Is it All About Sanders?

It occurs to me that the events which led to my being banned from AVFM are ultimately not just due to the fact that I’m more supportive of the PUA‘s than the Socialist MGTOW’s, but because, mythically, Bernie Sanders was supposed to be the guiding light of the Socialist MGTOW’s, and I’m represented through their kaleidoscope glasses as the archetype embodiment of his nemesis, thanks to sixties era television.

In other words, the supposedly politically-neutral AVFM is being moderated by a Socialist element, such that the fact that I happen to be a regressive authoritarian, anti-universalist separatist, and male-supremacist, would make me an enemy of the Equalist Socialist paradise that certain marginalized men foresee as their endgame Shangri-La.

Perhaps now that Jude Law’s security crew has been attacked by “gentle cappuccino-colored migrants who are coming for the sole purpose of enriching Europe’s stale, oppressive culture,” those elements of the “North American Manosphere” who persist in the notion that there is no rapefugee culture in Europe might just change their tune. The reason for this change of tune might be that a celebrity MGTOW (a.k.a. mostly perpetually unmarried Leftist male who gleefully sows oats with female Leftists who never wear aprons or do housework because such women are the enemy) was attacked, and doubtless his “security crew,” who was also attacked, is also male.

Sorry boys, or rather men, Bernie Sanders isn’t going to save you despite penis even though those trad-con bitches don’t want to talk to you thus making you a pet “victim”, so “man up!”

Or don’t. I don’t care. I just hate to see you get sucked into the wrong side of a religious war that has been going on ever since there has ever been too many people for too few opportunities. The war is “communitarianism” vs. “authoritarianism”.

Truth is, I’m not interested in seeing Islam abolished but rather, I’m leaning toward the notion of Balkanized Theocracies. If so many women insist on throwing themselves at Islamic criminals, this represents a need for a male-supremacist order of some sort, and wouldn’t it be nice if elements of European Culture would “man up” to provide their own such that beauties don’t go getting themselves mangled, raped, and killed by warring elements in their efforts to be dominated, finally, and otherwise taken off the damned pedestal.

I’m thinking that various feuding Christian factions need to revitalize Deuteronomy as a counterweight to Sharia Law and The Talmud. Naturally, they don’t all agree on how. I am in debt to this blog in terms of how gynocentricism killed the Church. Let’s get back to basics, fellows, can’t we?

European women are tired of being placed on pedestals (including “Equalist” ones) by Beta men, to only be attacked and killed by the sons of angry women of color. Please fellas. Man up!


11 thoughts on “Is it All About Sanders?

  1. Pingback: Is it All About Sanders? –

  2. I’ve known AVFM was a danger to our cause when I read an article titled, “What the fuck is wrong with Jack Donovan” critizing his book, “The Way of Men”

    The book is spot on in its analysis of things in the world. Yet, the article reads like it was written by a pissed off emotional bitch that thinks men should be treated like another victim class to add another cog in the machine rather than finding ways to beat the system.

    Being banned from that site is an honor. Own it!

  3. You were banned?? Lucky you. I am surprised you were even allowed to comment.
    It seems on any of the mgtow and christian ‘patriarch’ blogs no one is allowed to ask any questions which seems to challenge parroting skills, or to comment in a decent, what is it called, oh yes, PC way.

    Most are caught up in the meme all women are bad and there is something wrong with a woman being sexual, if you are looking for a wife. Childish and immature behaviors.

    As the scriptures says, come let us reason together. Doesn’t apply for these mgtow or wanna be patriarchs.

    I had given up attempting to comment until asking a question of the enlightened christian, ‘patriarchs’ yesterday. It could be said my score is 5 to 0 in my favor, for it was denied as well. 🙂

    What is the term for projecting our own insecurities and desires onto others in a negative way.

    • “Projecting” covers it I believe. There are many different brands of Christian, and it would appear that most of them are overwhelmingly poisoned by gynocentrism and I might add Aquinas notions in opposition to birth control–every sex act must result in the possibility of a baby or it’s a sin. I don’t buy it. There needs to be a “Stop” button in a technocracy that just doesn’t need all that many people except for purposes of eating each other. I think sometimes that many Christians are hoping for Armageddon. What if, humans are supposed to eventually figure out the social aspects of demographic mathematics to resources? What if God has faith in us to eventually subsume hubris and agendas to practical concerns? What if this is the higher consciousness that we’re all supposed to attain but keep getting wrong over and over again?

      Newsflash to the patriarchs you mention: The reason why there is “something wrong with a woman being sexual” is because it will make their wives jealous and cognizant of their diminishing SMV. Can’t have that. That would cause the old battle axe to go for the castration sheers.

      • The phrase SMV shows how men and women see one another.
        We should be looking at each sex as one with needs, not wants, instead of as only a ccommodity to be consumed.

        Yes, my woman adds to my life, she is a valued and cherished part of my life, not some resource to be consumed, she is a woman, which means she is highly sexual, instead of a stepford wife .
        Most mgtow’s are terrified of a woman’s capacity and sexual proclivities and seek one who is nothing more than a doll, dehumanizing an entire sex.

      • Rather than embrace the truth, no one man could ever keep up with a fully sexual woman, and find a way to apply I.e. lead, so both their lives can be enhanced, they feel threatened and inadequate, leading to an attack on women’s humanity. Most don’t want a woman, they want a doll.

      • I respectfully disagree in that Axel led me so completely, albeit, of course, he wasn’t an MGTOW in the sense of having any interest in what other men do or don’t do. However, he wasn’t a PUA either. So, there you have it. Doll’s are either degraded or they are put on pedestals, unless, of course, the woman likes being a doll, like a Raggedy Ann, who can be used in any way he sees fit. Other dolls expect for perfect houses to be built for them and to always be dressed in fine clothes. People are funny, to include “living dolls” and their owners.

      • Maybe when you said, “no one man” you were only referring to “no one man who says that…” however, I still disagree with your premise regardless of what population from which you are pulling “no one man”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: 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