[El Chinito loco]

Very insightful thoughts.

The truth path of the uncucked man is to spray your seed into the palm of your hand and rub it around a bit and then ingest it back in to continue the cycle of virtue.

[Anabasis to Desta]

(04-24-2016 09:19 AM)El Chinito loco Wrote:  

Very insightful thoughts.

The truth path of the uncucked man is to spray your seed into the palm of your hand and rub it around a bit and then ingest it back in to continue the cycle of virtue.

Nope. That would mean you got cucked by your own palms because they made contact with the cum first. The only solution is to jerk off straight into your mouth and swallow.

Make sure your teeth don't cuck you in the process though.

[R_Niko]

(04-24-2016 08:17 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

Am I the only one who thinks 'Cuck' has become the 'Literally' of the Alt-Right? It's current usage barely-resembles its original meaning, and its ubiquitous overuse is about to destroy whatever tiny trace of meaning still remained in the word. It's transitioning into background noise.

Copied from another message board, I think this is all we need to keep things in context:

"The word 'cuck' gets used a lot lately. Many people have taken a try at describing the phenomenon, but I think all existing descriptions of 'cuck' miss why the point and the power of the word. They miss why 'cuck' is not merely a modern 'faggot' or 'hippy,' but actually something much stronger. The perfect description for a modern epidemic that is destroying our nations, our societies, and our souls.

To understand why 'cuck' is so powerful, we need to understand its origins and literal meaning. The word cuck is a short for cuckold, which is a man whose wife is cheating on him. More specifically, in modern usage, a cuckold is a man who KNOWINGLY ALLOWS his wife to cheat on him - either because he gains pleasure from it or because he is too weak or cowardly to stop it. But this is not the original source of 'cuck,' nor the one that best describes why 'cuck' is the perfect description for the modern age.

The term cuckold itself comes from the cuckoo bird: a bird that is a brood parasite. The cuckoo bird lays its eggs in the nests of other birds. Once the egg hatches, the young cuckoo will swiftly destroy or eat most or all of the nest's original inhabitants. The parents of these murdered young who come back to a nest with a baby cuckoo in it will ignore the carnage, and dutifully raise the young cuckoo as if it is their own chick. Indeed, because cuckoos are often much larger than the birds whose nests they parasitize, it is possible for cucked parents to literally starve as they struggle to provide for the murderer of their real children. "

[Thersites]

(04-24-2016 10:27 AM)R_Niko Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 08:17 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

Am I the only one who thinks 'Cuck' has become the 'Literally' of the Alt-Right? It's current usage barely-resembles its original meaning, and its ubiquitous overuse is about to destroy whatever tiny trace of meaning still remained in the word. It's transitioning into background noise.

Copied from another message board, I think this is all we need to keep things in context:

"The word 'cuck' gets used a lot lately. Many people have taken a try at describing the phenomenon, but I think all existing descriptions of 'cuck' miss why the point and the power of the word. They miss why 'cuck' is not merely a modern 'faggot' or 'hippy,' but actually something much stronger. The perfect description for a modern epidemic that is destroying our nations, our societies, and our souls.

To understand why 'cuck' is so powerful, we need to understand its origins and literal meaning. The word cuck is a short for cuckold, which is a man whose wife is cheating on him. More specifically, in modern usage, a cuckold is a man who KNOWINGLY ALLOWS his wife to cheat on him - either because he gains pleasure from it or because he is too weak or cowardly to stop it. But this is not the original source of 'cuck,' nor the one that best describes why 'cuck' is the perfect description for the modern age.

The term cuckold itself comes from the cuckoo bird: a bird that is a brood parasite. The cuckoo bird lays its eggs in the nests of other birds. Once the egg hatches, the young cuckoo will swiftly destroy or eat most or all of the nest's original inhabitants. The parents of these murdered young who come back to a nest with a baby cuckoo in it will ignore the carnage, and dutifully raise the young cuckoo as if it is their own chick. Indeed, because cuckoos are often much larger than the birds whose nests they parasitize, it is possible for cucked parents to literally starve as they struggle to provide for the murderer of their real children. "

You right, 'Cuck' is the only word in our lexicon to describe the action of many people in the mess of world we live in. For example, cucksertive pretend to staunch conservative, but will betray its ideals of its movement for chance to be part of the liberal gravy train. The couple of this article is willing disregarding there biological programing of reproducing your own genes and Christian teaching for the opportunity of signal their supposed 'virtue' and to confirm twisted world view.

[Parzival]

This whole topic is Cuckaesque.

[Aurini]

(04-23-2016 10:17 AM)Anabasis to Desta Wrote:  

They're just white ... from which you pathetically extrapolated that their kids would grow up to change the world while the black kids they adopted will not. That's pretty close to the IQ and Race bullshit spewed on HBD forums.

I do lean towards the HBD camp, which means that you and I have a disagreement on facts, rather than values. You and I could debate, present evidence, re-examine our assumptions, et cetera, and likely come to some sort of agreement (or at least ammend our present posittions) - but that would not only be a massive amount of work, but would also derail the thread and forum. There are times when civilized men simply agree to disagree.

That said, I'd like to clarify a couple of points, since race itself had very little to do with my disappointment.

First, that although I do consider race a significant factor on the statistical level, and a notable factor on the individual level, it's far from the most important. As the saying goes, IQ is a great way to measure men, but a poor measure for a man; this goes for all generalizations. Being tall doesn't make you a good basketball player, for example. There's a host of other factors; culture, erudition, style of dress, what part of the country somebody comes from (New York values anyone?), et cetera.

That said, I do advocate the continuance of heterogenous ethnic groups - of actual multiculturalism, rather than the cultural bleaching which the term usually means - for a variety of reasons. Religiously, because of what happened to Babylon's "One World Cultue"; linguistically, because each language has its own form of beauty to it. Culturally, because cultural exchange (meaning American Chinese Food and British Curry, not McDonalds in India) is an incredibly enriching thing; and spiritually, different ethnicities and cultures approach God in different manners, and I think there's lessons we can all learn from one another, and by eliminating our differences we eliminate the ability to understand.

You could argue that none of this had to do with genetic differences between the races, that it has everything to do with culture, and you could be correct - but nonetheless, cultural lines are drawn across lines of race because we as a species are hyper-sensitive to detecting minor differences in one another. I can't tell the difference between a Hutu and a Tutsi, but they certainly can - and they wouldn't know the difference between a Brit and an Irishman, but I sure as Hell do.

So yes, part of my comment was out of a desire to maintain unique cultures and ethnicities in the world; but there was another element as well.

The second reason is that you can learn quite a bit about a person from the shape of their face. Deep-set eye sockets show empathy, and large eyes show intelligence, and this couple strikes me as being genetically endowed with good, pro-civilizational genes. If somebody from the Honey Boo Boo crowd had adopted these children, well - there'd still be the sick fetishization and so forth, the implicit child abuse - but I don't want the Honey Boo Boos of the world breeding. And quite frankly, the sort of Black couple that would use in vitro fertilization are probably amongst the top-tier Blacks, whom we want having more children. I would have rolled my eyes, wished them the best, and moved on.

But this couple looks capable of producing truly spectacular children; that they would commit genetic suicide strikes me as an absolute tragedy.

[samsamsam]

(04-24-2016 03:53 PM)Aurini Wrote:  

But this couple looks capable of producing truly spectacular children; that they would commit genetic suicide strikes me as an absolute tragedy.

That woman has good genetics, that guy is nothing special.

[AnonymousBosch]

(04-24-2016 10:27 AM)R_Niko Wrote:  

The term cuckold itself comes from the cuckoo bird: a bird that is a brood parasite. The cuckoo bird lays its eggs in the nests of other birds. Once the egg hatches, the young cuckoo will swiftly destroy or eat most or all of the nest's original inhabitants. The parents of these murdered young who come back to a nest with a baby cuckoo in it will ignore the carnage, and dutifully raise the young cuckoo as if it is their own chick. Indeed, because cuckoos are often much larger than the birds whose nests they parasitize, it is possible for cucked parents to literally starve as they struggle to provide for the murderer of their real children. "

Yes, it literally looks like this, but I still don’t see it. We don't need to look to the Animal Kingdom or use 'Cuck' to explain what is simply ‘Your Brain On Socialism’, particularly as the most common message board response would to be us to accuse each other of being 'cucks' over a minor disagreement like this. As a guy who understand the power of language in re-shaping thought: 'Cuck' is over-played and rapidly losing its power.

It's ANZAC Day back in Australia. This is a national holiday - a day of remembrance for both fallen and serving soldiers. I was watching a livestream of various dawn services and saw particular politicians laying wreaths and looking respectfully-solemn. I flashed back to the Cenotaph in my home town that I regularly jog past. The inscription on top always catches my eye: “For God, King and Country.” It always fills me with a pang of envy that people lived in a time with such outward-looking, community-minded values, rather than inward-focused, narcissistic ones.

Watching the feed, I was struck by the realisation that every single Politician there was actively-working to undermine Faith, Duty and Nationalism via their policies and actions.

Socialist Power is enacted by getting people to disbelief Objective Truths and believe in Subjective Lies, which can be shifted as necessary to maintain power. As such, everything good and noble must be held up for mockery by presenting the opposite as being the truth. It can be as simple as labelling a washed-up 47-year-old celebrity as ‘The Most Beautiful Woman Alive’ and demonising anyone who dares challenge this assertation; or it can be redefining words and concepts to change their literal meaning, such as ‘rape’ or ‘harrassment’; or it can be Feminists labelling men as having ‘fragile male egos’ and describing themselves as ‘Strong, Empowered and Badass’; or as simple as demanding that a 40-old-man in a dress have the same rights as a teenage girl.

It’s easy to label the 80’s Lesbian Radfems and this Catholic couple as either ‘Cucks’ or ‘Virtue Signallers” for their focus on minority props. To my eyes, they’re simply Socialists: the point of your family construct is to mock the traditional nuclear family, particularly the Patriach.

What does society think of when they think of a Traditional Christian family?



There’s interracial adoptions every day. Why do you think this particular story was presented as ‘news’ to begin with, and why it went viral and was re-shared on various other News Media Sites?

The entire staff at The Washington Post are Socialists, as shown by their repeated focus on rejecting Objective Truth for Subjective Falsehoods that strengthen a Socialist Narrative.

This story is being presented purely as a victory lap because Socialists have a deep loathing of Christian Faith. “See how we have defeated even our strongest enemies! Look at how the out Socialist Narrative has entirely-subverted the traditional Christian Family into serving our interests, and not those of God!”

That's really all I'm seeing.

[Days of Broken Arrows]

(04-24-2016 09:40 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 10:27 AM)R_Niko Wrote:  

The term cuckold itself comes from the cuckoo bird: a bird that is a brood parasite. The cuckoo bird lays its eggs in the nests of other birds. Once the egg hatches, the young cuckoo will swiftly destroy or eat most or all of the nest's original inhabitants. The parents of these murdered young who come back to a nest with a baby cuckoo in it will ignore the carnage, and dutifully raise the young cuckoo as if it is their own chick. Indeed, because cuckoos are often much larger than the birds whose nests they parasitize, it is possible for cucked parents to literally starve as they struggle to provide for the murderer of their real children. "

Yes, it literally looks like this, but I still don’t see it. We don't need to look to the Animal Kingdom or use 'Cuck' to explain what is simply ‘Your Brain On Socialism’, particularly as the most common message board response would to be us to accuse each other of being 'cucks' over a minor disagreement like this. As a guy who understand the power of language in re-shaping thought: 'Cuck' is over-played and rapidly losing its power.

It's ANZAC Day back in Australia. This is a national holiday - a day of remembrance for both fallen and serving soldiers. I was watching a livestream of various dawn services and saw particular politicians laying wreaths and looking respectfully-solemn. I flashed back to the Cenotaph in my home town that I regularly jog past. The inscription on top always catches my eye: “For God, King and Country.” It always fills me with a pang of envy that people lived in a time with such outward-looking, community-minded values, rather than inward-focused, narcissistic ones.

Watching the feed, I was struck by the realisation that every single Politician there was actively-working to undermine Faith, Duty and Nationalism via their policies and actions.

Socialist Power is enacted by getting people to disbelief Objective Truths and believe in Subjective Lies, which can be shifted as necessary to maintain power. As such, everything good and noble must be held up for mockery by presenting the opposite as being the truth. It can be as simple as labelling a washed-up 47-year-old celebrity as ‘The Most Beautiful Woman Alive’ and demonising anyone who dares challenge this assertation; or it can be redefining words and concepts to change their literal meaning, such as ‘rape’ or ‘harrassment’; or it can be Feminists labelling men as having ‘fragile male egos’ and describing themselves as ‘Strong, Empowered and Badass’; or as simple as demanding that a 40-old-man in a dress have the same rights as a teenage girl.

It’s easy to label the 80’s Lesbian Radfems and this Catholic couple as either ‘Cucks’ or ‘Virtue Signallers” for their focus on minority props. To my eyes, they’re simply Socialists: the point of your family construct is to mock the traditional nuclear family, particularly the Patriach.

What does society think of when they think of a Traditional Christian family?



There’s interracial adoptions every day. Why do you think this particular story was presented as ‘news’ to begin with, and why it went viral and was re-shared on various other News Media Sites?

The entire staff at The Washington Post are Socialists, as shown by their repeated focus on rejecting Objective Truth for Subjective Falsehoods that strengthen a Socialist Narrative.

This story is being presented purely as a victory lap because Socialists have a deep loathing of Christian Faith. “See how we have defeated even our strongest enemies! Look at how the out Socialist Narrative has entirely-subverted the traditional Christian Family into serving our interests, and not those of God!”

That's really all I'm seeing.

The entire staff at The Washington Post are Socialists, as shown by their repeated focus on rejecting Objective Truth for Subjective Falsehoods that strengthen a Socialist Narrative.

They're not socialists. I know some of these people. They're hyper-competitive careerists who have a "What can you do for me?" attitude.

The same goes for college professors. They're not actually socialists. They gladly take the perks and the salary that capitalism gives them.

What both of these camps do, however, is push watered-down socialist ideas on the masses, who they consider to be beneath them. It's "capitalism for me -- but socialism for thee."

That's what makes the ideas these groups push so repulsive. It'd be one thing if they spouted these concepts while living in a commune, living off he land, and not taking big salaries (as actual hippies did back in the day -- I had some in my family -- weird!). But these people are the first to rub their Ivy League degrees in your face and the first to show off their DC "townhomes" (they never say "townhouse" -- that word is for the uncouth!).

(I know this post was way off-topic from the original thread, but it's important to know your enemy.)

[All or Nothing]

(04-24-2016 09:40 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

The entire staff at The Washington Post are Socialists, as shown by their repeated focus on rejecting Objective Truth for Subjective Falsehoods that strengthen a Socialist Narrative.

This story is being presented purely as a victory lap because Socialists have a deep loathing of Christian Faith. “See how we have defeated even our strongest enemies! Look at how the out Socialist Narrative has entirely-subverted the traditional Christian Family into serving our interests, and not those of God!”

That's really all I'm seeing.

What makes me sad is that there are people who full blown reject the all of the great things Christian people have added to this world, reject their heritage, reject their faith, and openly hate their own kind.

It is a sickness of the mind.

On top of that, we had a referendum on large scale socialist policies. It happened when the USSR collapsed in 1991. Only it had to happen after wide spread suffering and millions of people dyeing under an incompetent authoritarian government whose control was so pervasive and far reaching that it consumed people's everyday lives.

Yet, young people in the US are now openly opining for large scale socialism, even with the knowledge that it leads to oppressive, unsustainable governments.

--------------------------------------------------------

Expanded welfare systems have worked though. In the case of Denmark, it has succeeded. Still, Denmark is a geographically tiny country that has a small yet extremely homogenous population.

To get an expanded welfare system to work in the United States like Denmark's system would be extremely difficult. To keep it from breaking down under various social pressures, would be even harder.

Edit: Just read this.

(04-24-2016 11:45 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

What both of these camps do, however, is push watered-down socialist ideas on the masses, who they consider to be beneath them. It's "capitalism for me -- but socialism for thee."

That's what makes the ideas these groups push so repulsive. It'd be one thing if they spouted these concepts while living in a commune, living off he land, and not taking big salaries (as actual hippies did back in the day -- I had some in my family -- weird!). But these people are the first to rub their Ivy League degrees in your face and the first to show off their DC "townhomes" (they never say "townhouse" -- that word is for the uncouth!).

That's another thing I have noticed. The high level people who openly espouse left leaning ideas, simultaneously follow none of the tenants that they are so fond of.

The hypocrisy is astounding for some of these people.

[AnonymousBosch]

(04-24-2016 11:45 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

What both of these camps do, however, is push watered-down socialist ideas on the masses, who they consider to be beneath them. It's "capitalism for me -- but socialism for thee."

This ivory tower doublethink hypocrisy is the defining feature of every Western Socialist I have ever interacted with in my entire life.

What you are describing as evidence that they're not 'True' Socialists is, to my eyes, evidence of exactly why they are.

I've never met a Working Class Socialist in any of my University Days or Working Life, as working-class Unions were minimised in power since the 80's by their jobs being outsourced overseas. Instead, they're all from wealthy backgrounds, clueless about class realities and they all expect to be well-paid for spreading propaganda. I suspect they just assume they'll be Inner Party members, come the Revolution.

If Religion truly is the Opiate of the Masses, then Socialism is the Amphetamine of the Upper Classes.

If someone stricken with Privileged Ennui takes the shot, they're suddenly jolted into a heightened-existence with a thrilling combination of hyper-alertness and hostility. The increasing sense of power and superiority makes everything suddenly matter, so they see great import in their 100 mph conversation and thought processes that just isn't there. They've the miserable, dysfunctional children of the 1% who have lived all their life in envy of the apparent happiness of The People (due to what they'd naturally see as naive stupidity due to a lack of intelligence). They crave to be perceived as possessing this earthiness and realness that seems to come to naturally to the proles - how simple are their concerns! - and this drug lets them feel like they share this realness, however briefly.

It offers a perfect, pre-constructed identity for those who lack a core soul. Remove 'Social Justice' from Caitlyn Dewey, and what is really left in her writing or outloook that is unique to her personality? To paraphrase Mike Cernovich, she is an entirely-fungible resource. There is no there there.

You've written enough about Narcissism to understand the widespread danger society is in now that Ennui and Narcissism have 'trickled down' into the middle classes, as in this case of this couple. Perhaps Social Media was carefully-designed to poison society with widespread Narcissism as to create a generation who would naturally-gravitate towards Social Justice, due to the masses craving a real identity: See! I'm not empty inside! I care! I'm a Goodperson! Likes aren't enough! Please praise me! Make me whole!

I think Socialism is the most dangerous drug in existence: whilst one drug might destroy a communities, Socialism destroys entire countries.

I think the second part of this message might give my identity away, so I'll send it to you privately.

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

(04-25-2016 03:35 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

If Religion truly is the Opiate of the Masses, then Socialism is the Amphetamine of the Upper Classes.

I shortened it further:

If religion is the opiate of the masses, socialism is the heroin.

[AnonymousBosch]

(04-25-2016 11:11 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  

I shortened it further:

If religion is the opiate of the masses, socialism is the heroin.

Ah sorry mate, I mustn't have made my point clearly from the tiredness. My Day / Night sleep cycle is all screwed up at the moment.

Heroin is an Opiate (a 'downer'), not an Amphetamine (an 'upper').

Marx's original quotation - often shorted to 'religion opiate of the masses' - suggests that the Masses who are unawakened to Class Understanding use religion as an opiate to dull the senses to the very real pain of social injustice.

My extension of his thought was building on my belief that the Western Upper Classes are stricken with Spiritual Deadness and Physical Ennui due to the overwhelming comfort of their extreme class privilege. As such, they need an Amphetamine - an Upper - to even remotely-feel alive. Hence, Socialism excites their senses, rather than deadens them. This is a highly-addictive feeling because Uppers usually give people false senses of both power and clarity of thought.

Therefore:

Quote:

If Religion truly is the Opiate of the Masses, then Socialism is the Amphetamine of the Upper Classes.

[Rhyme or Reason]

All this "cuck" bullshit has really jumped the shark.

Ancestral cucking? Seriously? I can't believe this was uttered in this thread without a hint of irony.

So having your own kids makes you a cuck now.

"Cuck" is the new alpha / beta or r/k.

"Does this make me a cuck?"

"Is it cucky if I do x?"

"How do I avoid being a metacuck?"


I blame those faggy "alt right" edgelords for abusing the term. It was funny when we used to make fun of guys who let their bitches get plowed by other men. They are pathetic and deserving of derision. But ever since the cuckservative meme trended it attracted the hordes of whiteknight altright cucks who cucked the shit out of the term and ruined our fun.


A cuck is a guy who unwittingly raises another guy's spawn or lets his wife take strange cock.


End of.


Anyone who spends any time ruminating about "uncucking his ancestry" or whatever needs to step away from the keyboard, turn off the computer, go outside, take a breath of fresh air, and get a life.

[Lizard King]

The popular politics of today, whatever you want to call them, all have one thing in common: pathological altruism.

Socialism provides social status. That's the prime motivator for these Bateman-esque types who write for the WaPo and surrogate children of a different ethnicity.

The WaPo staff are socialists, it ups their status. It shows they care about the less fortunate. If you're not socialist you don't care about other humans and must have something wrong with you.

This couple are Socialists. They care about other humans so much they gave the under-privileged a chance in life. We are less worthy than them because we haven't done as much as they have to help the less fortunate.

No one is concerned with reality anymore, they just want to be the best Socialist.

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

(04-25-2016 03:49 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

(04-25-2016 11:11 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  

I shortened it further:

If religion is the opiate of the masses, socialism is the heroin.

Ah sorry mate, I mustn't have made my point clearly from the tiredness. My Day / Night sleep cycle is all screwed up at the moment.

Heroin is an Opiate (a 'downer'), not an Amphetamine (an 'upper').

Marx's original quotation - often shorted to 'religion opiate of the masses' - suggests that the Masses who are unawakened to Class Understanding use religion as an opiate to dull the senses to the very real pain of social injustice.

My extension of his thought was building on my belief that the Western Upper Classes are stricken with Spiritual Deadness and Physical Ennui due to the overwhelming comfort of their extreme class privilege. As such, they need an Amphetamine - an Upper - to even remotely-feel alive. Hence, Socialism excites their senses, rather than deadens them. This is a highly-addictive feeling because Uppers usually give people false senses of both power and clarity of thought.

Therefore:

Quote:

If Religion truly is the Opiate of the Masses, then Socialism is the Amphetamine of the Upper Classes.

No no you wrote that theory of upper class excitement well the first time, only I mistakenly used the word "shortened" that implied that I was building upon it instead of just it giving me an inspiration for something else. I should have said "I got an idea from that".

When I said "If religion is the opiate of the masses, socialism is the heroin," I meant that any complacency ascribed to religion (opium - moderately strong and addictive substance) pales in comparison to the one produced by socialism (heroin - extremely strong and addictive substance).

I.e. regarding its potential for control over the masses, socialism is a lot stronger form of religion.

[SigmundSauer]

(04-24-2016 02:39 AM)Excelsior Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 02:43 PM)Anabasis to Desta Wrote:  

^Where are the Mongols now? A desperately poor and desolate country of less than 3 million despite being the size of Western Europe.

Sure they have descendants running around the Eurasian steppe's and Central Asia but do they identify as Mongolian? Are they culturally Mongolian?
On the other hand, insular cultures like Jews, Persians, Ethiopians and Japanese who prefer breeding with their own women have survived for Millennia.

Ashkenazim (read: most of the world's Jews) are largely the product of intermarriage between men with middle-eastern roots and European women. This is why the maternal lineages of Jewish populations have been shown to be rather heterogenous, but the paternal lineages far more consistent. They are born of genetic intermingling (which is a form of cuckolding now I guess, so I shall refer to this as "ancestral cucking"). The Sephardim (who account for the bulk of the non-Ashkenazim on the planet) have pretty much the same story. In short, Jews are genetically heterogenous products of ancestral cucking that, while far less violently executed, is not entirely dissimilar to that which we have ascribed to the Mongols.

"Ethiopians" are not a single people or culture. The history of the Oromo is defined by expansion and integration of various peoples (read: interbreeding/intermarriage/mixing). They have substantial Nilotic admixture. All of the major ethnic groups in Ethiopia show genetic affinities with populations outside of the country (particularly near eastern Caucasoids, whose gene flow into Ethiopia was extensive and has been well documented), which would imply extensive episodes of ancestral cucking have taken place there in the past.

The Persian people are no strangers to ancestral cucking. In fact, they have historically been quite adept at it, which is why today the Iranian peoples are quite diverse. Azeris, Turkmen, and Uzbeks are all considered modern Turkic-Iranian hybrids. The Tajiks (whose homelands are in modern day Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, and Tajikistan) are the product of widespread ancestral cucking led by Persians. Extensive admixture is evident in Iran itself and all over the region - in fact, Central/West Asia has generally been among the ancestral cucking capitals of the ancient world. The Iranians are among the few who can rival the Mongols in this regard - both were quite gifted ancestral cucks.

Also, I'm not sure about your characterization and comparison of Mongolia. You describe it as a poor and desolate nation before going on to compare/contrast it with several other peoples you (presumably?) consider more successful due to their insularity and lower propensity for ancestral cucking.

Aside from the fact that several of the nations/populaces you listed have had a long history of ancestral cucking not unlike that of the Mongols, a couple of them (most notably Ethiopia) are not much stronger than modern Mongolia in a developmental or economic sense. In fact, Mongolia is far ahead of Ethiopia by the measure of some well regarded metrics of human development, like the UN Human Development Index. The latest UN HDI (which was, ironically, released in Addis Ababa 5 months ago) ranks Mongolia at 90 (.727 measure, above world average of .711) and Ethiopia at 174 (.442 measure, quite far below world average of .711). Mongolia's per capita GDP (measured nominally or by PPP) is more than 5 times greater than that of Ethiopia.

This despite all of the ancestral cucking.

Quote:

You might not be getting cucked sexually but you're sure cucking your ancestry, heritage and culture. I can trace back my ancestry to 12th century Ethiopian Orthodox priests who fought alongside the crusaders in Jerusalem against the Saracen hoardes.

There are probably some Arabs, Syrians and Jews in that ancestral tree as well given the well documented genetic links between Ethiopia and outside populations (particularly those in the near east).

Quote:

0 chance I'm letting that part of me go by marrying someone else.

But to each their own i guess.

You wouldn't be here if your ancestors felt that way.

But yes, to each their own.

Amhara and Tigrinya are even more eastern Caucasoid than Cushtic speaking groups like Somali and Oromo; Up to 50-60%, due to a second migration from Yemen in the late Neolithic.