware men abhor the act of killing and only do it when necessary to maintain their food supply and restful sleep.

The disturbing trend in WN circles of promoting meat consumption is at odds with virility, as White virility inherently promotes justice and a safe society.

This entry was posted in crime, dharma, Kali-yuga, karma, men, politics, vegetarianism and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Virile Crime?

  1. I agree with the analysis that the industries based on killing animals do generate crime in society, that is an interesting analysis which I have not heard before.

    You also mentioned something about hunting, hunting I am very much against.

    • janoklark says:

      Hunting is only less immoral than farming animals. Hunting is blood lust and theft of life, and farming is what happens when that blood lust spirals out of control. Somehow killing of animals around you isn’t enough to satisfy you, and you end up raising animals for mass amount of meat, which on the market is much cheaper. For consumers, farmed meat is much cheaper and allows them to buy a lot more. So while it is all sin, one is a more extreme sin than the other, IMO.

      An analogy I could make would be the difference between pipe smoking and cigarette smoking. The pipe smoker has to constantly light and relight his pipe. The tobacco in a pipe is more pure and doesn’t have lighter fluid or gasoline in it. But when smoking some tobacco isn’t enough, one turns to cigarettes. Cigarettes are cheaper and always stay lit, and they have many more chemical additives that are intentionally added to increase additivity. So while all smoking of drugs is a sin, smoking cigarettes is a worse sin than smoking a pipe or a cigar. I suppose this distinction, though, isn’t usually worth mentioning.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s