…and the movies portray Corporate careers as glamorous and exciting… which they can be, but those careers shouldn’t stop those women having children, but I guess the fear of losing their jobs would.
Well that’s one way to get them procreating… oh the lure of big-city life… perhaps incentives to assure jobs are kept open and the availability of company creches, might be needed.
Surely not all the women in European countries are in corporate careers, so wouldn’t the wider demographic still be raising families?
For millennia, the Jews didn’t have land.
They couldn’t plough a field, or wield a sword very well…but they wrote the bible.
They can count shekels and tell stories, and that’s precisely what they did.
They swindled the nations of the earth out of their gold, betrayed Germany during WW1, and when the Germans called them out on it during WW2, they spun a sob story called the holohoax, and unfortunately the nations of the world bought it wholesale.
Remember they’re descended from Jacob, not Esau.
Of course it’s a fictional tale, but even fiction contains a germ of truth.
By and large, this was never a tribe of hunters and farmers, of artists, artisans and tradesmen, of warriors.
It’s a tribe of money changers, story tellers and entertainers.
They can make you laugh, cry or enraged at the stroke of a pen.
They’re also moralizers, but their morality is usually self-serving tripe.
They’re not above having one standard for Israel, and another for everyone else.
On the surface they’re cosmopolitan, but just beneath the veneer they’re obsessed with ethnic, racial and religious purity.
The bible is full of genealogy, littered with it.
They point to a poor, black, mentally ill transwoman and say, you must not only tolerate and accept, but you must embrace this person as if they were your own child, in fact they’re better than your own child, for some of your wicked ancestors…or the ancestors of a few people who look like you (because race exists, but only when they want it to) rejected these people, and you unwittingly benefitted from that…somehow, somewhere down the line I’m sure.
You must because the Jew, the eternal stranger in a strange land, above all else fears rejection, and if you’ll accept and worship the poor, black, mentally ill tranny, then surely you’ll accept and worship the Jew, yet they are not above trampling over the corpses of dead Palestinian women and children on their way to completing their Project for the New American Century i.e. greater Israel.
This is their armor, sword and shield.
They whimper, even as they strike you.
Elitism is a universal idea, populism, the idea the people should rule themselves as individuals, communities and a collective, is a white idea, but pluralism, the idea the majority should not only tolerate, accept but worship minorities and foreigners, is a Jewish idea.
The idea that we must be globalist, liberal and progressive while they’re permitted, even encouraged to be nationalistic, within our own borders?
It’s an absolute affront to, infiltration and subversion of our democracy.
They keep the middle and working classes fighting over taxes and wages when all that shit can be bypassed by directly going after the elite’s money.
They wage war against the 3rd world, then import the 3rd world for cheap labor, then say you owe these people a living for warring with them when polls show time and time again we never wanted to war with them in the first place, then extend more rights to them than us, and that’s what passes for socialism these days, keeping the majority fighting with minorities over scraps from the master’s table.
They keep us dumbed down and sickly with every kind of pollution, but just competent and healthy enough for enough of us to run the machines.
I don’t think they want civil war.
I just think the republicans had to wear different makeup, because whites were getting sick and tired of cronyism, the influx of cheap labor, offshoring, BLM, radical Islam, feminism and so on.
They had to amp up the empty rhetoric about opposing these policies (and in response the controlled opposition, the dems had to amp up their empty rhetoric) to make whites feel like something was being done so they wouldn’t vote 3rd party, independent or revolt, but the establishment doesn’t really want to rock the boat or dramatically change course, it rarely does, especially since they’re winning, consolidating wealth and power, it only feigns to, until it can purge social media of the alt and far right movements and find more, better ways to placate and stupefy the masses.
But if they do want civil war, which I doubt, of course it’s only because they think they can somehow blame the patriots for it and ultimately hasten their UN takeover.
Bring back the guillotine.
Christianity is in decline in the west, its relative absence may make it easier for whites to accept secular or pagan white nationalism someday.
As it’s gone so far, Post-Colonial WASPs (East coast Liberals) and New York Jews have formed a very powerful coalition in world history. Just as Jews worked with, and against Rome, so too do today’s worldwide Jews (Zionists) work toward their eternal goal of retaking and keeping Israel and Jerusalem. It’s kind of a one-trick pony, once you understand the premise. But people forget the Jewish-Christian intermarriage. Jews and Christians are essentially teammates. “You scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours.” Both sides are captives to Messianic Ideology, Prophecy (Magic), and Theocracy. Although Jews have tenuous alliances with (North) European pagans, this backfired when German/Saxons tried to seize control of Central European banks, resulting in World War II. If a country cannot control its own bank and currency, then war is absolutely necessary and inevitable. World War One occurred because of the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Aristocracy, which was overdue historically. Germany was in position to capitalize, leading to World War II.
English-Anglos are the “New World Aristocracy”. They think of themselves this way. Have you ever interacted with East Coast Liberals? They think they know more than everybody else, that they are righteous, can do no wrong, etc. The political battle is occurring between Left and Right, as it’s called. But the Zionist agenda is pretty secure. Jews and Zionists can, will, and have pulled-back from extremity, if it threatens their status-quo, which is Washington DC–Israel alignment. So the banks aren’t in trouble of collapse, just the opposite.
Unfortunately for you Zero, I don’t see any “collapse” coming, just the opposite, boredom and tedium for decades and decades. Any fragmentation and revolution in the US will come from secularist ideologues.
But nobody really fights tooth and nail on full stomaches. Real war happens when everybody’s stomachs are empty. The bottom-line, the status-quo, is not in danger.
Right, we’re ruled by rich Jews 1stly, 2ndly by rich WASPS, and other northwestern Europeans who sold us out.
This’s at least part of the reason why our society favors both the wealthy on the one hand, and at the same time, minorities on the other.
If we weren’t chiefly ruled by a rich minority, we’d probably be conservative on identity politics, or at least not as liberal and progressive as we are now.
However, I guess it’s possible for an elite to totally turn on its own people voluntarily, like if they figure their own people are too smart, strong and unruly, they might wish to water their blood down with the blood of foreigners, and/or that might be the first step in a plan to rule the whole globe by globalist consent rather than nationalist conquest.
But Israel remains an ethno-state, like almost all non-white states, so either globalism is for Europeans only, or the objective is to someday make it for everyone except Jews.
Imagine the world divided into two states, one a smaller, but ultra-powerful and exclusively Jewish state ruling over a powerless state encompasses the rest of the world and populated by miscegenous or interracial goy.
What a nightmare.
Will the Chinese and Japanese let the Jews in?
Will the Indians and Pakistanis?
I wonder how much of their banking and press is controlled by the tribe?
The elite shape the character of the society they rule.
The Jew seized power through banking, the media and entertainment industry, which’s why these entities are held in such high regard today.
If it was a warrior elite or whatever, it’d be different.
It’s a scientific elite rather than a theocratic, at least on the surface, but we know all manner of sordid, occult practices like child sacrifice to their Canaanite deities go on behind closed doors.
Yes, and just as the Romans collapsed, we probably will too at some point, the question is, when?
We can only speculate.
Right, again it’s that double standard, the Jews practice an eye for an eye (Judaism) while they try to get the rest of the world to turn a blind eye and the other cheek (Christianity).
It’s nationalism for Israel, and globalism, liberalism and progressivism for the goy.
As far as my knowledge goes, China hasn’t let Jews in, and certainly not in any position of their national banks. China is not like any other civilization; their citizens have no real Rights and can be surveyed at all times. China is also aware of Jews and Judaism, historically, and as pointed-out, have no reservations toward “Racism” or any political-taboo of the West. This makes China a potential threat, which the Anglo-Jewish alliance cannot penetrate (without going through the Russians).
Japan is emasculated by America, and there is slippage there. Japanese don’t really know how to integrate Jews and Anglicans (“Weebs”) who increasingly visit and take residence there. South Korea has the same problem. They’ve already been infiltrated by racial (non-Asian) outsiders. When the door’s open, it’s pretty much open for good. There’re not many final barriers to ‘Globalists’ and Globalism.
Anglos (English Aristocrats) and East Coast Liberals pride themselves on conquering the world. The way that England did it, and does it, is by segregation and ghettos. They fence-themselves off and let the conquered nations and tribes infiltrate the low or middle-class communities. It’s “their” problem. US is an exception because the country is so large geographically and there is cultural isolation.
The Deep South in the US, for example, is still a ‘Saxon’-Germanic stronghold. Liberals cannot penetrate there, even if they wanted to. So that is another form of repulsion. Jews and Anglos are intimidated by Saxons/Germans anyway; they’re antithetical ethnic peoples and cultures. Scots and Irish attest to this, and their historical rebellions against England. The “Brexit” topic applies to this.
Almost all historical ‘problems’, between European peoples, or Jews/Christians, apply today. I think people are largely blind or forgetful to this fact. The “Old Problems” are still “New Problems”. Modernity has not “solved” many, or any, of the old antagonisms.
The fact that Europeans intermarried (Scot+Russian, French+Norwegian, Irish+Pole, etc) in America, hasn’t really helped anything, except solidify the “white” racial category. When Europeans are abstracted, they cling to the ‘white’ racial identity, society, class, and culture, which Post-Colonial WASPs (East Coast Liberals) want to maintain their authority and control over. Europeans in Europe, are still Socialistic and Aristocratic. You go up or down by your ethnic group, based on marrying your own kind (German with German, English with English, Italian with Italian) and gaining wealth through Inheritance. America and Post-Colonial societies are Meritocratic. People gain wealth in the Western Hemisphere through Capitalism. But this era is quickly coming to an end.
USA is about 500 years into existence; that is a substantial amount of time from Republic to Empire. I don’t know how much time remains, but a lot of fracturing will occur before the end. The racial/ethnic identification and sub-cultures are going to explode. They already are broken, which is why the Liberal-Left are becoming radicalized to protect ‘racial’ victimization.
As for Western Civilization and banks as a whole, mostly controlled by Anglos and Jews, so the wealth factor will become stagnant within a century.
What’s happening now, is a direct attack onto Speech. Because the First Amendment of the US Constitution is under heavy assault, I probably will take a stand. If anything in USA is worth fighting for, it’s the First Amendment.
Yup, Trump is controlled opposition.
The war between the dems and Trump is more over empty rhetoric, style and who gets to be the reigning deep state puppets than it is over substance.
This Tulsi Gabbard is probably mostly or wholly controlled opposition too.
But I’m not as sure as you are that all the 3rd parties and independents are completely controlled.
At any rate, as far as I know, there is no Nazi party of the US, so in light of that, I would support the most nationalist party or independent available until something better shows up.
In Canada, that means Maxime Bernier and the People’s Party.
Even if it’s not enough, it’s a step in the right direction.
If we can get people to take that step, the subsequent one might be white nationalism.
Unlikely, especially in Canada, but still, that’s the best chance we got right now, I’m not so sure collapse is right around the corner.
It will happen sooner or later, because everything breaks down in nature, at least part way, it’s the one thing you can count on, but it could take decades.
But I’ll take a look at the graphs in that thread of yours anyway.
Same here.
Yup, I know you that way.
Briefly you were a communist, then an anarchist, and now you’re a national socialist.
If there’s anything that’s been consistent about your politics, it’s that you’re a radical.
You have no hope or faith in democracy, in reforming the system, instead you’re awaiting its demise, and hoping some dictator you may try to join will build something better in its ashes, but if that doesn’t happen, you’re content to live among its ruins.
If there’s anything consistent about mine, it’s that I’ve never been an elitist, nor a pluralist.
Putting the interests of another demographic, another class, religion, race or sex ahead of my own, is most reprehensible to me.
I’m either in favor of having a libertarian or communitarian balance of power between demographics, or my demographic first, I’d never put others ahead of me and my own.
I don’t hate other groups or regard them as very inferior, but I prefer mine, I look out for me and my own first.
The thing is, dictatorships aren’t that much, if any less likely to become multiracial and multicultural than democracies, or purge themselves of other races and cultures.
I’ll give you some examples off the top of my head.
In the early Roman republic, only Romans, that is, people descended from Rome’s earliest inhabitants, could become citizens.
In the late republic, only Italians could become citizens.
About 2 centuries after the republic fell and Rome became a dictatorship, the first non-Italian emperor Septimius Severus of North African descent became emperor, and shortly after he made it so all peoples of the Roman empire could become full citizens.
Other examples, the soviet union was and Putin’s Russia is officially multiracial and multicultural.
Many Latin American countries are officially multiracial and multicultural and have imported many non-whites from Africa and Asia, altho not as many as we have, but only because Latin American countries are poorer, not as many want to come, and they can’t economically accommodate as many.
I still have a little hope we can turn our democracies around as things continue to worsen. I’m hoping people will turn to 3rd parties and independents, but even still if collapse and balkanization are inevitable, I’d rather see national social democracies arise than dictatorships.
That being said, if dictatorship ends up being the only way we can preserve and protect our race, and the working class, then I’ll support it.
That being said, synthesis is something that interests me.
An interesting form of government would be one where the executive branch rules for life, or until they voluntarily leave office after appointing a successor of their choosing, but the legislative branch remains democratic, elected by the people.
The head of state still wouldn’t be above the law, if they commit a crime, they could be impeached, removed from office and thrown in prison, just as now.
They wouldn’t have absolute power, they’d have to share it with the legislative branch.
In case of death, the autocrat would have to write a will just before they enter office with the names of their successors (in case one or more of them die) enclosed in it.
This of government could be called constitutional or democratic autocracy.
Autocracy with the right checks and balances is preferable to compulsory nepotism (monarchy) because it averts infighting and is more meritorious.
There’s an economic model called social corporatism you should look into.
It’s the Nordic or Scandinavian and Finnish model.
It’s basically a synthesis of capital, labor unions and consumer representation, where all three are given an equal say in things.
I’m sure in practice it doesn’t always work out that way, but in theory it sounds like a fair and balanced system, especially for larger corporations, big business.
I would not be entirely opposed to such a system, it’s just that the working and middle classes have been looted for so long, I can’t even begin to think about supporting corporatism.
After the working class is several times richer than today, perhaps we can begin to talk about moderation, but right now we need major downward redistribution.
At least get our standard of living back to where it was when boomers were growing up.
Economically the Nordic model isn’t unlike the fascist and national socialist model.
It’s an alternative model, both to the Anglo-American, (crony) capitalist model on the one hand, and proper social democracy, democratic socialism and communism on the other.
Mussolini talked extensively about class collaboration, as opposed to the individualistic competition of capitalism on the one hand, and the class competition of corporatism or socialism on the other.
Of course culturally and socially, Scandinavia and Finland are fucking retarded, they need to radically shift towards conservatism and libertarianism, but economically, they may have one of, if not the best system in the world, altho I have not lived there or studied it extensively, so I can’t say for sure, I’m sure they have their problems.
I don’t like or dislike gays.
They can have their lifestyle and culture, but it should be R or X rated, keep it out of public view away from children.
I don’t see homosexuality as immoral the way Abrahamists do, so much as I see it as inferior to heterosexuality, sort of like the way junk food, alcohol and recreational drugs are inferior to whole foods, but not immoral.
Also, I don’t fully buy the whole born-this-way narrative.
Not much shocks or horrifies me.
For me it comes down to this: I’m in favor of equal rights for men and women.
However, I’m not necessarily in favor of the same rights for men and women.
I think if women want more positive rights than men, that is if they want men and the state to be more financially and socially responsible for their health and wellbeing than they are for men and the state’s wellbeing, then they should have less negative rights, less socioeconomic opportunities and give men and the state more authority over women.
I’m all for men and women having a public dialogue about this issue, deciding it together as a society, but what I’m not in favor of is women having more positive, and more and negative rights than men, like they do today, that is misandry.
Some things have changed in modernity, like legalized abortion (which you may not be in favor of, for me I’m in favor of it), improved contraceptive methods and jobs becoming less physically demanding.
I think traditional roles for men and women are still valid, they’ll probably always have some validity as long as we remain essentially what we are, human, especially within the context of family, marriage and children, but perhaps they’re not quite as relevant as they were a century or two ago.
For me, Canada doesn’t have to be 100% white, just maintain our majority.
The only minorities I dislike are Jews and Muslims because of their historic hostility towards whites, and because their religions are inherently militaristically expansionist.
Preferably all full blooded and religious Jews should be deported to Israel.
Preferably all Muslims should be deported to wherever they came from.
All illegals and refugees should be deported.
All non-contributive, non-white immigrants should be deported, unless they’re being financially supported by their families.
However, contributive non-white immigrants, and non-white citizens can stay, but I’d ban further non-white immigration.
I don’t like Jews, and I hate Judaism and Islam, because they’re inherently hostile to, not only whites, but to all of mankind, but paganism, far eastern religions like Sikhism, Hinduism, Daoism, Buddhism and non-Zionist Christianity, I don’t have a problem with.
Right, I just think there needs to be a balance.
Besides democracy, this is another area where we disagree on.
I’m very much in favor of citizens having the right to possess fully automatic assault rifles, and licensing militias to possess military vehicles.
I find both the economic, and military disparity between us and the elite to be very alarming.
If we don’t stop, and reverse some of the disparity, it could lead to 99.9% of the population being reduced to the status of cattle in the coming future.
If Canada doesn’t balkanize, then I’m in favor of just keeping it majority white.
We don’t have to remove every last non-white.
I don’t hate minorities either.
While some races might be a little stronger than others overall, every race has its strengths, weaknesses and things that make it unique and interesting, which’s all the more reason to keep them distinct.
It’s much more of a birds of a feather thing, for me, than a hate or supremacy thing.
I definitely don’t want to oppress anyone on account of their race or religion (I don’t consider deportation to be a form of oppression, especially when they’re financially compensated. Ultimately our survival depends on the deportation of Jews and Muslims).
However, if Canada does balkanize, then I’m all in favor of majority white regions adopting a strict policy of 100% whiteness, but for Canada as a whole, I don’t think it’s fair, feasible or necessary.
I think it is the recent immigration influx of the last few decades that has created tensions and conflict of interests, and things did (literally) spill out in the streets, when people were getting run over and killed by men in vans.
Not any more… The UK, because of Colonialism, has been a diverse place for 100s of years, so I think we’ll all cope.
As I’ve said, the UK has been diverse for a long while now, so the problem is not the British-born multi-ethnic population, but the recent forced influx of numbers, and that was forced on many countries, so a problem not solely reserve for us here.
why would you have an exclusive kind of hatred for this group of people that you wouldn’t have for any other group of people? how insensitive. like any ‘in-group’, you have the same weberian dynamic of stratification operating here; group x feels unique and identifies itself as culturally isolated from group y. there is nothing inherently worse about one group and not another, because they’re all doing the same thing, essentially.
but there is a kind of bolder existential reality to this dynamic that explains the appearance of such phenomena. an ‘in-group’ facilitates as well as fosters two of the strongest social drives (you could even call them instincts) in human beings. the ability to fully express both love and hate simultaneously; love for one’s group, and hate for an enemy. human beings enjoy having enemies as well as being able to love… and this group forming dynamic provides the opportunity to do this.
and part of this obviously involves each group believing they’re the ‘good’ group while the others are bad… and it’s here, if anywhere, that any criticism can be given. a group can be measured by what it was that gave them the idea of their exclusiveness. for the religious groups - those centered around religious doctrine - the reasons are especially ridiculous, and this is worth some criticism.
you might say that the formula for determining the integrity of individuals in a group is to analyze to what extent they feel their engagement in the group is for some higher cause, above and beyond the individuals, what transcends the appreciation of the individuals involved… or, feels appreciation only so long as the individual remains faithful to the sacred cause for which they are supposed to stand. such things as ‘state’ and ‘nation’ are examples of this… meaningless abstractions that originate to provide for those who are committed, a sense of selflessness and belonging so that they may temporarily, if not indefinitely, avoid the reality of their own ego… which is the causa sui of the very commitment itself (ironically). it is an attempt to transcend the ephemeral nature of the individual’s existence by believing as if he were ‘part’ of something greater and lasting. one of the more endearing features of man, in fact, because it is in fear and trembling that he forgets himself and takes refuge in the sacred cause. you’d have to be a real asshole to not sympathize with this or at least understand it.
you’ve heard the phrase ‘know thyself’ before, yeah? well here’s the bad news; for most that effort ought to be strenuously avoided because what it truly entails would be devastating to them. better not to start down that path of honest self discovery.
yeah but i don’t see the prob with the jews. it’s just an instance of the same mass mania that peoples have suffered since time immemorial… and it’s unfair to blame them for any of it. the joy of this feeling of belonging to something is incredibly strong… regardless of the delusional nature of it. just keep in mind that at the end of the day, man is not rational, and he dare not want to be, for good reason; one either breaks or becomes mad. in either case, ostracization from the herd follows directly. terrifying for the broken and liberating for the mad.
yo but that adage should really read: ‘don’t know thyself, whatever the fuck you do.’
I prefer describing them as vampiric financial and economic parasites myself.
They suck the life, blood, and prosperity out of entire nations or regions of the world where afterwards go onto moving to new hosts. Their only interests in morality, ethics, and laws is rigging them heavily in favor of themselves for their own benefit while destroying or bringing others down.
They are the most duplicitous or subversive people on the face of the planet where they cannot be reasoned with at all.
and here i thought it was you who was doing the ‘moralizing’. we nihilists are more like journalists than philosophers. we just report the facts, man.
yeah but i got no problem with the nazis movin’ on up. germany got royally fucked after WW1 and europe got what it deserved as far as i’m concerned. so i’m good with the war, but the whole ideological war with the ‘jewish problem’ was a bit much. trying to exterminate an entire ethnicity is tacky as fuck. id’a kept them all alive and put them to work to help build the german war machine… then after i won the war, i’d begin the long process of un-endoctrination to get all that judaism bullshit out of their heads.
but we historical materialists are much harder than that breed of romantic fascists who’s ideas are up in the metaphysical and mythological clouds. wagner’s stuff was great for opera, bro, but it wasn’t a way of life.
There’s only one solution to the United States domestic problems and that is violent revolution or insurrection.
All non-violent methods of approaching the national crisis has been tried and has utterly failed.
Eventually even the most idiotic and ignorant simpletons on the street will eventually come to this same conclusion. Once a majority of people come to that same realization this country will forever be changed.
Yes, but your reactions as a nihilist are a bit surprising since in your world moralizing is irrelevant or redundant, right? Yet you’re acting all politically correct concerning the plight of the Jews as if theirs is your own.
So the nihilist takes up the common position of the United States during world war II being the ‘good’ guys?
More moralizing which a nihilist isn’t suppose to do. Even in my nihilist days I would never make such an error.
Are you sure you’re still not an anarcho communist? Because you sound like one to me. For some reason the word nihilist just doesn’t suit you Zoot.
You only speak kindly of ‘modern diversity’ in Europe because you’re a Caribbean Jamaican living in England, so naturally you’re going to reduce England’s racial, social, and political modern transformation as being merely trivial since you’re a product of it. That’s exactly why you’ll defend it. That’s why you’re probably a cosmopolitan civic nationalist because in your own individual world it works, it certainly works for you, am I right? I highly doubt the native European white Scots, Brits, Welsh, and Irish feel the same as you, those that are not self hating retards anyways.
because global capitalism has made that possible… not because the ‘jews’ are intrinsically predisposed to do that. put a jew in 1920 maoist china and he’d behave himself like everyone else. it’s only because there happens to be a historically persistent ethnicity, religiously founded, and therefore a formidable presence, that has consistently utilized the opportunity of capitalism to further enrich itself as well as keep its distance as a culture. hell you can’t half blame them. the problem isn’t the jewish people… it’s the silly shit they believe and the capitalistic underhandedness that they have mastered to empower themselves and further augment the stupid shit written in some book by semi-literate bronze-age desert tribesmen, that they believe. the jewish situation isn’t tragic… it’s comical… but that’s from my particular anarchist perspective. the problem is capitalism… or what would become in the hands of the so called jewish communists, ‘state capitalism’, which is nothing but a ruse to cover their nationalism.
no but i like jewish people as much as anyone else. they’re no dumber than the christians, muslims, hindus, or buddhists. it’s just a different kind of dumb, that’s all.
Jews are financial and cultural predators whether it is in capitalism or Soviet Russia. Their modus operandi is the same either way with some minor differences.
Yes, I like social corporatism as a model only instead the government will be a dictatorship that keeps corporations in check if they know what is good for them.
The current system is not sustainable, it will collapse and do so in a very horrific manner. Currently the American political establishment is learning a hard lesson in economic diminishing returns. They’re finding it very difficult squeezing blood out of a rock and while they might currently realize the errors of their ways it’s simply too late in the game to meaningfully change the current trajectory of things. This whole corrupt and damned society is on the verge of collapse where there is nothing anybody can do about it. The chaotic fallout when everything really starts to break down will be quite epic. It will be a giant free for all and a revolutionary period when it finally arrives.
i’m de-moralizing the matter by defusing it of its philosophical and ideological foundations. in doing so i’m not saying you shouldn’t stand by your values… only that you ought not try to justify them on philosophical grounds… because there are no such grounds.
but there aren’t any bad guys in war, really. just guys killing each other in a field somewhere. but regarding WW2, i’d side with the corporatist nations (fascist) before the free market capitalist nations because the interests of the working classes would be my primary concern. corporatism is a step toward the proletarian dictatorship, while free market capitalism is every effort to prevent this.
yeah i know. there needs to be a whole new ‘position’ to characterize my standing. imma mix of all kinds of shit, bro… some of it even diametrically opposed. it’s fuckin retarded.
i wuz gonna found a school and invent my own designer philosophy, but i can’t get enough time off of work to do it.
Judaism and Islam aren’t just religions, they’re blueprints for global enslavement.
Judaism and Islam, along with Zionist Christianity, are cults and hate groups, if ever there were any, and ideally should officially be classified as such.
So long as we restore a 90-99% white majority, I can live with other minorities, but I can’t live with Jews and Muslims.
It’d be like Jews and Muslims tolerating white supremacists in their homelands.
We wouldn’t expect them to, and they shouldn’t expect us to tolerate them.
