The Noble White Christian Nationalist Myth

this is a reposted conversation I had that explores "the noble savage myth" rhetoric and also takes a look at the opposite side of that spectrum, unpacking what we might describe as the title above

I commented under James Corbett’s post on “The Great Replacement) linked below on the official The Corbett Report website

What is The Great Replacement? - Questions For Corbett

to say:

I appreciate you broaching this subject James.

Love that superiority complex brimming, eugenics obsessed and completely unhinged Benjamin Franklin quote you shared.

I find it interesting that some people consider certain countries to be “white countries” (despite the fact that as I elucidate on in the post I linked above, below the first comment in this thread, the concept of a “white” person is an invented, political, economic and oligarch benefiting term that has no biological nor solid cultural foundation).

Why have so many internalized this identity? Does it really offer any benefit what-so-ever?

BTW, Canada is full of people obsessed with variations of the “Great Replacement” fear (they want to ‘keep Canada a pure white place’). This is a strange idea to me considering Europeans replaced the original inhabitants of this land. Is one replacement righteous and worthy? and the other something to be feared? Why?

Well I have more questions than answers, but thanks for evoking them my friend.

And among other responses from colorful individuals, one person that goes by the name “tedman” said this:

Whites defeat Indians:
Indians displaced, put on reservations, allowed to participate in White economy.

Indians defeat Whites:
All the males and old women killed, young women taken as slaves and regularly beaten by jealous squaws.

- “tedman” (in a comment under a post on The Corbett Report Website)

The following is the resulting exchange of comments. I want to share this hear as I see a lot of the same rhetoric “tedman” is promoting being promoted here in Canada by people that want to protect “white culture” in “Canada”.

My response:

This is a particularly fishy red herring you have offered.

Your comment says a lot more about you than it does about “squaws”.

Who exactly are these “whites” you mention? Can you define them for us all please?

For more information on the term “white person” read:

Poll Of The Month: Is it beneficial for humans that are of a European genetic background to refer to themselves as "White" ?

tedman:

Who are the “Whites”? In this instance, mostly Western Europeans from ~1500 to ~1900 who traveled to North America. Throughout the 1500’s, many settlements were wiped out. The survivors were often either tortured for sport, or raped and enslaved. The Tribes had been doing this to each other for millennia. On occasion, captives escaped and reported.

The Haitian Revolution is another representation of what happens when Whites lose. French Liberals helped foment a slave rebellion. The former slaves killed the plantation owners, then the middle class French that worked there, then the French Liberals, then the mixed-race people.

When Whites won control of a territory, they usually didn’t torture-murder-rape the former inhabitants to extinction. Often they try to give the conquered people the White’s religion, language, forms of government, moral codes (no torture or slavery), basic technology, and get them working to export natural resources in exchange for imported manufactured goods.

While you expressed the perspective that one racial replacement is as good as another, I’m countering that it’s historically been a far more devastating thing when a land falls from White rule rather than into it. While I don’t expect Canada to get outright slaughtered as it would have in centuries past, I do expect a scenario similar to modern South Africa.

- “tedman” (in a comment under a post on The Corbett Report Website)

My response:

Thank you for elaborating.

The swampy decomposing fish aroma of your red herring offering has only increased in its potency.

So anyone that arrived in north america after 1900 is not “white” by your definition? Fascinating.

How about the term “Caucasian”, do you see this as interchangeable with the term “white person”? If not, why not?

Since Duck and I have been over much of the territory in previous discussions (as he and a few others in these threads also have a proclivity to talk about indigenous people in a cartoonish pedestrian 50-s hollywood manner) I will refer to you read the following posts to clear things up for you.

1. https://corbettreport.com/dissent-into-madness-the-weaponization-of-psychology/#comment-148050

I am fully aware of the conflicts that existed between the various indigenous tribes of what is now called North America and while I cannot speak to the validity of your claim (I am speaking to another guy that does by “Duck” on the Corbett Report website here) about human sacrifice I would suggest that we should keep in mind that demonization and dehumanization of the perceived “enemy” or targeted “sub-human class” of an empire is a time tested psychological warfare technique that has been employed in both real time conflicts and retrospectively as “victors write the history books”.

Lets assume that some isolated tribe of indigenous people (or several out of hundreds of different cultures that existed here) engaged in the behavior you describe. Even if that were true, if I look at the history of the imported European institutions and statist belief systems I would say that the repeated and widespread examples of viscous torture, mutilation, child abuse and psychopathic mass murder of dissidents that were par for the course in the history of those institutions and statist organizations are far more disturbing, immoral and evil than any isolated incidents of what you point to in North American indigenous history.

There were many cultural practices that existed in what we now call “North America” (or Mshike Mnise which means “Turtle Island” in the Anishinaabemowin language) before the Europeans came to claim the land as their own and commit genocide (killing off up to 98% of the local population in some areas). Though there was a great diversity in their cultural practices and belief systems, they all shared several common themes.

Some of these cultures formed democracies (such as the Haudenosaunee Confederacy) others were matriarchal societies but the one through-line that can be observed in the traditional views and spiritual teachings of all of the indigenous cultures of Turtle Island is that they recognized all of our fellow non-human beings on Earth as animate, imbued with a spirit and as persons deserving of our respect and reverence.

2. https://corbettreport.com/new-year-open-thread-2025/#comment-172647

You have made sweeping generalizing statements that lump all of the hundreds of different cultures from that area into one group of “indians” and then you describe their attributes and behaviors as though you are talking about one uniform village of people) that is nonsensical.

I don’t know if you summon up some image of an Apache brave charging into battle from a movie or something when you talk about indigenous peoples from Turtle Island, but I have got news for you, they are not all the same and they behave very differently based on their unique cultural backgrounds.

There were hardcore slave collecting warlords on the Mississippi 600 years ago that clearcut forests and behaved like Romans, they created massive mudslides, floods and crop failures through their hubris and learned the hard way about how exploitative ways of living come back to bite you in the behind.

There were very peaceful peoples that did not believe in violating others, they practiced some degree of self-defense, but did not specialize in killing, so when hegemonic forces arrived, they faced a similar fate to those poor Tibetan people on the border of China that keep getting killed and beaten down.

Then there were those that valued precision of language, diplomacy, scholarly knowledge and wit over physical prowess (though they could also hold their own in a fight).

There were trophy hunting marauders, and pacifist meditators, totem pole carving artists and food forest cultivating farmers, each with their own diverse history and customs that motivated them.

There were certainly abusive groups of humans here prior to European arrival, there were also others that far surpassed Europeans in their intellectual, horticultural and social technologies. Being able to discern the difference between the two will save you from looking dumb and will offer you solutions based intel for that which is coming ahead.

3. https://corbettreport.com/new-year-open-thread-2025/#comment-172604

Rogers and Colden admired these Indigenous people of the Eastern Woodlands, but not every European did. “The Savage does not know what it is to obey,” complained the French explorer Nicolas Perrot in the 1670s. Indians “think every one ought to be left to his own Opinion, without being thwarted,” the Jesuit Louis Hennepin wrote twenty years later. The Indians, he grumbled, “believe what they please and no more” — a practice dangerous, in Hennepin’s view, to a well-ordered society. “There is nothing so difficult to control as the tribes of America,” another Jesuit unhappily observed. “All these barbarians have the law of wild asses — they are born, live, and die in a liberty without restraint; they do not know what is meant by bridle and bit.”

Indigenous insistence on personal liberty was accompanied by an equal insistence on social equality. Northeastern Indigenous peoples were appalled by the European propensity to divide themselves into social classes, with those on the lower rungs of the hierarchy compelled to defer to those on the upper. The French adventurer Louis Armand de Lorn d’Arce, Baron of Lahontan, lived in French “Canada” between 1683 and 1694 and frequently visited the Huron. When the baron expatiated upon the superior practices of Europe, the Indians were baffled.

‘When an Indian Child has been brought up among us [Franklin lamented in 1753], 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 take the first good Opportunity of escaping again into the Woods, when there is no reclaiming them.’

Influenced by their proximity to Indigenous societies — by being around living, breathing role models of human liberty — European colonists adopted their insubordinate attitudes, which “troubled the power elite of France,” the historian Cornelius J. Jaenen observed. Baron d’Arce was an example, despite his noble title; as the passage he italicized suggests, his account highlighted “Indian freedoms” as an incitement toward rebellion.

In the most direct way, Indigenous liberty made indigenous villages into competitors for colonists’ allegiance. Colonial societies could not become too oppressive, because their members — surrounded by examples of free life — always had the option to vote with their feet.

tedman:

I don’t think you’re stinky G, even metaphorically. I appreciate your anti-statist stance. I’m hoping I can give you some new information. Why 1900?

North American settlements started out with populations primarily from Western and Northern Europe, however that started to change in the 1880’s after lots of Jews fleeing Russia came to America and immediately started lobbying to loosen immigration restrictions. At first this let in Eastern Europeans and Mediterranean peoples, which I personally would place under the “White” umbrella, but they were somewhat different from the founding populations. Jews would continue to work tirelessly to diversify the Anglosphere and Europe, which brings us to the video topic of the “Great Replacement”. This was not just a legislative effort, Franz Boas made it his life’s work to inject ignorance of racial differences into American colleges and schools from 1899 to 1942, and his fanatical acolytes had a lot of success spreading this fashionable ignorance through out “The West”, leading us to sleepwalk into suicide. So, I see the late 19th century as the start of our diversity woes.

I think the 1950’s depictions of natives were quite sanitized, if campy at times.

Comments on reply 1

I don’t think human sacrifice was common in North America, I think that was mainly a Mesoamerica and South American thing.

Native Americans I’ve met have been varied. Some were very nice. The point of bringing up their warfare is that our modern propaganda is designed to depict them as these peaceful egalitarian forest hippies, who were living in balance with nature until the evil White man came and stole their land. In actuality, their land was changing hands for millennia from tribal warfare, and they would start forest fires for war, some hunted with buffalo jumps, and they hunted the woolly mammoth to extinction.

Yes, Europeans have a history of torture back in the old country.

My understanding is that something like 90% of the Natives were inadvertently killed by the introduction of new-world diseases, and without that, they probably would have destroyed the colonies of the 1500’s and 1600’s.

Comments on reply 2

I’m sure there was a large diversity of tribes and cultures, but local ones described to me as “peaceful” in the Seattle public school system, I’d later discover had done a lot of savage stuff, even tortured one of my ancestors. On this topic, peaceful is realtive.

Comments on reply 3

Sometimes a tribe would go back on it’s agreement and slaughter a town. There’s a potential dark interpretation to just doing as one pleases.

Wasn’t it common for tribes to have chiefs, and people with more or less status within the tribes?

I have to give it to you G, the quote about Whites raised with the Indians preferring to return to the Indians after Whites tried to indoctrinate them back, makes an impression on me. I hadn’t heard of that before.

my response:

Thanks for the in depth response.

The stinky red herring comment was in reference to a portrayal of diverse groups of people and myriad different pre-colonial cultures spanning an entire continent with a cartoonish demonized generalized caricature (eg “Indians defeat Whites:

All the males and old women killed, young women taken as slaves and regularly beaten by jealous squaws.”).

This is just as fragrant a red herring as when bigoted and resentful/judgmental people that have higher melanin skin content judge all “white” people as “exploitative settlers/imperialistic colonials” simply based on genetics alone.

Both generalizing statements are absurd and only serve to reveal the small mindedness of those promoting such viewpoints.

—–

Re: Buffalo

Read:

and:

Re: “Native Americans I’ve met have been varied. Some were very nice. The point of bringing up their warfare is that our modern propaganda is designed to depict them as these peaceful egalitarian forest hippies, who were living in balance with nature until the evil White man came and stole their land. In actuality, their land was changing hands for millennia from tribal warfare, and they would start forest fires for war, some hunted with buffalo jumps, and they hunted the woolly mammoth to extinction.”

There are several problems with the logic of this perspective and thinking.

1. The behavior of “native americans” you`ve met today, does not necessarily say anything about their pre-colonial cultural attributes, for as I elucidate on in this post ( https://gavinmounsey.substack.com/p/some-irreconcilable-truths-on-truth ) and as is explored in the quote below many people living today that have blood indigenous to this land have been fully assimilated, indoctrinated and inculcated into the colonial, state worshipping, anthropocentric, exploitative, reductionist, capitalistic world view.

“THERE’S A MONOLITHIC ASSUMPTION ABOUT INDIGENOUS POLITICS. Particularly that we all care about the Earth. This assumption establishes Indigenous identity as a virtue. But there are Indigenous fascists, capitalists, conservatives, socialists, anarchists, nihilists, extractivists etc. Some spend more time than others (particularly academics) mired in arguments of what system is best for Indigenous “futurity” or “survivance.” Largely ignoring that the origin of the assumption must be contended: the imposition of colonial politics. Anthropological and social assertions of Indigenous “politics” steeped in the stench of the progressivisms of modernity, have dominated how we think about social organizing today. Indigenous organizations measure their accomplishments based on how well they’re recognized, funded, and included in colonial order.“

– Klee Benally (a Dine land defender and musician, from his book No Spiritual Surrender: Indigenous Anarchy in Defense of the Sacred)

2. The “modern propaganda” you reference is not a singular monolithic movement that all depicts indigenous people of this land in the way you describe. That variant of propaganda is but one variation on a spectrum of different forms of propaganda that you are being targeted with.

The tendency of those that still have many statist religion knee jerk reactions in their psychology to jump between two extreme binary options as the only possible two options leaves them open to being psyoped between two different seemingly oppositional storylines (which both benefit the oligarchy).

You describe the propaganda that romanticizes the pre-colonial cultures of this land in an idealist manner (and that propaganda is indeed promoted by some) yet there is an equally fallacious and oligarch benefitting propaganda thread on the other side of that spectrum, which romanticizes the “civilized white culture” instead (and looks down upon the “less advanced” non-white cultures).

Both of those are psyops designed to have you fighting with other every day humans while the yacht owning humans laugh at you and squeeze all of us equally through the state, tighten the noose and feed on us like parasites.

Through embracing one of the two binary options presented to you at either end of the manufactured extreme views of that spectrum, you fall right into their trap.

You use the word “their” in your statement “their land was changing hands for millennia from tribal warfare, and they would start forest fires for war, some hunted with buffalo jumps, and they hunted the woolly mammoth to extinction.” in a very generalizing manner, again, this shows ignorance and a proclivity to assign attributes in behavior that you portray as universally applicable to a vastly different group of cultures.

Some of the cultures here in pre-colonial times were indeed aggressive and engaged in war, slavery and ecologically degenerative behaviors.

Some ancient Turtle Islanders experimented with “Civilization” and had to grow through their own stages of cultural adolescence (they built cities and highly stratified social hierarchies with caste systems and pillaged landscapes to maintain vanity projects for the elite, as statist culture does today).

For some examples of those types of cultures, read the part of my post quoted and linked below :

Others did not do that. Some of them cultivated extremely advanced multi-generational food production systems that employed technologies (such as fire and seed saving) to create forests filled with food producing trees that persisted for millennia (some of them still exist today).

I document a number of those regenerative pre-colonial cultural practices, that were used both here and abroad in this essay:

They were forest engineers, architects of ecosystems and some of them opted to create democracies (such as the members of The Haudenosaunee Confederacy) and others maintained more autonomous communities with matriarchal leadership.

They were not “forest hippies”, but they were forest experts and forest townsfolk. Like my ancestors (the Gael and their Druidic ways) they saw the forest inhabitants (trees, birds, four legged, flowing water and mountains) as beings deserving of recognition and respect.

They took life to live (hunted and cut trees) but did not take life to profit. And while there is always potential for a drive to choose selfish / greedy actions in any and all humans (and their communities would have been no exception) behavior that benefits one but harms the community (human and non-human) was disincentivized and shunned in their culture, where as in our statist/capitalist cultures it is incentivized, encouraged and even prized as a sign of “success”.

The forests where I grew up speak to the real world results of either worldview.

Prior to the British arriving (which morphed into the “dominion of Canada” and then modern day statist regime of Canada) ancient thousand year old plus trees were only cut sparingly to build important objects like a canoe, totem pole or longhouse. The people that lived there sometimes engaged in war with neighboring humans but the idea of clearcutting an ancient forest to export for profit was unfathomable to them, for the trees were their elders that possessed a spirit.

Fast forward to today, and as I explored in that post I linked in the first comment to you above on “Truth and Reconciliation Day” the residential schools were so successful in brainwashing the indigenous people of that region that now some of them refer to themselves as “a logging nation” (and they mean industrial clearcutting ancient forests to export to China and Uk for profit).

So, forest hippies no, but historically, tree huggers, yes.

Over here in the eastern woodlands where I live now, certain cultures developed some thing called “The Great Law Of Peace” and their system of government required unanimous referendum among member tribes before any act of war was initiated. Some of the early visitors to this land from France (Jesuits and military officers) engaged with the diplomatic and intellectual elite of these Carolinian northeastern woodland pre-colonial townsfolk and they were mesmerized (and horrified) by what the indigenous people had to say once they learned english and offered their views on the “superior” European culture that these Jesuits were trying to force down their throats. These are the types of communities Franklin referenced above.

When indigenous scholars, intellectuals and philosophers (such as the Wendat chief Kandiaronk quoted below) of eastern Turtle Island made their first observations of European culture and its focus on money in the 1600-s they expressed something that came to be known as The Indigenous Critique.

What was said about how focusing our lives and priorities on accumulating money at any cost and how that has a degenerative and corrosive effect on morality was very astute and sadly , also prophetic in describing what would one day become a sickness of the mind that infected some of those indigenous to Turtle Island as well.

In some cases, indigenous intellectuals travelled to Europe in order to study and understand feudal society. One such person was a Huron-Wendat leader named, Kandiaronk also known as Le Rat, who seems to have impressed everyone he ever met with his great brilliance.

In New France (known as Ontario, Canada today) Wendat leader Kandiaronk raised scathing critiques of European social customs and values, particularly criticizing monarchical rule, social hierarchies, emphasis on the accumulation of wealth and materialism, and punitive justice systems. These descriptions then made their way back to Europe, where they were widely distributed among the intellectual class.

After visiting France and then returning to the Eastern Woodlands of Turtle Island Kondiaronk (the Wendat chief described above) offers this distillation of the indigenous critique:

“I’ve spent six years thinking about the state of European society and I still can’t think of a single one of your ways that isn’t inhumane, and I sincerely believe that it can only be because you stick to your distinctions of ‘mine’ and ‘yours’.

I affirm that what you call money is the devil of devils; the tyrant of the French, the source of all evil; the scourge of souls and the slaughterhouse of the living. To imagine that one can live in the land of money and preserve one’s soul is like imagining that one can preserve one’s life at the bottom of a lake. Money is the father of luxury, lasciviousness, intrigue, deceit, lies, betrayal, insincerity, all the worst behaviors in the world. Fathers sell their children, husbands their wives, wives betray their husbands, brothers kill each other, friends are false, and all for money. In light of all this, tell me that we Wendat are not right to refuse to touch or even look at money“

“Over and over I have set forth the qualities that we Wendat believe ought to define humanity – wisdom, reason, equity, etc. – and demonstrated that the existence of separate material interests knocks all these on the head. A man motivated by interest cannot be a man of reason. “

Kandiaronk’s view was that the greed, poverty, and crime found in French (European) society arise from lust for money. By refusing to deal with money, the Wendat were able to live in freedom and equality.

For more on that Kandiaronk fellow and others that called the north eastern woodlands their ancient home that expressed what came to be known as “The Indigenous Critique” in the same timeframe read this:

Re:

“I’m sure there was a large diversity of tribes and cultures, but local ones described to me as “peaceful” in the Seattle public school system, I’d later discover had done a lot of savage stuff, even tortured one of my ancestors.”

I think our modern statist culture is far more savage than anything you may have been told about what supposedly happened to your ancestors at the hands of a few people from a specific tribe. Also, victors (and psyoping delusional people with supremacy complexes) are the ones that write the history books and promulgate these stores into your mind, so taking all of them with a grain of salt would be wise (both the non-sense romanticized depictions as well as the blood soaked vicious savage ones).

Some of the tribes in the PNW were slave traders and gangsters of sorts, others had strict rules forbidding slavery and they focused more on horticulture (the oak food forest tending tribes of modern day Cali being one example). Even just along one coastline, the differences between peoples that lived here prior to colonization is vast, and so generalizing views applied to them all, just makes no logical sense.

Savage behavior is a potential in all of us. How we are raised and with what worldviews and cultural lenses we are given to look at the world and our fellow beings influences if those potential savage expressions of human nature are expressed or not.

For examples supporting what I share above, read:

I would argue that modern statist culture breeds savage behavior far more reliably (and intentionally) on an institutional scale, than any pre-colonial cultures did here in the past (whether they were peaceful or not).

For more on the savage nature of the modern statist regime of Canada (and the USA) read :

Lastly, I will provide an example of how the opposite side of the spectrum of propaganda you highlight can skew people’s perception of reality.

I will provide the example of the RCMP officer’s widow that was conditioned to view her husband (the residential school government agent tax payer funded enforcer) with rosy glasses and to look down her nose at the dirty savages (that she and her husband so benevolently were trying to help be more like the white man).

This women commented on my post about (interestingly enough) how an indigenous woman journalist was depicting the Canadian Freedom Trucker Convoy movement (and protest in Ottawa in 2022) as a “white supremist” movement (she is one of those people that makes absurd generalizations about people with less melanin in their skin with European genetics). (linked here:

Was the Freedom Convoy (Ottawa 2022) about White Supremacy? Lets investigate.

So anyways, this RCMP officer’s widow shows up and comments (here: https://gavinmounsey.substack.com/p/was-the-freedom-convoy-ottawa-2022/comment/236891875 ) to say her and her husband (an RCMP officer that enforced Canadian government edicts in the 70-s in the Northwest Territories) tried to help the dirty savages but she couldn’t understand why they were not cooperative.

She described all the wonderful humanitarian gifts that the colonial government bestowed upon an Tłı̨chǫ (Dene) indigenous community (which she referred to as “Dogrib tribe” and basically describes as full of diseased, dirty, alcoholic, incest, abusive and unmotivated people). However, she neglected to highlight the fact that during that time frame Canadian law prevented indigenous people from owning their own land (that and the fact that it was the colonial statist Europeans that brought the alcohol, disease and annihilated their traditional life ways). They were essentially expected to “own nothing and be happy”.

The historical ignorance and/or mental gymnastics performed by people pushing those types of narratives is astounding to me. After all the Tłı̨chǫ (Dene) indigenous people she was referring to stewarded that land for centuries before the British (and then Canadian) statists arrived and they were doing just fine. So the British show up tell them “hey you, heathens, we claim this land in the name of the crown!” And then some years later they feel bad and they “gift” them back some “crown land” (which was stolen from them in the first place) and offer handouts (after they’d criminalized their language, destroyed their food systems and ceremonies and engaged in cultural genocide) and they want to call themselves heroes.

More specifically the “Missionary Oblates of Mary Immaculate” showed up around 1850 to tell them they were dirty savages that needed to be civilized and saved by swearing fealty to the church, European fur traders and statists with treaties to sign got them addicted to hard liquor making them more compliant and then in 1921 the Canadian statists found oil, gold, diamonds and gas up north and they sent their legal psyop specialists to get the indigenous people to sign over their land to the crown (telling them the treaty was about “peace and friendship”) after which they told them to get the fuck off the land and stay out of the way when ever they wanted to set up a gold mine, diamond mine or oil well.

Those nuns I mentioned above (and the RCMP) ensured the children would not be allowed to speak their own language or practice their traditions (which were orally transmitted) via inducting them into the residential school system and once they were not able to live off the land anymore as their practices had been erased by the church they gave them handouts , told them to stop being so depressed and drinking so much (patting themselves on the back for being so generous).

Then in more recent decades it becomes unpopular to just engage in cultural genocide and tell people to shut up and die or get out of the way when the state wants their land so they did “reparations” (set up reserves and gave them trinkets, while preventing them from owning land so they could not prosper in the capitalist system forced on them, and told them to own nothing and be happy).

So, all of that is to say, that both the romanticized “noble savage” narrative and the romanticized “noble white Christian” narrative are fallacious psyops that do not accurately describe the nuanced reality we live in and anyone promoting either should be viewed with a special degree of scrutiny, suspicion and discernment, as they are likely trying to brainwash you and/or they themselves are brainwashed and have lost their grip on reality.

---

Okay that is all I have for that lengthily exchange. Hope you found it to be illustrative and you got something out of that.

For some additional interesting discourse on this topic, check out this note (which James was thoughtful enough to re-stack, leading to some interesting people coming out of the woodwork to tell me how full of it I am).

Thanks for reading everyone!

I would value hearing your thoughts on what the gentleman that goes by “tedman” expressed and my responses to him in the comment section.

Thank you in advance for your time.

---

Related posts with more context: