New posts

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Philonous" data-source="post: 1498449" data-attributes="member: 22043">I actually grew up in Baltimore prior to the city becoming almost totally black and perpetually violent. I now live in Pennsylvania, and although there are blacks around me up here, they are not like the sorts of blacks I remember from Baltimore. They want to be here, whereas the blacks of Baltimore were forever contemptuous of being in a city and nation founded by whites.And I understand both sides of the issue. I’m not saying the Baltimore blacks are justified in their behavior—they’re not—but by the same token, “they’re that way just because they’re black” isn’t entirely truthful. There was an external impetus that inclined them in such direction.After the Civil War the Confederate sympathizers in Maryland were at a loss. Those who owned farmlands were suddenly without slaves to tend them. However, the nation was now transforming to an industrial economy, and any southerner who could and did invest in steam-driven machinery or the factories/shops that included such devices could get rich. And so in late 19th century Baltimore you saw these former Confederate sympathizers who sold their farmlands and were now getting into industry in a big way. And in some regards it was more economical for them, as they could pay people slave wages (freed blacks and poor whites alike) without having to worry about caring for “old slaves” who were no longer fit for work, or who were otherwise injured beyond their capacity for labor.[My own relatives were very much poor whites—they were coal miners (originally from Pennsylvania).] And so, in a sense, in the Mid-Atlantic the slave system never ended, just as America borrowing from the British caste system never really ended. And a lot of resentment grew amongst blacks and the laboring classes against this “class framework”. Farther down south there may have actually been a degree of “noblesse oblige” practiced among property owners. But no, that absolutely wasn’t widespread in Baltimore. Far more the exception to the rule. Then there's the question of whether this was the Jews exacerbating the differences between “labor” and “capital” in order to sublimate their own unassailable differences with the Christian majority, or whether it was the greed of the Mid-Atlantic Christian gentry themselves.I’d say it was a mixture of both. Human greed is what it is (a cardinal vice that leads directly to mortal sin). At the same time, there were Jews in Baltimore who very much wanted to attack Christianity, and “black issues” and “labor issues” were ways of making it seem Christianity had failed. And so what you had were the Jews creating their “Ethical Societies”, or “Ethical Culture Movement”, which was basically an effort to make American ecumenical Christianity seem worse than useless in handling 20th century challenges. And to spearhead this they found a gentile front-woman—Madelyn Murray O’Hair—who in 1960 was living and working in Baltimore as a psychiatric social worker. O’Hair was very bitter at the adulterous father of her first child refusing to divorce his wife, staying married on Christian grounds. She then became an outspoken atheist pushing Soviet communism as a panacea. And so she would serve as a sort of gentile “magnet” to attract attention away from the Jewish Ethical Society as they got Christian prayer and any/all sort of Bible reading banned from American public schools.O’Hair didn’t stay in Baltimore after winning her 1963 SCOTUS case against school Bible-reading, as her house was then constantly pelted with rocks. Instead, she moved to Hawaii and married a Marine who was stationed there (who was actually an FBI informant). She also founded American Atheists, gradually growing rich on donations. And by then Baltimore had a lot of collective bargaining, mostly through the Teamsters at the Port of Baltimore, and so the local Jewish drive to push communism began to wane. The result is the Jews switched to encouraging their Critical Race Theory (which at the time was understood as “black revolutionary nationalism”). This coincided with the baby boom generation’s love of recreational drug use. The result is that in the early 1970’s the Port of Baltimore became a major ingress for heroin and cocaine to enter the country, with the sale of these drugs creating a permanent illicit economy that supported Baltimore’s black community.The result of these 2 things—CRT and a gang-controlled narcotics economy—made it so Baltimore’s blacks became impossible for anyone else to live around. And so throughout the 80’s and 90’s you saw a giant white exodus up to Bel-Air and other parts of Harford County. With the millennium you saw Baltimore’s black community implode into its own violence, narcissism, and outright stupidity. CRT had taught the blacks that all their bad behaviors could be blamed on “white racism”, with drug gangs now running their own communities through “street justice”. In fact, if you look at a map, you can see where I-95 cuts through the southeast tip of Baltimore. That tip is where you see the Dundalk Marine Terminal and the Curtis Bay Terminal—the Port of Baltimore. It’s the only part of the city that’s still worth anything. Everything in the city to the north and west of that is just a more moneyed version of what you see in Liberia. It’s held together by Jewish finance capital, but that’s about all that’s holding it together.With all that said, I’d be remiss if I didn’t add the one markedly noble thing about my home town—a thing it has since forfeit along with all its other boons—and that was its 19th century focus on “curing mental illness”, so much as to lead to the founding of the Sheppard and Enoch Pratt Hospital in 1853, mostly under the same Quaker principles that led to the creation of the modern penitentiary, rather than what had been a choice between brutal flagellations and hangings (with the choice made by the prosecution, and not the accused). This is difficult to explain to people who don’t understand it, and is the one instance in which I absolutely will justify Protestantism, do so over the desires of both Catholicism and Orthodox Christianity, as Protestantism gave the western world Isaac Newton and George Berkeley, both of whom were Christian, and it was only the western world’s selfishness that inclined it to trade Berkeley for David Hume, if not also later replacing Hegel with Marx, replacing “science plus God” with “science plus godlessness”. And so what had been the once pure studies of psychology and psychiatry became the Satanic Jewish bastardization of these things, or the transfer of the intelligent Christian contributions to neuroscience by way of Pierre Janet over to the stupid Jewish non-contributions to that field by way of Sigmund Freud. And so Baltimore, with its historical connection to these studies, inclined me to investigate them—and in that sense I’m grateful to my hometown. Grateful it had a school such as Johns Hopkins University, back when that American university was still honest. All these studies have since decayed, as the luminaries involved in them allowed themselves to be bought out by Jewish capital. And so whereas Christianity was well on its way to becoming a pro-science religion in the 19th century, by the end of the 20th a harsh wall had been recreated between science and Christianity, this time created by Jews and those Christians willing to bend to Jewish whims. And so the gain was lost. Nonetheless, if you think about it, “consciousness” really was the only seriously unexplored field of science remaining by the end of the 20th century—if not also a field which harkened directly to the Christ, for he said, “These and greater things shall ye do, for I go unto the Father.” This was in regard to his apparent control over nature—his ability to walk on water, turn it into wine, wilt a fig tree at whim. Yet 2,000 years later no theologian from any grouping—Protestant, Catholic, or Orthodox—is capable of performing such works, let alone any greater works. And so I testify to you that when Christ did those “supernatural” things, they were in fact completely natural, for this nothing unnatural he would have done as a model to humanity. Yet aside from the occasional “holy unmercernary” or intermittent “medical saint”—with scant writings coming from such persons—Christianity has been otherwise devoid of such nature studies. Instead of “greater things” we have perfected the pursuit of “lesser things”, most of which involves moving property around.</blockquote>

Verification