Having read this thread, I felt the need to make a thread challenging all those pacficists out there.
incels.is
First off, this reading should be with the mind that incel violence is not controllable by us. People will go ER no matter what, and in fact that most "incel" ERs never had an account in here or similar platforms. Furthermore, we are grouped in with Andrew Tate's fans (see UK's "extreme misogny"), so we disavowing violence would not change much.
The shock culture and the edginess, is a part of our brand. It is what attracts attention to the incel community. If countries like UK consider Andrew Tate's fans to be extremists, then unelss we adapt the PC libtard culture, nothing would satisfy their low bar.
The idea that just because a group glorifes mass murderers, makes it that it loses public support is nonsense. I will give you two examples.
You can maintain a moderate and extreme side of a given group, both help the reputation.
1. Muslims
Muslims are a dominant and invasive community. There is no doubt that they glorify mass violence. For example, in Palenstine, celebrations are regularly taken place after an "shahid" (matryr; suciide attacker) killed some Jews in israel. Have this stopped public support for Palenstine? No. Not to mention, they are a growing community globally despite their violent reputation and the fact that many terrroist groups are islamic.
In fact, because of the cruel reputation, people are afraid to mess with them.
2. Niggers
The Black community as a collective, glorify violence. Endless civil war in Africa, BBQ feasts of rival gang members of Haiti, the constant gang wars and the rap culture to celebrate them. Even in their protests BLM, they were extremely violent rioting and burning up stuff. Have this stopped people from supporting them? No, because if you speak against them you'll get UZI'd or beaten up.
On the other hand, you have Indians.
Indians are regularly mocked on Twitter and all sorts of platforms, despite their non violent (although questionable hyigene) reputation. No other group is as made fun of as Jeets, even on libtard sites like Reddit.
Violence works. We should embrace it, but not commit it.
Violence doesn’t solve anything.
Violence, murder, threats of rape or worse do not improve our social standing as an oppressed group of people. The state has no reason to support what they deem as a group of terrorists-in-the-making. Incels have been referred to as school shooters, ect., and this negative stigma stops us from...
incels.is
First off, this reading should be with the mind that incel violence is not controllable by us. People will go ER no matter what, and in fact that most "incel" ERs never had an account in here or similar platforms. Furthermore, we are grouped in with Andrew Tate's fans (see UK's "extreme misogny"), so we disavowing violence would not change much.
The shock culture and the edginess, is a part of our brand. It is what attracts attention to the incel community. If countries like UK consider Andrew Tate's fans to be extremists, then unelss we adapt the PC libtard culture, nothing would satisfy their low bar.
The idea that just because a group glorifes mass murderers, makes it that it loses public support is nonsense. I will give you two examples.
You can maintain a moderate and extreme side of a given group, both help the reputation.
1. Muslims
Muslims are a dominant and invasive community. There is no doubt that they glorify mass violence. For example, in Palenstine, celebrations are regularly taken place after an "shahid" (matryr; suciide attacker) killed some Jews in israel. Have this stopped public support for Palenstine? No. Not to mention, they are a growing community globally despite their violent reputation and the fact that many terrroist groups are islamic.
In fact, because of the cruel reputation, people are afraid to mess with them.
2. Niggers
The Black community as a collective, glorify violence. Endless civil war in Africa, BBQ feasts of rival gang members of Haiti, the constant gang wars and the rap culture to celebrate them. Even in their protests BLM, they were extremely violent rioting and burning up stuff. Have this stopped people from supporting them? No, because if you speak against them you'll get UZI'd or beaten up.
On the other hand, you have Indians.
Indians are regularly mocked on Twitter and all sorts of platforms, despite their non violent (although questionable hyigene) reputation. No other group is as made fun of as Jeets, even on libtard sites like Reddit.
Violence works. We should embrace it, but not commit it.
Last edited:
