>>510376722you claim certain races are "evil" based on behavior, then cite that behavior as proof t hey're evil, but if morality is just survival (your original claim), why is theft/rape "evil" if it aids tribal fitness? your outrage contradicts your own framework. you reject "jewish storytelling" but uncritically accept 19th century race "science," another invented narrative.
you say rape is "evil," but why? in your worldview, it's only "bad" if it harms your tribe. if it strengthened your race (ie terrorizing enemies) would it become good? if not, you're smuggling in objective morality from the Christian worldview.
if "high-trust societies" are your standard, why reject Christianity, the cultural foundation of the very civilizations you fetishize?
you can't simultaneously deny objective morality and condemn "evil." your rage at rapists proves you know real evil exists, you just can't explain it without borrowing from the moral realist framework you mock. that's why your ideology is a dead end, it's all snarling and no substance.
Christianity doesn't teach "obey authority blindly" (see Acts 5:29) your caricature ignores centuries of Christian civil disobedience against tyranny. meanwhile, your morality literally boils down to "obey tribal instincts blindly," no reasoning, just id.
you mock God for "setting up" adam and eve, but in your worldview, there's no free will (just atoms obeying physics) so why rage at "evil race?" they can't help it.
there's no justice, so why cry about "Yahweh's cruelty?" if the universe is pitiless chaos? your outrage is pure cognitive dissonance.
you accuse God of condemning billions to suffering, yet your ethic celebrates genocide. at least Christianity offers redemption, your worldview is just slaughter with extra steps. you dismiss free will ("Yahweh should've made them obey") but demand moral responsibility from "evil races," pick one.