Ramus Inferior

Father. Husband. Son. Existence is interesting. The logical irregularities of modern times are apparent. Every wisdom knows a koan.
Chromosomes: XY

[Ramus Inferior @HumblyCurious]

Reflection: we have entered the post factual era. Truths are drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Group think mobilizes against all forms of reason. The internet comes with the potential for intellectual enlightenment but is used to dumb us down. We are being divided by design.

[Ramus Inferior @HumblyCurious]

@Markus_Allard Team Allard ✋🏻

[Ramus Inferior @HumblyCurious]

@PenguReborn To themselves and others around anything in the real world

[Pengu REBORN @PenguReborn]

Anyone who believes this about teenagers is a danger to themselves around metal utensils.

[Ramus Inferior @HumblyCurious]

@Miragea_S @mattvanswol Confidence arrives well before experience and wisdom. This isn't unique for kids, but it tends to be more apparent. Needs parental permission to go on a school trip, but has strong, confident views on national sovereignty.

[Ramus Inferior @HumblyCurious]

David Raya is our second most active player off the ball. Also one of the most creative and accurate passers of the ball. #arsenal

[Ramus Inferior @HumblyCurious]

@pmosligo @doctor_rahmeh @Buckason22 Disgusting

[Ramus Inferior @HumblyCurious]

@_cingraham Are there any weaknesses in the methodology that could potentially skew these proofs?

[Ramus Inferior @HumblyCurious]

@20th_Centurygal Even In Arcadia by Sleep Token

[Ramus Inferior @HumblyCurious]

@readswithravi The Kybalion. Alchemy is real

[Ramus Inferior @HumblyCurious]

@sciencegirl Free will

[stepfanie tyler @stepfanie]

When I was in “Women’s and Gender Studies” in college, we spent a lot of time talking about “systems,” “the patriarchy” and all these hidden structures supposedly shaping women’s lives in the West

I entertained a lot of those ideas back then and I was trying my best to understand the frameworks they were teaching

But the one place I never gave them an inch on was women in the Middle East

Every time someone would say “that’s just their culture” something in me short-circuited. No matter how hard I tried, I just couldn’t reconcile it

We were told American women were oppressed because of wage gaps or subtle social expectations, but when the conversation turned to women who could be punished by the state for showing their hair, suddenly we were supposed to become culturally sensitive (some of these lunatics even romanticized it!)

My professors used to get irritated with me when that topic came up bc they knew I wasn’t going to play along and my pushback would cause a rift in their narrative

They didn't like it when I pointed out the hypocrisy of calling Western women oppressed while treating literal legal restrictions on women’s bodies as a cultural difference

One of my professors even had a running joke she'd use to preface discussions on Islam—she'd do this smug smirk and say something to the effect of “we all know Stepfanie's take on Islam” as if I was the ridiculous one

Looking back, I wish I had the language and wit to verbally obliterate her but I was 22 and simply did not have the intellectual capacity yet. I didn't know the first thing about geopolitics, I just knew in my bones how fucking stupid it sounded to be bitching about making 20 cents less than men when women in the Middle East were being stoned to death for showing their hair

Even back then, before my politics changed, that contradiction never sat right with me. And it's one of the many reasons I despise so-called feminists so much today

[Blondelady2024 @arva61138]

This is probably the best answer I've ever heard to the question, "Why did God create evil?"

A professor at the university asked his students the following question:

“Everything that exists was created by God?”
One student bravely answered:
“Yes, it was created by God.”

The professor asked :
“If God created everything, then God created evil, since it exists. And according to the principle that our deeds define ourselves, then God is evil.”

The student became silent after hearing such an answer. The professor was very pleased with himself. He boasted to students for proving once again that faith in God is a myth.

Another student raised his hand and said:
“Can I ask you a question, professor?”
"Of course," replied the professor.

“Professor, is cold a thing?”
“What kind of question is this? Of course it exists. Have you ever been cold?”
Students laughed at the young man's question.

The young man answered:
“Actually, sir, cold doesn't exist. According to the laws of physics, what we consider cold is actually the absence of heat. A person or object can be studied on whether it has or transmits energy.
Absolute zero (-460 degrees Fahrenheit) is a complete absence of heat. All matter becomes inert and unable to react at this temperature. Cold does not exist. We created this word to describe what we feel in the absence of heat.”

The student continued:
“Professor, does darkness exist?”
“Of course it exists.” said the professor.
“You're wrong again, sir. Darkness also does not exist. Darkness is actually the absence of light. We can study the light but not the darkness. We can use Newton's prism to spread white light across multiple colors and explore the different wavelengths of each color. You can't measure darkness. A simple ray of light can break into the world of darkness and illuminate it. How can you tell how dark a certain space is? You measure how much light is presented. Isn't it so? Darkness is a term man uses to describe what happens in the absence of light.”

In the end, the young man asked the professor:
“Sir, does evil exist?”
This time it was uncertain, the professor answered:
“Of course, as I said before. We see him every day. Cruelty, numerous crimes and violence throughout the world. These examples are nothing but a manifestation of evil.”

To this, the student answered:
“Evil does not exist, sir, or at least it does not exist for itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is like darkness and cold—a man-made word to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is not faith or love, which exist as light and warmth. Evil is the result of the absence of Divine love in the human heart. It’s the kind of cold that comes when there is no heat, or the kind of darkness that comes when there’s no light.”
🙏🏻❤️🙏🏻

[Ramus Inferior @HumblyCurious]

@FightWithMemes They don't recognize their own shadows so they project them onto others

[Ramus Inferior @HumblyCurious]

@NicoleBehnam They're creating a super spreader event. Don't they care about grandma!?

[Elaine Ellinger @Elaine_Ellinger]

There is a lawful way to stop sharia — and no one is talking about it.
Watch the full interview here: https://t.co/DdtJtD3jen

[✞🎀TrumpGirlOnFire 🔥 @TrumpGirlOnFire]

Charlie Kirk’s BEST Debate Moment | You Gotta See This!

HE PUTS THIS COLLEGE INSTRUCTOR TO SHAME
Losing Charlie has been a great loss to everyone, but especially our younger generation.

[Ramus Inferior @HumblyCurious]

@GreiderDD Jag tror många nu ser det absurda i att prideaktivister, feminister och socialister försvarar islamister och diktaturer i antiimperialismens namn. Krafter som skulle krossa dem först av alla. När hatet mot väst väger tyngre än individens frihet har kompassen tappats.

[Thodin @therealthodin]

Socialists and Islam use each other to take power the winner eliminates the other.

In Iran, Islam won and the Leftists were slaughtered.

In China the Communists won so Islam went to concentration camps to endure slavery, genocide, and live organ harvesting.

Amusingly neither complain about this. For example Leftists in the US whine about imagined Muslim persecution while ignoring the active genocide of Muslims happening in China today.

Such is their hatred of all that is good and right.

[Ramus Inferior @HumblyCurious]

The world should be governed by the non-binary, one legged, divorced, intersex Muslims. For a fairer future!

[Yuri Bezmenov's Ghost @Ne_pas_couvrir]

Leftists do not treat “indigenous” as a neutral category that can apply broadly to white or European peoples as a category. That contradiction makes sense once you see how the term functions in their framework. For them, indigenous is a protected moral and epistemic rank tied to a theory of power, marginalization, and repair. “Indigenous” marks who is positioned as historically dispossessed, meaning the past as read through that theory, and therefore entitled to special standing to name harm and to define what justice requires.

In that view, “historical dispossession” is an ongoing structure that runs through conquest and land seizure, removal, broken treaties, boarding schools, suppression of language and religion, legal exclusion, and the settler institutions that embed those outcomes in the present. Some left theories widen the frame further, treating capitalism, enclosure, and liberal property regimes as the deeper logic that made those outcomes durable. Either way, the past is treated as active in today’s land control, jurisdiction, norms, and institutional recognition. Standing attaches to the ongoing and political condition as defined by left theory.

This is where the activist verbs get their force. The present order is treated as a hardened arrangement that presents itself as natural and inevitable. That is reification, a human-made structure treated as “just how things are.” In left terms the reified object can include whiteness, the settler state, capitalism, liberal neutrality, managerial expertise, and the default standpoint that sets the norms.

Dereification then is the counter-move: breaking the aura of inevitability so contingency becomes visible and what was suppressed can return as authoritative. The program therefore draws on verbs like dismantle, decenter, decolonize, abolish, overcome alienation, and liberate.

So, two inversions follow.

First comes an ontological inversion. What outsiders treat as the basic structure of reality, neutral institutions, fair procedures, official categories, expert systems, is redescribed as derivative and compromised, not an innocent baseline but a surface layer produced by deeper false, oppressive forces. The deeper reality is power and its effects: domination, dispossession, and lived harm. In plain terms, the “power principle” is treated as the deep structure and institutions are read as expressions of it, even when they present themselves as neutral.

Second comes an epistemological inversion. Authority shifts away from the supposedly neutral knower toward standpoint, lived experience, positionality, and testimony anchored in exclusion. “Standpoint” here does not just mean having an opinion. It means a socially located vantage point shaped by where you sit in structures of power, which is treated as revealing what the dominant order tends to hide from itself. The oppressed standpoint is treated as epistemically privileged because it sits closer to the system’s fault lines.

In plain terms, neutrality is treated as a mask for embedded interests as defined by left theory, while proximity to trauma is treated as a clearer angle on what the false, oppressive system conceals.

In that frame, disputes over who “counts” as indigenous generate productive friction against the settled order (doing the work!). The category stays elastic within left frameworks because if performs moral and organizational work. It expands who can claim protected standing, who can speak with authority against the established center, and who can demand restorative rearrangement of status, resources, and recognition. That is praxis in the strong sense: practical activity that interprets the world while working to change it, aimed at a repaired social whole on a new, “higher” level.

[Ramus Inferior @HumblyCurious]

@Cobratate No but the Iranian regime wants the infidels dead. I believe them and everyone I love is an infidel.