Subjective Morality vs Objective Morality

[Crystallized Mushroom]

What would be the best way to view things such as morality since i've seen some arguments online and talked to a coworker about morality and his was Subjective morality which he said ANY BEHAVIOR IS OKAY cause Culture said so and he also said that parasitism and murder and even pedophilia and evil alien species and diseases would be "valid" cause they are just trying to live and he recognizes they're a problem but doesn't call them evil or worthy of punishment or death like how the Joy of Satan recognizes that reptilians jews greys gypsys enemy Nordics Pleiadeans etc are evil and deserve to be driven away from Earth and Satans empire. and objective morality is obviously something is always wrong like rape or circumcision etc.

what would be the best solution to morality also what would happen to human tribes that practice cannibalism and pedophilia like the papua new guinea ones or the aghori tribes would they be ignored changed killed segregated?
i hope this is an okay set of questions and i'm not going to out of "line" or anything like that

 

[darkmonkey666]

No one should tolerate things like Pedophilia and cannabalism etc ever. Those are war crimes.

But with that said those are extreme things this whole war actually negates morality and ethics in a way even the concept of family and friends and some of the things that once held civilization together.

Think of it like this. Earth is a war zone. It is a battle field. There are friendly people fighting on your side (soldiers) there are neutrals (civilians) then there are enemy combatants spies subversives and enemy agents.

Your goal in a war is to limit the damage to civilians back up your side (fellow soldiers or comrades) and take out enemy combatants and subversive agents. At least that is how it's done in every non commie bastard military.

This negates ethics in many situations. If you can get away with it and know that for sure you really *can* do "evil" against your enemy to benefit your own *self*.

Remember subversives and enemy agents are never really your friend or family or nothing. This is like being in a battle field are your going to lay down your weapons and go try to be friends with a fully armed Islamic State Jihadist in the middle of a war.

No you seek to back up your fellow soliders and take out the subversive scum in what way you can.

Same kind of concept in this war. You can't ever be to friendly with your enemy. Especially not a kike.

This war is fought on a psychological and awareness level. This is a war of awareness. Whatever little thing you can do to subvert your enemy is great. Earth is a war zone a battle field.

Just always keep this in mind and the fact you are a soldier you have a call to duty for your race and your nation. Anyone can be a subversive. Your neighbor the friend you say hi to at the mall your co worker your own father or sister.

Your loyalty is to your own people and your nation and the state. You always seek to build up civilization and slow down or stop subversive agents or at least be aware of them.

Now I am not saying do anything illegal or kill someone or any of that and cannot say something like that. But you really do know the implications of what I am saying if you can put two and two together

This war is fought in the psychological and spiritual and on an awareness level.

 

[Jack]

There are two moralities for the world - one for elites who make their own morality and the common people who follow the different ideologies out there. There is no basis for objective morality because Humans don't have perfect knowledge and thus the subjective interpretations of everything around us is an assumption. And since there is no basis for morality, the individual comes upon Philosophical Nihilism as there is no basis for Right and Wrong, Good or Bad.

Nietzsche went through this Dilemma and eventually succeeded in finding the Case for creating your own morality and belief system in the book "The Will To Power. " Since there is no Right and Wrong, you can choose to believe something to be right and wrong and when you make persuasive arguments about your beliefs to the common man ,they will accept you as the Saviour who gave their lives meaning and accept your Ideology as defining their identity.

This is how Elites on both sides of the war think. We look at nature and we protect our Children and our Societies from Hurt because we believe in Nature. The enemy does not believe in Nature which is why they want to hurt Children and Nature. Both of us have persuasive arguments and both og us have people willing to die for the respective Beliefs.

Eventually what matters is not what is right or wrong, because that does not exist. We accepted Right or Wrong as an interpretation that gives our lives meaningful existence. What does matter is who comes out on top and wins the Fight of Will. Is our will stronger or is their will stronger ? History is written by the Victors and when you have an elitist mindset it is assumed you've already gone "Beyond Good and Evil" and are now creating your own Good and Evil ,playing the role of the creator manifesting his will.

I came to this side because I made a choice and i will keep true to my choice till the bitter end. I don't care about Morality or Ethics ,i believe we make our own morality and ethics. I don't believe most of the civil rights agreed to upon the Democratic values and I believe primarily in National Socialism. And i also believe in the basis for Casteism and Nobility of the meritocratic way.

Everything, no matter how grim it would be will be justified in winning this war.

 

[Stormblood]

Pleiadians are not Nordic, but Grey.

On the topic of morality, there are some things that are fixed and some that are fluid. Fixed things are things that benefit everyone as a whole or curse everyone as a whole. For example, race-mixing curses two races at once and it's undeniably evil. Going onward and upward objectively benefits both the individual and the collective as a whole.

The things are fluid are more along the terms of something that may beneficial for one/some and neutral or detrimental for someone else/others.

This is how I see it.

 

[Jack]

Pleiadians are not Nordic, but Grey.

On the topic of morality, there are some things that are fixed and some that are fluid. Fixed things are things that benefit everyone as a whole or curse everyone as a whole. For example, race-mixing curses two races at once and it's undeniably evil. Going onward and upward objectively benefits both the individual and the collective as a whole.

The things are fluid are more along the terms of something that may beneficial for one/some and neutral or detrimental for someone else/others.

This is how I see it.

Exactly. Both Nietzsche and Foucault came to the same conclusion on the lack of Objective Morality but they deviated in the point of Nature. While Nietzsche argued that living according to Nature would make one stay true to himself, Foucault the Jew argued that Man must go against Nature and legalise Pedophilia transgressing all restrictions of Nature.

This is Aryanism Vs Judaism

 

[Crystallized Mushroom]

Pleiadians are not Nordic, but Grey.

On the topic of morality, there are some things that are fixed and some that are fluid. Fixed things are things that benefit everyone as a whole or curse everyone as a whole. For example, race-mixing curses two races at once and it's undeniably evil. Going onward and upward objectively benefits both the individual and the collective as a whole.

The things are fluid are more along the terms of something that may beneficial for one/some and neutral or detrimental for someone else/others.

This is how I see it.

sounds like how i view morality/ethics
the whole golden rule treat others the way you wish to be treated and as long as ye harm none do what thou wilt

 

[Hp. Hoodedcobra666]

Pleiadians are not Nordic, but Grey.

On the topic of morality, there are some things that are fixed and some that are fluid. Fixed things are things that benefit everyone as a whole or curse everyone as a whole. For example, race-mixing curses two races at once and it's undeniably evil. Going onward and upward objectively benefits both the individual and the collective as a whole.

The things are fluid are more along the terms of something that may beneficial for one/some and neutral or detrimental for someone else/others.

This is how I see it.

Exactly. Both Nietzsche and Foucault came to the same conclusion on the lack of Objective Morality but they deviated in the point of Nature. While Nietzsche argued that living according to Nature would make one stay true to himself, Foucault the Jew argued that Man must go against Nature and legalise Pedophilia transgressing all restrictions of Nature.

This is Aryanism Vs Judaism

They were both interesting thinkers, however, Nietzsche dwarfed Foucault.

The thing is, observe the cosmos. Do you see many things "out of order"? This is not a scientific nor realistic view of things.

Lions don't rape their young as kikes say humans should, because this scars their minds, nor they eat their own alive or something. Because they will be weak to rule the pride once they grow up, and that is an objective natural fact.

These are understood on an unconscious level by animals, and they clearly constitute some form of "nature's morals". But morality fails to describe this still. We can just call it universal law or Dharma.

 

[Crystallized Mushroom]

Pleiadians are not Nordic, but Grey.

On the topic of morality, there are some things that are fixed and some that are fluid. Fixed things are things that benefit everyone as a whole or curse everyone as a whole. For example, race-mixing curses two races at once and it's undeniably evil. Going onward and upward objectively benefits both the individual and the collective as a whole.

The things are fluid are more along the terms of something that may beneficial for one/some and neutral or detrimental for someone else/others.

This is how I see it.

Exactly. Both Nietzsche and Foucault came to the same conclusion on the lack of Objective Morality but they deviated in the point of Nature. While Nietzsche argued that living according to Nature would make one stay true to himself, Foucault the Jew argued that Man must go against Nature and legalise Pedophilia transgressing all restrictions of Nature.

This is Aryanism Vs Judaism

They were both interesting thinkers, however, Nietzsche dwarfed Foucault.

The thing is, observe the cosmos. Do you see many things "out of order"? This is not a scientific nor realistic view of things.

Lions don't rape their young as kikes say humans should, because this scars their minds, nor they eat their own alive or something. Because they will be weak to rule the pride once they grow up, and that is an objective natural fact.

These are understood on an unconscious level by animals, and they clearly constitute some form of "nature's morals". But morality fails to describe this still. We can just call it universal law or Dharma.

thankyou for pointing out nature has natural laws unlike that dumb coworker "friend" of mine who says well if a country promotes pedophilia than its okay and he also said that harassment and sexual harassment isn't based on legitimate harassment but just asking for a date or making a joke or a hookup unless the "culture" like in islam promotes REAL SEXUAL HARASSMENT which he said is "okay" cause all cultures are valid and right he says so according to him if someone says i have nice hair especially at work then i can get them fired for sexual harassment cause it means ANYTHING and not actual harassment how does Pagan cultures view this when is it okay to flirt or ask for dates hookups 1 time. is it only okay online , at nightclubs at brothels is it wrong to tell someone once that you like them cause apparently from what i researched online lawyers claim its not illegal to ask a stranger one time for a hookup what would be the ethical or "right" then in this situation also the stupid coworker said that it was okay to kill gay people if the culture permits it and said they're "right" even though he once told me he was gay which makes no sense to me