Women do not belong in positions of authority and the reasons are numerous. The prior golden age was a network of kingdoms ruled by KINGS.

Spanish conquistadors told stories about a mystical black muurish queen that ruled a State of California, situated in the same location as the present day California. The modern state of State California continues the legacy and the memory of this great black Queendom and its Queens.

Plenty of leaders of N'egroes have been women (Negresses). From the bottom all the way to the top spot in the nation! That's right. I'm not sure why Anglo women are so useless and incapable of being entrusted with anything. But this idea that women are completely useless must only come from them.

Queen Khalifa/Calafia/Califa (for whom California is named) being just one example.

[link to www.africaresource.com (secure)]



Negresses are very handy as administrators, governors, mayors, planners, warrior queens, generals, etc. And they can cook and clean too. Why/How are they so good at this? Well obviously because becoming good at these things is not determined by what's between your legs, but what's inside your head. Given the right motivation a woman should be more or less as capable as a man except for the most physical of challenges. It must suck to be an Anglo...

Who you have sex with matters people...

Democracies, republics, elected governments of whatever kind are for dimly conscious degenerates. High conscious, righteous, advanced people get a king of the same kind and they prosper. Dimly conscious, unrighteous people get a king of the same kind or they form a type of government that is inherently of the same kind.

1. Women have a strong in-group bias. This automatically leads to gynocentric governance. Men have either a neutral bias or even a slight out-group bias towards women. Women inherently look out for their own while men are more neutral, perhaps even looking out for women. This is inherently just and proper for authority.

[link to pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (secure)]

2. Female moral development typically stops at stage 3 of 6 as defined by Kohlberg. Stage 3 is typified by social conformity and seeking the approval of others. This stage is typically reached before the teens. Males more often progress beyond stage 3 and eventually reach stage 6, the stage of universal principles. Stage 6 is only reached in adulthood. The lower stages of moral development only belong is the smallest of inter-personal relations like within the home. Only stage 6 and perhaps beyond belong at the highest level, the level that organizes and governs nations, empires, and civilizations.

[link to derfrechehund.net (secure)]

3. The net-flow of resources has and always will be from men to women. The receiver should never dictate to the giver. This is a universal law. It is no coincidence that the size of the welfare state exploded once women began voting. A welfare state's existence is an implicit enslavement of men and reflection of female entitlement, seeing as women receive the vast majority of welfare.

4. The masculine principle is active while the feminine principle is passive. This has been known by initiates down through the ages and is evident from basic observation even for the profane. The active leads, the passive follows. This is an immutable facet of duality and when not respected, will ultimately be corrected by the cosmic machinery.

5. The hypergamous nature of women that sees a small minority of men as being worthy which eventually leads to the disenfranchisement of the vast majority of men. Since men are the civilization builders, performing the complex, hard, dirty, and dangerous tasks necessary tasks necessary to maintain it, civilization cannot exist without the masses of men being respected. A small minority of elite men never have and never will build a civilization. Men's nature is inherently polygamous with acceptable appraisal of the vast majority of women.

Democracies, republics, elected governments of whatever kind are for dimly conscious degenerates. High conscious, righteous, advanced people get a king of the same kind and they prosper. Dimly conscious, unrighteous people get a king of the same kind or they form a type of government that is inherently of the same kind.

1. Women have a strong in-group bias. This automatically leads to gynocentric governance. Men have either a neutral bias or even a slight out-group bias towards women. Women inherently look out for their own while men are more neutral, perhaps even looking out for women. This is inherently just and proper for authority.

[link to pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (secure)]

2. Female moral development typically stops at stage 3 of 6 as defined by Kohlberg. Stage 3 is typified by social conformity and seeking the approval of others. This stage is typically reached before the teens. Males more often progress beyond stage 3 and eventually reach stage 6, the stage of universal principles. Stage 6 is only reached in adulthood. The lower stages of moral development only belong is the smallest of inter-personal relations like within the home. Only stage 6 and perhaps beyond belong at the highest level, the level that organizes and governs nations, empires, and civilizations.

[link to derfrechehund.net (secure)]

3. The net-flow of resources has and always will be from men to women. The receiver should never dictate to the giver. This is a universal law. It is no coincidence that the size of the welfare state exploded once women began voting. A welfare state's existence is an implicit enslavement of men and reflection of female entitlement, seeing as women receive the vast majority of welfare.

4. The masculine principle is active while the feminine principle is passive. This has been known by initiates down through the ages and is evident from basic observation even for the profane. The active leads, the passive follows. This is an immutable facet of duality and when not respected, will ultimately be corrected by the cosmic machinery.

5. The hypergamous nature of women that sees a small minority of men as being worthy which eventually leads to the disenfranchisement of the vast majority of men. Since men are the civilization builders, performing the complex, hard, dirty, and dangerous tasks necessary tasks necessary to maintain it, civilization cannot exist without the masses of men being respected. A small minority of elite men never have and never will build a civilization. Men's nature is inherently polygamous with acceptable appraisal of the vast majority of women.

They came to America believing that conversion would be easy once Natives saw the superiority of the Europeans’ religion, clothing, agriculture, dwellings, and every comfort known so far to man.

Yet there were very few Indians who converted to English culture, while large numbers of English chose to become Indian. Even Benjamin Franklin pondered why:

“When an Indian child has been brought up among us, taught our language and habituated to our customs, yet if he goes to see his relations and makes one Indian ramble with them, there is no persuading him ever to return. [But] when white persons of either sex have been taken prisoners young by the Indians, and lived a while among them, tho’ ransomed by their friends, and treated with all imaginable tenderness to prevail with them to stay among the English, yet in a short time they become disgusted with our manner of life, and the care and pains that are necessary to support it, and take the first good opportunity of escaping again into the woods, from whence there is no reclaiming them.”

One author put a bottom line on it in 1782, writing that,

“thousands of Europeans are Indians, and we have no examples of even one of those Aborigines having from choice become Europeans!”

AMER'ICAN, noun A native of America; originally applied to the aboriginals, or copper-colored races, found here by the Europeans; but now applied to the descendants of Europeans born in America.

Also pay very close attention to the fact that Benjamin Franklin called "the Indians" "aborigines". In other words, he was proving once and for all that the "aborigines" and "indians" were originally the same people as he clearly uses the words interchangeably. Indeed, as we know, Websters dictionary would state 46 years later that the Aborigines were non other than the "copper colored races".

[link to webstersdictionary1828.com]


'Copper-colored' refers to the mostly brown skin people found here, although early European explorers clearly stated that there were three 'races' of N'egroes here, with light skin, brown skin, and dark skin.

Regardless, the 1936 song (i.e. before the "African slave" fake news faux narrative took off) 'Copper-colored girl' for example is about a Negress. You can clearly see this on the sheet music cover where it depicts numerous copper-colored aboriginal American N'egroes.

[link to i.ebayimg.com (secure)]

We are not Africans, we are not 'former slaves'. We are the aboriginals and thus OWNERS of this land.

Europeans are a race of hateful liars who manipulate history and distort it in order to confuse people in the present so you don't see them stealing your shit.

Let the envy flow through you. Your loosh is delicious.

No one envies naggers. Not whites, Asians, Hispanics, birds, turtles, moss, or algae.

Which is why you stupid dog fucking assholes spend ALL YOUR FUCKING TIME lying about us then right? That's why you stupid FUCKING ASSHOLES forced yourselves in our countries and refuse to leave like disgusting maggots and parasites, huh asshole? FUCK YOU YOU LYING PIECE OF SHIT!

"I ignored the people attempting to block my progress and had no limits to who I talked to and in sharing my opinion," Dean said when we asked how he dealt with issues around racism (which includes both the subtle, systemic type of racism, and the more obvious form).

"I also was able to demonstrate my ideas to a point where it was hard to argue their viability. It took a lot of work and sacrifice. But I was confident and believed I had some good ideas. Fortunately, there were a few in the right leadership positions that agreed with my ideas."

You're on a computer, internet, and tech created by whites and Asians crying about some bogeyman "holding you down". The only thing holding you down is your IQ and lack of self-awareness. Feed me please.

Dr. Mark D ean, an African-American computer scientist and engineer, spent over 30 years at IBM pursuing the Next Big Thing. He was chief engineer of the 12-person team that designed the original IBM PC in the early '80s, earning him three of the nine original patents for that device. D'ean was also instrumental in designing the Industry Standard Architecture bus (which made it easy to plug external devices into IBM's PCs), laid the groundwork for color PC monitors and led the team that created the first gigahertz microprocessor. And despite his many accomplishments shaping our modern computing landscape, D'ean isn't afraid to admit that the PC may now be going the way of the dodo.

It's impressive enough that he was instrumental to so many significant projects, but it's even more remarkable in an industry where African-American representation is still an issue today. When younger tech companies like Google are reporting that only 2 percent of its workforce is black and only 3 percent is Hispanic in 2014, it's tough to imagine what the landscape was like for minorities decades ago. (IBM, for its part, claims a long history of diversity initiatives.)

Bond (1924) early last century pointed out that the average IQ scores of African Americans from several northern states were higher than those for whites from many southern states (Bond, 1924a, p. 63)

He argued that African Americans who migrated to the North must have left their "duller and less accomplished White fellows in the South."Bond also believed that IQ test scores reflected social and educational training.

Inline with this belief, Jenkins's (1936) reported the results of IQ tests given to Black and White children in Illinois, and found that the proportion of students with scores over 130 was the same among Black and White children when environmental influences were comparable.

A later study, involving Caribbean children, would in essence replicate these findings.The results from that study showed that when raised in the same enriched institutional environments as white children, black children demonstrated superior IQ test scores. IQs were: Black children 108, Mixed children 106, and White children 103(Tizard et al, 1972).

You're on a computer, internet, and tech created by whites and Asians crying about some bogeyman "holding you down". The only thing holding you down is your IQ and lack of self-awareness. Feed me please.

Dr. Mark D ean, an African-American computer scientist and engineer, spent over 30 years at IBM pursuing the Next Big Thing. He was chief engineer of the 12-person team that designed the original IBM PC in the early '80s, earning him three of the nine original patents for that device. D'ean was also instrumental in designing the Industry Standard Architecture bus (which made it easy to plug external devices into IBM's PCs), laid the groundwork for color PC monitors and led the team that created the first gigahertz microprocessor. And despite his many accomplishments shaping our modern computing landscape, D'ean isn't afraid to admit that the PC may now be going the way of the dodo.

It's impressive enough that he was instrumental to so many significant projects, but it's even more remarkable in an industry where African-American representation is still an issue today. When younger tech companies like Google are reporting that only 2 percent of its workforce is black and only 3 percent is Hispanic in 2014, it's tough to imagine what the landscape was like for minorities decades ago. (IBM, for its part, claims a long history of diversity initiatives.)

Bond (1924) early last century pointed out that the average IQ scores of African Americans from several northern states were higher than those for whites from many southern states (Bond, 1924a, p. 63)

He argued that African Americans who migrated to the North must have left their "duller and less accomplished White fellows in the South."Bond also believed that IQ test scores reflected social and educational training.

Inline with this belief, Jenkins's (1936) reported the results of IQ tests given to Black and White children in Illinois, and found that the proportion of students with scores over 130 was the same among Black and White children when environmental influences were comparable.

A later study, involving Caribbean children, would in essence replicate these findings.The results from that study showed that when raised in the same enriched institutional environments as white children, black children demonstrated superior IQ test scores. IQs were: Black children 108, Mixed children 106, and White children 103(Tizard et al, 1972).