in defense of human extinction.

is morality possible without humanity?

Many religions have an “object oriented” morality. The Ark of the Covenant was stolen by the Philistines and had to be retrieved. The Romans had the Aquilia, to be defended at all costs.

After the Ark of the Covenant was lost to the Babylonians, and after the second temple was destroyed, Judaism had to reorient its “object orientation” toward human lives. Since there was no longer a sacred object or holy site to defend, Jewish life itself became the “object.”

According to racial nationalists, the collective survival of the race is the supreme good. All forms of sadism, including deportation and genocide, can be justified to preserve the racial group. Generally, however, the “racial object” is justified by some higher cause. In Judaism, there is no explanation of the “merit” of Abraham which caused him to be chosen by God above others. But since God is universal, his divine act of “choosing” is also universal.

Even if this is a made-up lie, to believe this lie is less ridiculous than “secular humanist tribalism.” Secular human tribalism states that humanity, as a total sum, is “chosen” over the animals. Humans have inherent moral value, whereas animals do not. Judaism should be applauded for requiring divine intervention to defend tribalism; without such intervention, “humanism” exposes its naked narcissism.

Adam, after committing sin, had the decency to cover his loins in fronds. Secular humanist tribalism (SHT) has no such decency. It does not bother to invent a God to justify the “chosenness” of humanity. It simply asserts human dignity without justification. It is a clinging selfishness with no redeeming features, and in lacking higher ideals, it declares war on virtue in favor of biomass. The strength of SHT relies upon the fear of “indecency.” You can’t say that! Don’t be an asshole! That’s just rude! It is rule by prudishness, but replaces the grace and style of the Victorians with the vulgar nihilism of the “chucklefucker.”