Often when a coalition gains power, infighting occurs.

Freud spoke of the narcissism of small differences
:

Quote:Quote:

the thesis that it is precisely communities with adjoining territories and close relationships that engage in constant feuds and mutual ridicule because of hypersensitivity to details of differentiation.

Ultimately we all have more in common with the alt/new/whatever right than we do with the SJW-progressives. Nothing wrong with disagreements but we should remember who the real enemy is.

Quote: (11-27-2016 11:44 AM)Thersites Wrote:  

While Europe is in variety of being fucked over, there still a historical, cultural, and genetic background to call themselves Italians, Germans, French, and Englishmen for example. One of the dangers of white in US is there is no shared historical, cultural, and genetic background to be define as American. Add in the destruction and abuse of American identity by the left will cause problem in the long run do to the use of identity politics.

That great irony in disowning white nationals, they are right on two things:
creation of white ethno-state due to identity politics and trend of majority of leftist enables and thinkers being Jewish.

Frankly as 1st generation Indian in the US, I hope to keep a high trust society going. I have integrated American values and cultural as part of my identity. If the Left wants to continue play of the game of kill whitey, I will become a white supremacist to degree that Spencer and the alt White question their sanity.

White nationalism is something I can sympathize with to some degree, but it needs to be refined to emphasize legal and practical truths, not emotional or racialist sentiment. A quarter of the country is Hispanic or black and a lot of American whites are not really white in the European sense. The core of the matter is that whites were the ones who for better or worse created the country and its mainstream culture, and leftists hate that. They aren't actually trying to bring racial or economic equality, they just want to destroy the system, which whites are at the center of.

Even speaking as a mixed Chinese and white American who spends a good chunk of his time not using English, I would prefer that a vaguely European culture remain unquestionably dominant in the US while minorities are also allowed to keep their cultures and languages. We need to create laws and policies that keep the core American heritage and values alive and growing, without being burdened by communist fantasies. I think this is what Trump and his guys are trying to do, and the logical thing to do is assist them in moving it forward.

The major problem with White Nationalism is that it assumes all you need is a White only population and *poof* suddenly everything is perfect. The entire idea is absurd and totally ignorant of history. White cultures became a pile of dogshit after the fall of the Roman empire and had to be rebuilt by Christianity, which was rooted in Jewish culture. During the Byzantine Empire, when Western Europe was in the dark age, the center of White civilization was in Constantinople (aka Istanbul) and that empire was very much a Theocracy/Monarchy, and although it was primarily White there was still plenty of race mixing and Cosmopolitan attitudes prevalent within that empire.

If Whiteness is all we need why did it take a Jewish religion to straighten out this race? There is a real issue of Whites being unable to get along with each other, which is why Europe has 50 or so countries. It's probably the most fractious and quarrelsome race on the planet. The fighting proceeded Christianity and continued well after the introduction of Christianity. That suddenly making everything White would solve all White problems is a fantasy. Having some degree of racial homogeneity may be necessary to create a successful country (which is why mass immigration is bad), but it is not sufficient.

Race gets way more attention than it deserves, and the 1488 LARPers are no different than the race hucksters like Al Sharpton and the like. And all of these race worshippers end up getting into arguments of whoever is "the most White," "the most Black," "the most Jewish," etc, and represents "their Race" best. It's all nonsense and doesn't build strong countries. The USA was built on ideas of power management and rule of law. The White factor, while obviously present, was not enough to have created the USA. It was also devoutly Christian, and included nearly a total rejection of all forms of government recorded up through European history until that point.

Now the entire European world is modeled after American democracy, and these 1488 guys want to emulate Hitler who their grandfathers killed in war, as well as return to "Roman values" which collapsed in selfish debasement 1700 years ago. These guys make no sense, are intellectually bankrupt or just confused. Furthermore if they want to live in Whitetopia they can just move out to Montana or something, plenty of space in the USA where non-Whites avoid.

I don't consider any of this stuff to be serious and all these dudes need is a history lesson, a better job, and some pussy, and guarantee you they would walk away from guys like Richard Spencer and never look back. The question is if the economy can get the revival it needs, if shit keeps going down the tubes then dumber guys will turn to easy answers like White nationalism. But I think Trump can do it.

What about possibility of "sleeper agents" inside the alt right in order to destabilize it from within? Like it was said on previous page, it will be worse after Trump inauguration (hopefully it will be inauguration), where these agents will start making even more shit.

Samseau, why attack White Nationalists with a bunch of weak strawman arguments like:

"They think it will solve all their problems when it won't"

"They can move to Montana"

"White people fight between each other a lot".

You should know better than to use such silly arguments against your own allies on the right.

Forget the label alt-right.

We are all NATIONALISTS.

Some of us are white nationalists, (whatever that may mean)

Some of us are not, but still want a majority white European population.

Let's stop arguing and shitting all over the free speech of those who share only a slightly different opinion to us.

^ Is Samseau making straw man arguments? Some self-proclaimed white nationalists have advanced these positions. Not all white nationalists have, but then again, you also acknowledge that lack of definition: "... white nationalists, (whatever that may mean)."

I'd say Samseau is addressing these specific arguments, and not all white nationalists. Hence why his post starts with "The major problem with White Nationalism," and not "The all-encompassing problem with White Nationalism."

Similarly, not all white nationalists are "our" allies, as this schism itself demonstrates.

Finally, it seems to run counter to free speech to ask "allies" who have slightly different opinions to silence themselves. Free speech means let the sparks fly, in every direction. Bring your popcorn.

delete

Quote: (11-28-2016 07:12 AM)Zep Wrote:  

This wasn't happening here when there was a common enemy.

Are you kidding me? Before the migrant crisis you couldn't even criticize muslims here without getting an insta-ban. Even slightly jew-critical speech would also get you an insta-ban. We even had a slightly left-of-center moderator at the helm.

Stormfront types are still held at a long arms length, and it's important to maintain that by continuing to argue what differentiates us. This is not a white forum, and the "alt right", which is an invention of this Spencer guy, is prima facie Nazism as I've already illustrated.

These people are simply not allies of this forum. They're not enemies as it currently stands, but they are definitely people our movement should avoid association with. All of us here, regardless of race, can agree on the general social reactionary creed that society has gone off track and needs to restore some prior forms. We can all agree that reverting back from this feminist, identity politics, gay agenda, tranny agenda, ridden with welfare, regulation, cronyism, corruption, war mongering and dysfunctional laws and law enforcement, and lunatic immigration policies, is a good idea.

This white ethno-state, ethnic cleansing, Roman empire (a.k.a "fourth reich"), eugenic, "racial identity is everything", Nazi saluting bunch are in a whole different domain to all that and they are nothing to do with us. And that distinction is damn important.

Quote: (11-28-2016 03:16 AM)RedPillUK Wrote:  

Let's stop arguing and shitting all over the free speech of those who share only a slightly different opinion to us.

No, this group does not have a mere 'slight' difference of opinion to us. They are straight up fascists by every indicator that exists. And we are not. They can go have their freedom of speech as fucking far away from me as possible.

===

Actually I would like to submit to the forum that allying with or defending (instead of merely ignoring) this group be considered on par with allying with or defending stormfront, and treated accordingly.

Quote: (11-27-2016 11:37 PM)Lunostrelki Wrote:  

White nationalism is something I can sympathize with to some degree, but it needs to be refined to emphasize legal and practical truths, not emotional or racialist sentiment. A quarter of the country is Hispanic or black and a lot of American whites are not really white in the European sense. The core of the matter is that whites were the ones who for better or worse created the country and its mainstream culture, and leftists hate that. They aren't actually trying to bring racial or economic equality, they just want to destroy the system, which whites are at the center of.

Even speaking as a mixed Chinese and white American who spends a good chunk of his time not using English, I would prefer that a vaguely European culture remain unquestionably dominant in the US while minorities are also allowed to keep their cultures and languages. We need to create laws and policies that keep the core American heritage and values alive and growing, without being burdened by communist fantasies. I think this is what Trump and his guys are trying to do, and the logical thing to do is assist them in moving it forward.

That what I hope we can achieve. The greatest different between US and Europe was the more successful assimilation of its immigrant population. The problem with the white nationalism sprout by Spencers and his ilks is ilk overwrites the American identity already in place for new identity based on skin colour. If we failed to achieve to keep the English foundation of identity in place, and stop the identity politics of the left, will breed more extreme version of the Nazis among the whites of this country. An good reminder that asshole Vox Day is correct on the upcoming trends hit our nation soon.

Quote: (11-28-2016 12:40 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

The major problem with White Nationalism is that it assumes all you need is a White only population and *poof* suddenly everything is perfect. The entire idea is absurd and totally ignorant of history. White cultures became a pile of dogshit after the fall of the Roman empire and had to be rebuilt by Christianity, which was rooted in Jewish culture. During the Byzantine Empire, when Western Europe was in the dark age, the center of White civilization was in Constantinople (aka Istanbul) and that empire was very much a Theocracy/Monarchy, and although it was primarily White there was still plenty of race mixing and Cosmopolitan attitudes prevalent within that empire.

If Whiteness is all we need why did it take a Jewish religion to straighten out this race? There is a real issue of Whites being unable to get along with each other, which is why Europe has 50 or so countries. It's probably the most fractious and quarrelsome race on the planet. The fighting proceeded Christianity and continued well after the introduction of Christianity. That suddenly making everything White would solve all White problems is a fantasy. Having some degree of racial homogeneity may be necessary to create a successful country (which is why mass immigration is bad), but it is not sufficient.

Race gets way more attention than it deserves, and the 1488 LARPers are no different than the race hucksters like Al Sharpton and the like. And all of these race worshippers end up getting into arguments of whoever is "the most White," "the most Black," "the most Jewish," etc, and represents "their Race" best. It's all nonsense and doesn't build strong countries. The USA was built on ideas of power management and rule of law. The White factor, while obviously present, was not enough to have created the USA. It was also devoutly Christian, and included nearly a total rejection of all forms of government recorded up through European history until that point.

Now the entire European world is modeled after American democracy, and these 1488 guys want to emulate Hitler who their grandfathers killed in war, as well as return to "Roman values" which collapsed in selfish debasement 1700 years ago. These guys make no sense, are intellectually bankrupt or just confused. Furthermore if they want to live in Whitetopia they can just move out to Montana or something, plenty of space in the USA where non-Whites avoid.

I don't consider any of this stuff to be serious and all these dudes need is a history lesson, a better job, and some pussy, and guarantee you they would walk away from guys like Richard Spencer and never look back. The question is if the economy can get the revival it needs, if shit keeps going down the tubes then dumber guys will turn to easy answers like White nationalism. But I think Trump can do it.

These are also the same people who spend a lot of free time accusing every other ethnicity in Europe that isn't theirs of being mongrels and "Not White". Seriously, how does the Axis and Hitler have anything to do with peoples' everyday lives?

Most people are tired of being in a depressed economy which nobody in power has the decency to even admit and suggests that people just need to suck it up. People also are tired of people telling them what to do and how to live their lives, but now all this energy is been wasted on arcane historical minutia of a majorly discredited political movement from last century.

Quote: (11-28-2016 12:40 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

that post doe....

It's kind of hilariously [triggering] that you think Jewish religion or culture saved Europe. Jews were a (ostracized) minority in every country where they lived, it's absolutely absurd to pretend that their culture somehow influenced - much less SAVED - Europe. Also you're starting to evaluate white culture from the fall of the Roman Empire. Bro... that's kind of a pretty long timeline to pretend Europeans didn't claw themselves to greatness. That's on the same level as Turks/Indians/Chinese/Japanese pumping their chest that they had a pretty good time at some point centuries ago.

People who come to this forum should be able to hold any political view they like. Don't get strict and authoritarian about people who appreciate strict and authoritarian political systems.

The variety of types of people here really is our strength. It's ironic that an ethno-nationalist is parroting a globalist political meme, but our diversity is our strength. We have a variety of different types of Nationalist, and we have IKnowExactly, who I think is a Liberal, and Traktor who is a Soviet Communist.

Everyone should be able to express their political opinion, provided they are respectful and polite. Not much to ask.

Quote:Quote:

The major problem with White Nationalism is that it assumes all you need is a White only population and *poof* suddenly everything is perfect.

No, it assumes, correctly, that demographics=destiny. It assumes correctly that radical changes of demographics and social fabric are detrimental to the host society. That's just two significant premises of contemporary Identitarianism or ethno-nationalism. None of the proponents of White/European ethno-nationalism are suggesting pogroms or violence, they are also happy to settle for a White majority, as I already mentioned a few pages back.

Quote:Quote:

White cultures became a pile of dogshit after the fall of the Roman empire and had to be rebuilt by Christianity, which was rooted in Jewish culture. During the Byzantine Empire, when Western Europe was in the dark age, the center of White civilization was in Constantinople (aka Istanbul) and that empire was very much a Theocracy/Monarchy, and although it was primarily White there was still plenty of race mixing and Cosmopolitan attitudes prevalent within that empire.

Those White cultures in that era were such dogshit that they birthed the Medieval era, and later the Renaissance era. With all due respect, there is so much wrong there, it isn't worth engaging with. It would be a distraction from far more pertinent topics that affect all of us.


The rest of your post looks like an attempt to trigger the stereotype of the White Nationalist. None of the significant writers/thinkers in the "Alt-Right" are suggesting that an ethnically homogeneous society is some kind of magic cure. However, the President-elect did say "The nation state remains the true foundation for happiness and harmony". I don't expect other people to agree with me about everything, but I do think most people here would cosign that statement.

At this point, instead of descending in to a he said-you said discussion about one post, I suggest that we focus on Nationalism, and how it can be achieved in America and Europe. That is my prime concern over all other political concerns, it should be yours too, and I suspect it is. Your post is aiming for the wrong sort of reaction, we need to be consolidating on Trump's victory and brainstorming towards the next of many victories, hopefully concluding in the reconquista of Constantinople(joking, a little bit)

Quote:Quote:

It's kind of hilariously [triggering] that you think Jewish religion or culture saved Europe. Jews were a (ostracized) minority in every country where they lived, it's absolutely absurd to pretend that their culture somehow influenced - much less SAVED - Europe.

It's doubtful you would even know about Greeks or the Romans had they not been preserved by the Christians (and the Jews who birthed them). None of us would exist, and neither would America, without Christianity.

White people have existed for hundreds of thousands, potentially over a million years. And yet the furthest the written record goes is back ~2500 years ago, and Christianity is incidentally 2000 years old. The vast majority of humanity has been destroying itself, Whites included, and things did not start to improve until Whites converted to Christianity. Everything you know about your past was handed to you by your Christian ancestors, whether or not you want to accept this fact is your choice.

Quote:Quote:

No, it assumes, correctly, that demographics=destiny. It assumes correctly that radical changes of demographics and social fabric are detrimental to the host society. That's just two significant premises of contemporary Identitarianism or ethno-nationalism. None of the proponents of White/European ethno-nationalism are suggesting pogroms or violence, they are also happy to settle for a White majority, as I already mentioned a few pages back.

Maybe that's what you believe but it's not what the hardcore among the alt-right believe.

Quote:Quote:

Those White cultures in that era were such dogshit that they birthed the Medieval era, and later the Renaissance era.

All birthed from Christianity.

Everything I say I can prove. Quite easily I might add, hundreds of historians have already done the work for me.

You're digressing Samseau, I'm happy to disagree with you about the pre-Medieval era, although I agree(well, it isn't even open for debate unless you're a hardcore liberal atheist) that Christianity has ultimately been a force for good in Western civilisation.

That isn't the issue here, and I'm not sure what point you are trying to make now. Demographics does equal destiny. It's immutable. Doesn't matter whether I believe it or not, or who you say does or doesn't believe it. It doesn't matter what "the hardcore alt-right" believe either, you're using that as a distraction.


This is a distraction too: White cultures did not become dogshit after the Roman Empire diminished in Western Europe(3rd/4thC), they became tribal, which was just an opposite reaction to the previous type of rule.

None of that shit matters right now, what matters is that the globalist deep state infra-structure is destroyed. Trump has to set the path for everyone else. A Nation without pure sovereignty is like an adult having to answer to the parent about it's decisions. The men who use this forum should be able to distance themselves from this ridiculous farce, and continue discussing the things they think matter, even if we disagree on some things.

Quote: (11-28-2016 08:03 AM)Phoenix Wrote:  

Quote: (11-28-2016 03:16 AM)RedPillUK Wrote:  

Let's stop arguing and shitting all over the free speech of those who share only a slightly different opinion to us.

No, this group does not have a mere 'slight' difference of opinion to us. They are straight up fascists by every indicator that exists. And we are not. They can go have their freedom of speech as fucking far away from me as possible.

I have no problem throwing white nationalists under the bus. Let's not label as 'virtue signaling' the expression of agreement with our enemies when that happens. There is a profound difference between my desired endgame and that of WNs, as well as the steps needed to get us there.

While it may be a tactical mistake to concede to demands that we 'disavow' WNs, one has to be politically tone deaf not to realize that their cause is a non-starter and their presence in any broader movement will greatly limit what can be achieved. Their numbers are small. They offer nothing in return for the considerable damage they cause. I haven't gotten tired of winning yet.

I've been following this thread pretty closely - I knew a thread like this was imminent even before Spencer made the speech before the media.

The forum has been evolving -from where I first got here I was all about the Game & Lifestyle forum, then dived into the vast political threads on here.

The Trump Thread & Immigration Crisis thread supercharged this discussion.

This thread itself has made obvious what sides people are on - and it's not just 2 sides, but multiple. It's somewhat reared it's head (ugly or not is yet to be determined).

It's also brought some polarizing POV's into the light on here.

There is an Alt-Right yes, but there's also a left and right to the Alt-Right also. Some good some bad.

I'm not sure how to categorize myself - am I Alt-Right ? I guess in some aspects yes as far as the anti MSM media, anti globalist, and avid Trump supporter.

At one point I did get rubbed the wrong way about embracing the Nazi Pepe memes, but was brought around the logical reasoning how embracing how the MSM labeled us which was so absurd was hilarious.

I've discussed my views on the "#HeilGate" - if you want to call it that.

They can express it sure, do I like it ? No - I think it was in bad taste.

I'll never condone Nazi's, racial purists, eugenics, etc. The Nazi's losing was a good thing, just like communism falling is a good thing.

I say all of the above with no sarcasm or snark, just pure honest thoughts about the matter.

I'm also trying to grasp the understanding of white nationalism versus white supremacy. (I'll talk more about that later)



What I'm really trying to understand is:

Where do I stand in this new world ?
How do fellow forum members view me in this aspect ?
Am I rejected by one side and embraced by the other ?
Are these labels petty or is this an actual serious movement redirect ?


Many of you know my family immigrated from India/Pakistani. I'm first generation born American who embraces the western lifestyle (I've known nothing else)

Clearly I'm not white - so I can't believe in white nationalism - but maybe nationalism ? Perhaps patriotism is a better word.

I'm not a South Asian nationalist either since I know nothing of the sort, I'm an American by my views first, Indian by genetics second.

I get that whites want to "save their race" and want it to be possible homogeneous as possible and cohesive as well.

But does that include us minorities ?

White supremacy ? Definitely not - however there's the view that whites built this great nation/modern europe/fought the wars etc (you get what I'm saying).

What does that mean for minority allies such as us ?

I'm NOT playing the victim card in any circumstance - but purely asking - Where the hell do our cards lay on such a vast table ?

The biggest problem I have with Spencer and his crew is their glorification of Hitler and National Socialism.

Hitler was a massive failure and you can't call yourself "right-wing" if you support socialism. This is what these Hitler-lovers don't get. Hitler was an asshole. Socialism is a recipe for economic failure. They need to do some introspection because denial ain't just a river in Egypt.

Quote: (11-28-2016 04:53 PM)kaotic Wrote:  

I've been following this thread pretty closely - I knew a thread like this was imminent even before Spencer made the speech before the media.

The forum has been evolving -from where I first got here I was all about the Game & Lifestyle forum, then dived into the vast political threads on here.

The Trump Thread & Immigration Crisis thread supercharged this discussion.

This thread itself has made obvious what sides people are on - and it's not just 2 sides, but multiple. It's somewhat reared it's head (ugly or not is yet to be determined).

It's also brought some polarizing POV's into the light on here.

There is an Alt-Right yes, but there's also a left and right to the Alt-Right also. Some good some bad.

I'm not sure how to categorize myself - am I Alt-Right ? I guess in some aspects yes as far as the anti MSM media, anti globalist, and avid Trump supporter.

At one point I did get rubbed the wrong way about embracing the Nazi Pepe memes, but was brought around the logical reasoning how embracing how the MSM labeled us which was so absurd was hilarious.

I've discussed my views on the "#HeilGate" - if you want to call it that.

They can express it sure, do I like it ? No - I think it was in bad taste.

I'll never condone Nazi's, racial purists, eugenics, etc. The Nazi's losing was a good thing, just like communism falling is a good thing.

I say all of the above with no sarcasm or snark, just pure honest thoughts about the matter.

I'm also trying to grasp the understanding of white nationalism versus white supremacy. (I'll talk more about that later)



What I'm really trying to understand is:

Where do I stand in this new world ?
How do fellow forum members view me in this aspect ?
Am I rejected by one side and embraced by the other ?
Are these labels petty or is this an actual serious movement redirect ?


Many of you know my family immigrated from India/Pakistani. I'm first generation born American who embraces the western lifestyle (I've known nothing else)

Clearly I'm not white - so I can't believe in white nationalism - but maybe nationalism ? Perhaps patriotism is a better word.

I'm not a South Asian nationalist either since I know nothing of the sort, I'm an American by my views first, Indian by genetics second.

I get that whites want to "save their race" and want it to be possible homogeneous as possible and cohesive as well.

But does that include us minorities ?

White supremacy ? Definitely not - however there's the view that whites built this great nation/modern europe/fought the wars etc (you get what I'm saying).

What does that mean for minority allies such as us ?

I'm NOT playing the victim card in any circumstance - but purely asking - Where the hell do our cards lay on such a vast table ?

If nothing else, the alt-right is forcing people to consciously think about: how am I? what is my place in this world? what does it mean to be "American"? where do I stand, where WOULD I stand if push comes to shove?

that is a very fruitful conversation to have. a conversation that simply wouldn't have been possible in the politically correct climate. this is a far more meaningful debate than if policeman is sexist and it should be policeman/woman and his/herstory. all people should be woke and conscious, and wokeness should be cherished

Quote: (11-28-2016 01:15 PM)Lizard King Wrote:  

People who come to this forum should be able to hold any political view they like. Don't get strict and authoritarian about people who appreciate strict and authoritarian political systems.

The variety of types of people here really is our strength. It's ironic that an ethno-nationalist is parroting a globalist political meme, but our diversity is our strength. We have a variety of different types of Nationalist, and we have IKnowExactly, who I think is a Liberal, and Traktor who is a Soviet Communist.

Everyone should be able to express their political opinion, provided they are respectful and polite. Not much to ask.

Quote:Quote:

The major problem with White Nationalism is that it assumes all you need is a White only population and *poof* suddenly everything is perfect.

No, it assumes, correctly, that demographics=destiny. It assumes correctly that radical changes of demographics and social fabric are detrimental to the host society. That's just two significant premises of contemporary Identitarianism or ethno-nationalism. None of the proponents of White/European ethno-nationalism are suggesting pogroms or violence, they are also happy to settle for a White majority, as I already mentioned a few pages back.

Quote:Quote:

White cultures became a pile of dogshit after the fall of the Roman empire and had to be rebuilt by Christianity, which was rooted in Jewish culture. During the Byzantine Empire, when Western Europe was in the dark age, the center of White civilization was in Constantinople (aka Istanbul) and that empire was very much a Theocracy/Monarchy, and although it was primarily White there was still plenty of race mixing and Cosmopolitan attitudes prevalent within that empire.

Those White cultures in that era were such dogshit that they birthed the Medieval era, and later the Renaissance era. With all due respect, there is so much wrong there, it isn't worth engaging with. It would be a distraction from far more pertinent topics that affect all of us.


The rest of your post looks like an attempt to trigger the stereotype of the White Nationalist. None of the significant writers/thinkers in the "Alt-Right" are suggesting that an ethnically homogeneous society is some kind of magic cure. However, the President-elect did say "The nation state remains the true foundation for happiness and harmony". I don't expect other people to agree with me about everything, but I do think most people here would cosign that statement.

At this point, instead of descending in to a he said-you said discussion about one post, I suggest that we focus on Nationalism, and how it can be achieved in America and Europe. That is my prime concern over all other political concerns, it should be yours too, and I suspect it is. Your post is aiming for the wrong sort of reaction, we need to be consolidating on Trump's victory and brainstorming towards the next of many victories, hopefully concluding in the reconquista of Constantinople(joking, a little bit)

History doesn't happen in a vacuum.

Quintus wrote an article very recently about the effects of the Crusades on Europe and how they did lead to the innovations and concepts that led to the Renaissance. If you consider the Mongol influences - and rulership via the Khanates - that hit Russia as well as seeped into Eastern Europe, you'll understand a lot more "identity"

Christianity has done so much to advance Western civilization. However, outside influences did make contributions. Spain became a great power after they kicked the Moors out.

The Moors however did contribute vast amounts of technological improvements, scientific learning, education, etc. that the Spanish were able to adapt and improve upon. ( For instance, when the Romans left England, the Celts had no idea how the technology the Romans employed their worked.) Who adapts, who doesn't?

This is what made the Swiss into what they are. They have no natural resources, but they import and make great products. Western culture has been particularly successful at refining technology and utilizing it. The Chinese invented gunpowder, but they didn't use it effectively. (Or they might have fought off the mongols)

The Europeans did and its why they colonized the world and still have so much influence today. Great ideas may take you far, but utilizing effectively in how you employ them is what leads to dominating history.

"White culture" is kind of a strawman and a non-sequitur. European civilization, hegemony, etc are more significant. After the Enlightenment, many technological advances hit the forefront that have really shaped most of the world today, but the worldview that came with them is shattering from within.

In a sense, "white culture" is doomed to failure because of the foundations which have been taken away.

Get rid of Christianity and spirituality and look what happens. Two world wars, communism, and the devastation that Eastern Europe hasn't recovered from, and now the refugee crisis gives you an idea of what their end logical conclusion is.

The wars showed what secularism had wrought. Post-Christian Europe occurred after ww1. It was so terrible, that they shed everything that remotely had ties to the past. In so they also shed their foundation.

Something to consider.

Quote: (11-28-2016 05:09 PM)Ghost Tiger Wrote:  

The biggest problem I have with Spencer and his crew is their glorification of Hitler and National Socialism.

Hitler was a massive failure and you can't call yourself "right-wing" if you support socialism. This is what these Hitler-lovers don't get. Hitler was an asshole. Socialism is a recipe for economic failure. They need to do some introspection because denial ain't just a river in Egypt.

This reply is a simplification of the history.

Hitler was a success until he went to war. After taking France in 3 weeks he thought he was a military genius. It was downhill from there. Prior to that, he had turned Germany from a nation with millions unemployed and people taking a wheel-barrow full of cash to buy bread, to a nation with full employment, auto-bahns, incentives for families, VW Beetles, Panzers, and many other good social programs, all within a few years.

National Socialism was good for Germany until they went to war, not because Nat Soc was flawed, but because Hitler had aspirations beyond his ability. If one actually bothers to look at the history properly, it is quite clear that Hitler did a lot of good for Germany, until he got carried away with military victories. Most of the Eastern Front Generals ended up as a POW or committed suicide because Hitler would not let them retreat.

I think it's reasonable for me to make those points about evil Hitler, in order to make some of you recognise that you have been sold a flimsy narrative. I am not trying to say "National Socialism is good", not at all. I am trying to say to you "Find the facts for yourself and make your own opinion".

Also, Nazi Germany was massively ahead of the rest of the world in terms of technology, for a significant amount of time. It took quite a few years for the Allies to catch up with military technology. Just because you've been told Hitler was the most evil, doesn't mean his society wasn't proficient and ahead of other societies.

And no, I'm not a "Hitler lover", but I do want to secure a good future for our children.

Quote: (11-28-2016 05:47 PM)armenia4ever Wrote:  

Quote: (11-28-2016 01:15 PM)Lizard King Wrote:  

People who come to this forum should be able to hold any political view they like. Don't get strict and authoritarian about people who appreciate strict and authoritarian political systems.

The variety of types of people here really is our strength. It's ironic that an ethno-nationalist is parroting a globalist political meme, but our diversity is our strength. We have a variety of different types of Nationalist, and we have IKnowExactly, who I think is a Liberal, and Traktor who is a Soviet Communist.

Everyone should be able to express their political opinion, provided they are respectful and polite. Not much to ask.

Quote:Quote:

The major problem with White Nationalism is that it assumes all you need is a White only population and *poof* suddenly everything is perfect.

No, it assumes, correctly, that demographics=destiny. It assumes correctly that radical changes of demographics and social fabric are detrimental to the host society. That's just two significant premises of contemporary Identitarianism or ethno-nationalism. None of the proponents of White/European ethno-nationalism are suggesting pogroms or violence, they are also happy to settle for a White majority, as I already mentioned a few pages back.

Quote:Quote:

White cultures became a pile of dogshit after the fall of the Roman empire and had to be rebuilt by Christianity, which was rooted in Jewish culture. During the Byzantine Empire, when Western Europe was in the dark age, the center of White civilization was in Constantinople (aka Istanbul) and that empire was very much a Theocracy/Monarchy, and although it was primarily White there was still plenty of race mixing and Cosmopolitan attitudes prevalent within that empire.

Those White cultures in that era were such dogshit that they birthed the Medieval era, and later the Renaissance era. With all due respect, there is so much wrong there, it isn't worth engaging with. It would be a distraction from far more pertinent topics that affect all of us.


The rest of your post looks like an attempt to trigger the stereotype of the White Nationalist. None of the significant writers/thinkers in the "Alt-Right" are suggesting that an ethnically homogeneous society is some kind of magic cure. However, the President-elect did say "The nation state remains the true foundation for happiness and harmony". I don't expect other people to agree with me about everything, but I do think most people here would cosign that statement.

At this point, instead of descending in to a he said-you said discussion about one post, I suggest that we focus on Nationalism, and how it can be achieved in America and Europe. That is my prime concern over all other political concerns, it should be yours too, and I suspect it is. Your post is aiming for the wrong sort of reaction, we need to be consolidating on Trump's victory and brainstorming towards the next of many victories, hopefully concluding in the reconquista of Constantinople(joking, a little bit)

History doesn't happen in a vacuum.

Quintus wrote an article very recently about the effects of the Crusades on Europe and how they did lead to the innovations and concepts that led to the Renaissance. If you consider the Mongol influences - and rulership via the Khanates - that hit Russia as well as seeped into Eastern Europe, you'll understand a lot more "identity"

Christianity has done so much to advance Western civilization. However, outside influences did make contributions. Spain became a great power after they kicked the Moors out.

The Moors however did contribute vast amounts of technological improvements, scientific learning, education, etc. that the Spanish were able to adapt and improve upon. ( For instance, when the Romans left England, the Celts had no idea how the technology the Romans employed their worked.) Who adapts, who doesn't?

This is what made the Swiss into what they are. They have no natural resources, but they import and make great products. Western culture has been particularly successful at refining technology and utilizing it. The Chinese invented gunpowder, but they didn't use it effectively. (Or they might have fought off the mongols)

The Europeans did and its why they colonized the world and still have so much influence today. Great ideas may take you far, but utilizing effectively in how you employ them is what leads to dominating history.

"White culture" is kind of a strawman and a non-sequitur. European civilization, hegemony, etc are more significant. After the Enlightenment, many technological advances hit the forefront that have really shaped most of the world today, but the worldview that came with them is shattering from within.

In a sense, "white culture" is doomed to failure because of the foundations which have been taken away.

Get rid of Christianity and spirituality and look what happens. Two world wars, communism, and the devastation that Eastern Europe hasn't recovered from, and now the refugee crisis gives you an idea of what their end logical conclusion is.

The wars showed what secularism had wrought. Post-Christian Europe occurred after ww1. It was so terrible, that they shed everything that remotely had ties to the past. In so they also shed their foundation.

Something to consider.

Liberalism doomed "White culture".

Switzerland offered a religious sanctuary and religious freedom, like America; geographically it is a node, like Afghanistan. It had a lot to offer in a Europe that was constantly changing.

The 20th Century Wars showed what Zionism could do. The original Modern ethno-nationalist movement achieved control of empires and an ethno-state within 100 years.

Nearly every Arab/Muslim tech breakthrough was stolen.

I'm not denying other histories or thinking that events took place in a singular fashion. All of history is far more complex than that.

Quote: (11-28-2016 05:09 PM)Ghost Tiger Wrote:  

The biggest problem I have with Spencer and his crew is their glorification of Hitler and National Socialism.

Hitler was a massive failure and you can't call yourself "right-wing" if you support socialism. This is what these Hitler-lovers don't get. Hitler was an asshole. Socialism is a recipe for economic failure. They need to do some introspection because denial ain't just a river in Egypt.

My biggest problem with the 1488 crowd is they're a tiny, vocal minority that historically has ridden on the backs on Reactionaries and Conservatives and then stabs them in the back. I don't care if they get thrown under the bus, because Fascists do that as soon as they can to the rest of their so call "allies".

Case in point being Hitler himself. Hitler and the Nazis never had the majority, but they did have a power-base and managed to rope in a bunch of Reactionaries who were pissed off about the Weimar Republic and "Conservatives" scared about Communism. Most "pro-Nazis" weren't really convinced Nazis, but they did think the Weimar state was a massive screw up and wanted to return to the better days of the Zweites Reich. The German officer corps is a major example, these guys wanted a restored Germany, and often being Junkers wanted the Kaiser back. Boulanger is another great example being the Proto-Fascist, his whole rise to power was him promising to return France to the Bourbon monarchy but in the end really only cared about his own dictatorial power (which he failed to achieve).

So the Nazis then push a lot of stuff that nobody wanted, like the Holocaust. The Holocaust was completely unnecessary and doomed the invasion of the Soviet Union from the start. If Hitler was really the "Anti-communist warlord" the 1488 crowd likes to pretend and revise to make themselves palatable, then he wouldn't have been interested in genocide for millions of Slavs that would have risen up and helped them topple Stalin. There was simply no reason, other than a bunch of sociopaths didn't like them. Germany could have simply made Eastern Europe a bunch of client-states (like they planned at Brest-Litovsk) and nobody would have probably cared now that Communism was dead.

In the end anything remotely resembling them was tarred for almost a century. Hitler is the go-to for "Far-right", not Bismarck, Metternich or any sane reputable figure. I don't have anything to do with them for the same reason the CIA stopped trying to take on Fascists as assets during the Cold War, they have their own agenda and will screw you over the very first moment they can.

Quote: (11-28-2016 06:26 PM)Meister Eckhart Wrote:  

Quote: (11-28-2016 05:09 PM)Ghost Tiger Wrote:  

The biggest problem I have with Spencer and his crew is their glorification of Hitler and National Socialism.

Hitler was a massive failure and you can't call yourself "right-wing" if you support socialism. This is what these Hitler-lovers don't get. Hitler was an asshole. Socialism is a recipe for economic failure. They need to do some introspection because denial ain't just a river in Egypt.

My biggest problem with the 1488 crowd is they're a tiny, vocal minority that historically has ridden on the backs on Reactionaries and Conservatives and then stabs them in the back. I don't care if they get thrown under the bus, because Fascists do that as soon as they can to the rest of their so call "allies".

Case in point being Hitler himself. Hitler and the Nazis never had the majority, but they did have a power-base and managed to rope in a bunch of Reactionaries who were pissed off about the Weimar Republic and "Conservatives" scared about Communism. Most "pro-Nazis" weren't really convinced Nazis, but they did think the Weimar state was a massive screw up and wanted to return to the better days of the Zweites Reich. The German officer corps is a major example, these guys wanted a restored Germany, and often being Junkers wanted the Kaiser back. Boulanger is another great example being the Proto-Fascist, his whole rise to power was him promising to return France to the Bourbon monarchy but in the end really only cared about his own dictatorial power (which he failed to achieve).

So the Nazis then push a lot of stuff that nobody wanted, like the Holocaust. The Holocaust was completely unnecessary and doomed the invasion of the Soviet Union from the start. If Hitler was really the "Anti-communist warlord" the 1488 crowd likes to pretend and revise to make themselves palatable, then he wouldn't have been interested in genocide for millions of Slavs that would have risen up and helped them topple Stalin. There was simply no reason, other than a bunch of sociopaths didn't like them. Germany could have simply made Eastern Europe a bunch of client-states (like they planned at Brest-Litovsk) and nobody would have probably cared now that Communism was dead.

In the end anything remotely resembling them was tarred for almost a century. Hitler is the go-to for "Far-right", not Bismarck, Metternich or any sane reputable figure. I don't have anything to do with them for the same reason the CIA stopped trying to take on Fascists as assets during the Cold War, they have their own agenda and will screw you over the very first moment they can.

Sorry, but that is a lot of feelings based garbage.

The holocaust doomed Barbarossa?

Yes, Hitler was anti-Communist, most historians agree that there was an ideological battle taking place between Fascism and Communism in the inter-war period and during WW2.

The German officers/generals were mutinous at 2 significant junctures, after the Battle of Britain, and after Barbarossa. I think we can deduce why, it's because they were both costly military ventures.

Quote: (11-28-2016 06:38 PM)Lizard King Wrote:  

Quote: (11-28-2016 06:26 PM)Meister Eckhart Wrote:  

Quote: (11-28-2016 05:09 PM)Ghost Tiger Wrote:  

The biggest problem I have with Spencer and his crew is their glorification of Hitler and National Socialism.

Hitler was a massive failure and you can't call yourself "right-wing" if you support socialism. This is what these Hitler-lovers don't get. Hitler was an asshole. Socialism is a recipe for economic failure. They need to do some introspection because denial ain't just a river in Egypt.

My biggest problem with the 1488 crowd is they're a tiny, vocal minority that historically has ridden on the backs on Reactionaries and Conservatives and then stabs them in the back. I don't care if they get thrown under the bus, because Fascists do that as soon as they can to the rest of their so call "allies".

Case in point being Hitler himself. Hitler and the Nazis never had the majority, but they did have a power-base and managed to rope in a bunch of Reactionaries who were pissed off about the Weimar Republic and "Conservatives" scared about Communism. Most "pro-Nazis" weren't really convinced Nazis, but they did think the Weimar state was a massive screw up and wanted to return to the better days of the Zweites Reich. The German officer corps is a major example, these guys wanted a restored Germany, and often being Junkers wanted the Kaiser back. Boulanger is another great example being the Proto-Fascist, his whole rise to power was him promising to return France to the Bourbon monarchy but in the end really only cared about his own dictatorial power (which he failed to achieve).

So the Nazis then push a lot of stuff that nobody wanted, like the Holocaust. The Holocaust was completely unnecessary and doomed the invasion of the Soviet Union from the start. If Hitler was really the "Anti-communist warlord" the 1488 crowd likes to pretend and revise to make themselves palatable, then he wouldn't have been interested in genocide for millions of Slavs that would have risen up and helped them topple Stalin. There was simply no reason, other than a bunch of sociopaths didn't like them. Germany could have simply made Eastern Europe a bunch of client-states (like they planned at Brest-Litovsk) and nobody would have probably cared now that Communism was dead.

In the end anything remotely resembling them was tarred for almost a century. Hitler is the go-to for "Far-right", not Bismarck, Metternich or any sane reputable figure. I don't have anything to do with them for the same reason the CIA stopped trying to take on Fascists as assets during the Cold War, they have their own agenda and will screw you over the very first moment they can.

Sorry, but that is a lot of feelings based garbage.

The holocaust doomed Barbarossa?

Yes, Hitler was anti-Communist, most historians agree that there was an ideological battle taking place between Fascism and Communism in the inter-war period and during WW2.

The German officers/generals were mutinous at 2 significant junctures, after the Battle of Britain, and after Barbarossa. I think we can deduce why, it's because they were both costly military ventures.

The Holocaust is wider than people make it out to be because it has become obsessive over the Jews, and minimal attention on the genocidal policy in general towards Slavs and other groups.

Barbarossa failed in part because of the genocidal mentality the Nazis had. If Hitler was this Anticommunist generic reactionary warlord revisionists say, then an invasion of the Soviet Union could have gone a lot better. If say, the Imperial German government was in control, then it'd be highly likely that the average Soviet would be inclined to see this as a genuine chance to topple Stalin who had been oppressing them. Some did historically, there was the Russian Liberation army and other collaborators. However, this failed for that exact reason, most people aren't going to collaborate with an occupying power whose clear intentions is the extermination of your people.

That's not emotional, that's hard facts. The people playing fast and loose with them are the 1488 crowd who want to whitewash themselves.

Quote: (11-28-2016 06:48 PM)Meister Eckhart Wrote:  

Quote: (11-28-2016 06:38 PM)Lizard King Wrote:  

Quote: (11-28-2016 06:26 PM)Meister Eckhart Wrote:  

Quote: (11-28-2016 05:09 PM)Ghost Tiger Wrote:  

The biggest problem I have with Spencer and his crew is their glorification of Hitler and National Socialism.

Hitler was a massive failure and you can't call yourself "right-wing" if you support socialism. This is what these Hitler-lovers don't get. Hitler was an asshole. Socialism is a recipe for economic failure. They need to do some introspection because denial ain't just a river in Egypt.

My biggest problem with the 1488 crowd is they're a tiny, vocal minority that historically has ridden on the backs on Reactionaries and Conservatives and then stabs them in the back. I don't care if they get thrown under the bus, because Fascists do that as soon as they can to the rest of their so call "allies".

Case in point being Hitler himself. Hitler and the Nazis never had the majority, but they did have a power-base and managed to rope in a bunch of Reactionaries who were pissed off about the Weimar Republic and "Conservatives" scared about Communism. Most "pro-Nazis" weren't really convinced Nazis, but they did think the Weimar state was a massive screw up and wanted to return to the better days of the Zweites Reich. The German officer corps is a major example, these guys wanted a restored Germany, and often being Junkers wanted the Kaiser back. Boulanger is another great example being the Proto-Fascist, his whole rise to power was him promising to return France to the Bourbon monarchy but in the end really only cared about his own dictatorial power (which he failed to achieve).

So the Nazis then push a lot of stuff that nobody wanted, like the Holocaust. The Holocaust was completely unnecessary and doomed the invasion of the Soviet Union from the start. If Hitler was really the "Anti-communist warlord" the 1488 crowd likes to pretend and revise to make themselves palatable, then he wouldn't have been interested in genocide for millions of Slavs that would have risen up and helped them topple Stalin. There was simply no reason, other than a bunch of sociopaths didn't like them. Germany could have simply made Eastern Europe a bunch of client-states (like they planned at Brest-Litovsk) and nobody would have probably cared now that Communism was dead.

In the end anything remotely resembling them was tarred for almost a century. Hitler is the go-to for "Far-right", not Bismarck, Metternich or any sane reputable figure. I don't have anything to do with them for the same reason the CIA stopped trying to take on Fascists as assets during the Cold War, they have their own agenda and will screw you over the very first moment they can.

Sorry, but that is a lot of feelings based garbage.

The holocaust doomed Barbarossa?

Yes, Hitler was anti-Communist, most historians agree that there was an ideological battle taking place between Fascism and Communism in the inter-war period and during WW2.

The German officers/generals were mutinous at 2 significant junctures, after the Battle of Britain, and after Barbarossa. I think we can deduce why, it's because they were both costly military ventures.

The Holocaust is wider than people make it out to be because it has become obsessive over the Jews, and minimal attention on the genocidal policy in general towards Slavs and other groups.

Barbarossa failed in part because of the genocidal mentality the Nazis had. If Hitler was this Anticommunist generic reactionary warlord revisionists say, then an invasion of the Soviet Union could have gone a lot better. If say, the Imperial German government was in control, then it'd be highly likely that the average Soviet would be inclined to see this as a genuine chance to topple Stalin who had been oppressing them. Some did historically, there was the Russian Liberation army and other collaborators. However, this failed for that exact reason, most people aren't going to collaborate with an occupying power whose clear intentions is the extermination of your people.

That's not emotional, that's hard facts. The people playing fast and loose with them are the 1488 crowd who want to whitewash themselves.

LOL! Barbarossa failed because it was an enormous front, and because Hitler made stupid decisions and wouldn't let a single German retreat. And because America was giving the Soviet Union a colossal amount of assistance, but lets not tarnish a good holocaust myth with facts.

"Genocidal mentality", what have you been reading? Can you dial up the "Evil Nazi" narrative a bit more.

All this WW2 debate is unrelated to Israel having a racially pure ethno-state while Europe is flooded with Third World people. When are you going to address that hypocrisy?