[Roosh]

(11-26-2016 10:46 AM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  

Far from seeking to demoralize the men on this forum, my goal at all times is the exact opposite of that. I know that morale can be a fragile thing for some men, and I do the little I can to keep it, not so much high, as steady and even. I was truly dreading what this place would be like if, as seemed likely to me, Trump would fall just short; I worried about the effect it would have on some guys' lives. It is always better to be delighted and surprised by a good outcome than to have one's unreasonably high expectations shattered. To the extent that any of my posts played a small role in tempering guys' expectations and keeping them on a steadier keel, that is something I do not regret. The time to celebrate is after the buzzer. For us, that time is now.

This sounds fishy to me. It doesn't appear that you've met anyone from the forum (that I'm aware of), so for you to say you were "truly dreading" the outcome for a community that you remain at arm's length from, and refuse to bridge beyond the internet, doesn't jive. How worried can you be for people's lives if you don't know them? Your language is similar to Scott Adams, the gaslighter of the election, who would take people up on a confidence high and then smash it back down.

Quote:

Far from seeking to demoralize the men on this forum, my goal at all times is the exact opposite of that.

I guess we'll have to believe you.

[The Lizard of Oz]

Roosh,

I don't follow Scott Adams very closely, but my point was the exact opposite of what you write about him; instead of taking people on confidence highs and lows, I try -- to the limited extent it's within my power -- to keep them on an even keel. That's what I said in the previous post.

I'll leave it to the guys on this forum -- some of whom I have now interacted with in one way or another for over three years -- to judge whether or not it's possible that I care about them enough to dread the effect that an event could have on their lives and on their morale.

[Ghost Tiger]

The Lizard of Oz,

You may not have been seeking to demoralize men reading this forum, but you were doing that. I accept your statement that you didn't mean to do it, therefore you had no mens rea, and so you're not guilty, but you did have actus reus, and so you should accept the righteous anger of some of your fellow members here, including me. We forgive you, but we don't want you to do it again, or we will find you guilty and we'll be really pissed off. As Roosh said above, look to the wreckage that is iknowexactly for an example of how this can play out.

I like you a lot. You were one of the first members I encountered here who showed enthusiastic support for Trump's rise, and you expressed it with such eloquence that you reminded me of Conrad Black and I even used a line from one of your posts as my signature here for a while (the "Doritos energies" post):

The Lizard of Oz Wrote:

And it delights me that the American people, alone in the whole world, are saying: No. FUCK YOU. We will have our DORITOS.

I may have been the first member to start razzing you about your aversion to Bobby Knight, which is intense. I think the post I made where I said you should change your avatar to a picture of Bobby Knight when Trump wins launched the campaign of jokes about you and Bobby. I still think you should man up and do that as good-faith penance for being wrong and for demoralizing a lot leading up to the election, albeit innocently. It would be the Christian thing to do. Self-flagellation and all. But it's your call.

Bobby Knight personifies the Doritos energies you described in the post I referenced above. Your aversion to Bobby shows your aversion to said energies, ironically. Indeed the very fact that you talked about these energies and how the American people delight you in their embrace of them, as if you were a bemused third-party observer, indicates your natural aversion to them. Trump won by winning the support of working class white boys from flyover country. Doritos energies boys. Guys like this guy Owen Shroyer. Guys like me.

You said the time for celebrating is after the buzzer. I dare say Bobby Knight would argue that the time before the buzzer is the time for CHEERLEADING. Not risk-averse bet-hedging like some government bureaucrat lawyers terrified of policy changes. Such risk aversion is demoralizing, which is why everyone hates government bureaucrat lawyers, they even hate themselves. And demoralization is a dangerous and destructive force, particularly during an election, as Yuri Bezmenov will tell you.

You started out as a cheerleader, but then you became risk-averse, I dare say you got scared, and you wanted us to get scared with you. And some guys here DID, because they look up to you. You should understand that, regardless of how you WANT your words to be received, you are IN FACT a thought leader here, even to me, even now. You are a brilliant and very talented guy. But remember the words of Peter Parker's Uncle Ben.

With great power comes great responsibility.

We still love you man. Just own your mistakes and we'll move on from it.

And don't fucking do it again.

[The Lizard of Oz]

Ghost Tiger,

Thanks for that post my man -- posts like this are why I love this place.

The irony is that I actually like Bobby Knight and have watched quite a few games in which he coached. He wasn't much of a cheerleader -- he was the kind of guy who would chew a young kid's ear off for a minor defensive lapse when IU was up by 15, because he wanted the job to be done right every time. He was a perfectionist who wanted to win and hated every error, no matter how small. He did win more than 900 games (as we may have heard once or twice in the past year) so maybe there is something to learn there.

[HighSpeed_LowDrag]

Ghost Tiger,

TLOZ has nothing to apologize for, nor nothing to be contrite about. He has contributed greatly to the forum this election cycle through his advocacy for Trump, his eloquence, but perhaps most importantly for doing his best to prevent groupthink from overtaking the Trump thread.

Groupthink is a dangerous thing to allow in any organization. It leads to hubris and complacency. To get an example of what can happen when such things are allowed to go unchecked, you need merely look at the Hillary Clinton campaign.

[GlobalMan]

Lizard has previously contacted me in private to warn that my identity here was being discussed on another website, to my great appreciation. I will take that as evidence enough that the man truly cares about the lives of men here and his connection to them, though I didn't need that evidence to see this.

[Kona]

I watched the entire video of Richard's speech that the clip in the first post of this thread came from.

I wanted to understand why Richard feels America belongs more to him than it does to me. Also, after reading how he took responsibility for his people at his speech going off the rails doing the Heil Hitler, I thought it was good to see his side. And it is the Heil Hitler, it isn't the Roman Salute. Transgender used to be cross dressing, same damn thing. But still, I thought his responsibility was admirable.

When you watch the video from another angle, he is absolutely doing the Heil Hitler, just with a drink in his hand. He's trying to be sneaky about it. Don't tell me otherwise, regardless of my ethnicity, I'm a grown ass man.

If you watch the whole video, then read his excuses later for the Heil Hitlering, it just destroys all his credibility in my eyes. More so than having Tila fucking Tequila as your guest of honor.

There are so many moments in the speech where you have to think "well look at you" that just drive me crazy.

Own your shit. Don't hide and be sneaky with what you say. Have some balls.

If you want to be a racist, be a racist.

And that guy uses air quotes too much. You are never going to have a successful movement when you have Tila Tequila and air quotes involved.

Aloha!

[Rhyme or Reason]

^ Yeah lol at "roman salute".


If you call it that, you are an intellectually dishonest faggot.

[SamuelBRoberts]

(11-26-2016 12:28 PM)Roosh Wrote:  

This sounds fishy to me. It doesn't appear that you've met anyone from the forum (that I'm aware of), so for you to say you were "truly dreading" the outcome for a community that you remain at arm's length from, and refuse to bridge beyond the internet, doesn't jive. How worried can you be for people's lives if you don't know them? Your language is similar to Scott Adams, the gaslighter of the election, who would take people up on a confidence high and then smash it back down.

I gave TLOZ a lot of shit during the election. But at no point did it enter my mind that he was attempting to gaslight us or manipulate our opinions. I don't think that holds up at all. The evidence simply does not support it. During the final run-up to the election, when it was clear that his opinion on the election differed so drastically from ours, he just stopped posting. There were plenty of times in that final week or three when things were looking bad, and a writer of TLOZ's calibur, who commanded the respect he did, could have easily done a great deal of damage. I know I specifically asked for his take on Bill Mitchell's accusation of poll fraud via sample weighting. I don't doubt for a minute that he could've written something that would have cast serious doubt on those accusations, and it would've been amplified from here out to the rest of the twitter-verse. (This is irrespective of whether or not the accusations were true. Very few people were actually qualified to judge those claims, and TLOZ has a poly sci background. He could easily put something together that would sound "good enough" to convince most people.)

Those accusations of poll fraud were critical in maintaining enthusiasm online in the last weeks, and if TLOZ were a manipulative gaslighter, he could have put a stop to them. How much damage this hypothetical evil TLOZ could have done, I don't know. But it would have been a lot.

There were many times in this election when I felt similar to TLOZ. There were many times I didn't think Trump was going to pull it off, and it felt to me like the upbeat optimism of the forum was a little unmoored from reality. I know on election morning I had no idea how it was going to go. I almost skipped the local election party because I didn't feel like attending a funeral. (I did go, and I had the time of my life.) I had other members privately say the same thing to me, that the Trump thread was a cheerleading section.

In the end, the "unmoored" people were right, and many of them collected five and six figure paychecks off the betting sites because they were optimistic when I wasn't. There's a lesson there, and it's one I'm taking to heart.

The difference between TLOZ and myself (and no doubt many other members) is just what Ghost Tiger said. I felt that once the game starts, you're committed to the players you've got. You have to support your team till the very end. I was damned if I was going to say anything that indicated I thought we were going to lose the election, or anything that I thought might drive down turnout on the big day. I have no way of knowing, but I would imagine that many other members felt similar.

TLOZ felt otherwise. Where I saw cheering for your team, he saw groupthink. Where I saw the need to keep up enthusiasm, and do whatever it took to keep spirits up and make sure we got the turnout to win on election day, TLOZ saw gloom and misery on Wednesday morning. He saw dashed hopes and despair, as people who thought the election was a sure Trump win woke up to find out that they were in for four god-awful years of Hillary Clinton. And he did what he thought he had to do to try and mitigate the crash.

I thought he was wrong then, and I think he was wrong now. But while I disagree with what he was trying to do, I don't question the purity of his motivations in trying to do what he did.

There is NOTHING to suggest that TLOZ has lied or misrepresented himself. There is NOTHING to make us question his motivations. There is NOTHING to indicate that he is trying to gaslight us. There is NOTHING to indicate that he's done anything except disagree with some members of the forum, in a polite and respectful way. It is entirely unfair to a man who's spent thousands of hours bringing value to the forum to make these accusations.

I have disagreed with TLOZ in the past. I disagree with him in the present, because I do think that there's some creepy stuff going on with some aspects of #PizzaGate. I have no doubt I will disagree with him in the future. But until I see something that makes me think otherwise, I will not question his motivations.

[Atlanta Man]

Men like Richard can claim all the shit they want about how great they are for being born a certain color but the fact remains he has done nothing of note. He is a useless man pushing a stupid agenda that has done nothing for humanity. I do not give a damn what color someone is, who your ancestors were, or what you think the world owes you because of who your parents were. That dipshit Richard wants to tell me how fantastic white people are, how about telling me how fantastic he personally is. A big problem I see with people in the west is they are always looking backwards at what their "ancestors" did and expect a pat on the back.People need to get off their ass and make something of themselves.

Richard had a captive audience, free press and a moment in his grasp to make a real impact politically for his "movement"- and he did a Nazi salute. Think about that. He played right into their hands and was the perfect idiot. So much for his superior IQ....

Roosh had a moment when the press stalked him, stalked the meet ups, and harassed his mother- They took the fight to his goddamn family- and Roosh exposed the press as the dishonest hacks that they were. He did not go into a woman hating tirade, he did not get into a physical confrontation- he simply met with the press in a hotel and deconstructed their boogyman and made them look stupid. Roosh should tutor Richard , but I do not think Richard has the IQ to learn.

Anyone who thinks that Richard or the NPI is going to be anything more than a distraction and a shit show is delusional. They are not ready for prime time. If I had a political movement I would keep my distance far away from them. Trump's daughter is Jewish, and Richard makes the statements he does? Do you think Trump would even want to be in the same room with that idiot?

[jibj]

As Roosh said some months ago, elements of the alt right work together b/c they share mutual interests. But, as the alt right gains in power some of these interests will diverge. A potentially influential voice in the alt right are the various white supremacist groups who trump the values of the Constitution when it comes to gun rights and free speech but then pretend that same constitution doesn't exist when it comes to other races or religions. It will be interesting to see what happens in the next few years.

[ivansirko]

I dont personally consider myself a member of the alt-right. However, I am interested in the things they have to say and have a tendency in leaning in that direction. When we talk about a schism we learn this from the very media sources who wish to destroy the alt-right. Schism? To me any new movement needs to rid itself of any elements that will harm the movement itself and/or are not representative of the movement. This is how it becomes more mainstream and palatable to those who didnt start out as a supporter. There needs to be a push for leadership (to my understanding there is none) so it can be steered in the right direction.

If Roosh chooses to not disavow elements of the "alt-right" as a member of that movement thats his business. I will wait about a year before making a judgement on where the movement is going due to how new it is.. Salutes? Hails? Excuse me while i not give a shit. It is more damaging to act SJW as much from the left as from the right. If we dont want the racial purity aspects time will work itself out. Now, does anyone want to bitch about the New Black Panther power salute?

[Kona]

(11-26-2016 08:56 PM)ivansirko Wrote:  

Now, does anyone want to bitch about the New Black Panther power salute?

When a member of that group does their salute at one of their get-togethers, I bet he does it with pride. Not some half-ass sneaky way, and then deny it, like Richard Spencer.

Tila Tequila has the balls to do it, come on Richard.

Aloha!

[Rhyme or Reason]

Quote:

Now, does anyone want to bitch about the New Black Panther power salute?

Yeah because nobody in this forum has ever criticized BLM or anyone associated with them.

[Atlanta Man]

(11-26-2016 09:17 PM)Kona Wrote:  

(11-26-2016 08:56 PM)ivansirko Wrote:  

Now, does anyone want to bitch about the New Black Panther power salute?

When a member of that group does their salute at one of their get-togethers, I bet he does it with pride. Not some half-ass sneaky way, and then deny it, like Richard Spencer.

Tila Tequila has the balls to do it, come on Richard.

Aloha!

In my opinion the New Black Panthers are another bigoted useless group trying to cash in on the past. Huey Newton would not associate himself with the New Black Panthers if he were alive today.

[ivansirko]

(11-26-2016 09:45 PM)Rhyme or Reason Wrote:  

Yeah because nobody in this forum has ever criticized BLM or anyone associated with them.

BLM <> A symbolic symbol to hint at black power used by a black power organization (Which is what "those opposed to Spencer" accuse Spencer of doing for white power). But thank you for playing.

[Kona]

(11-26-2016 10:23 PM)ivansirko Wrote:  

(Which is what "those opposed to Spencer" accuse Spencer of doing for white power).

This is one of my favorite arguments people like Spencer love to make.

There are tens of thousands of ethnicity based organizations in the USA alone. They have picnics and festivals, chambers of commerce, scholarship associations, things like that. Here's a gymnastics club for Czechoslovakians: http://sokolstl.org.

Now, if you are black, unless your family came to the USA after 1880 or you have had DNA testing done, you have a little trouble tracing your heritage.

So the "well they got the NAACP" argument is just kind of pointless to make.

If they are making that argument, then their group can't exist. If Richard Spencer really was only interested in celebrating his heritage and ensuring its legacy he world be the president of the German American Heritage Congress. But he isn't.

The reason is, because as much as he is proud of his heritage, he also hates other people's just because of their skin color, and for the way they are portrayed by society.

Can a white guy get a scholarship from the United Negro College Fund? No. But he can get one from FACC Scholarship Foundation if he's of French decent. Which do you think came first?

Groups for whites only have existed for a long time, the second a non-white does it people like Richard Spencer and Tila Tequila get all crabby.

Aloha!

[ivansirko]

(11-26-2016 10:58 PM)Kona Wrote:  

Groups for whites only have existed for a long time, the second a non-white does it people like Richard Spencer and Tila Tequila get all crabby.

Aloha!

I am simply tired of being required to care about symbolic "hints" (or more specifically dog whistles) which is what SJW's push on all of us. Yes, if you really wish to advocate for HItler or for a "race power" then dont hide it. Actions can speak more loudly than "Hail Trump" (ZOMG HE SAID HEIL DRUMPF! NAZI! I AM TRIGGERED!). We hear the term "1000 year trumpenreich" even in this very forum.

I just believe certain elements on the right like the SJW tactics. And its interesting, you dont have to be any type of racist to see the double standards we apply on groups.

[Valentine]

(11-26-2016 10:58 PM)Kona Wrote:  

(11-26-2016 10:23 PM)ivansirko Wrote:  

(Which is what "those opposed to Spencer" accuse Spencer of doing for white power).

This is one of my favorite arguments people like Spencer love to make.

There are tens of thousands of ethnicity based organizations in the USA alone. They have picnics and festivals, chambers of commerce, scholarship associations, things like that. Here's a gymnastics club for Czechoslovakians: http://sokolstl.org.

Now, if you are black, unless your family came to the USA after 1880 or you have had DNA testing done, you have a little trouble tracing your heritage.

So the "well they got the NAACP" argument is just kind of pointless to make.

If they are making that argument, then their group can't exist. If Richard Spencer really was only interested in celebrating his heritage and ensuring its legacy he world be the president of the German American Heritage Congress. But he isn't.

The reason is, because as much as he is proud of his heritage, he also hates other people's just because of their skin color, and for the way they are portrayed by society.

Can a white guy get a scholarship from the United Negro College Fund? No. But he can get one from FACC Scholarship Foundation if he's of French decent. Which do you think came first?

Groups for whites only have existed for a long time, the second a non-white does it people like Richard Spencer and Tila Tequila get all crabby.

Aloha!

1) In the post you quoted he clearly said "doing for white power", not celebrating whiteness nor have an exclusive sports club based on ethnicity. Those organisations have very different goals.

2) Many groups are ineffectual. I see no reason to not create another organisation if the mainstream one doesn't get anything done, its actions aren't aligned with your beliefs or if it in fact is subverted.

3) Not sure where you're getting the idea of hating other people for their skin colour from. His organisation is very clearly a reactionary, not fascist one - about nurturing white population rather than wanting to eliminate others. You're getting white nationalists confused with white supremacists, just like all the old media does.

[Rhyme or Reason]

delete. this is retarded.

[Kona]

(11-26-2016 11:56 PM)Valentine Wrote:  

3) Not sure where you're getting the idea of hating other people for their skin colour from. His organisation is very clearly a reactionary, not fascist one - about nurturing white population rather than wanting to eliminate others. You're getting white nationalists confused with white supremacists, just like all the old media does.

Well Richard Spencer's " the most dispicable creatures on the planet" comment is where I got my idea. I'm sure you can big-word that to tell me he's referring to something I don't understand. And I'm pretty aware of the difference between white supremacists and white nationalists. The differences, to a sane person, are too subtle to really matter. The similarities are right there in your face.

So a big Roman Salute to them.

Aloha!

[Space Cowboy]

(11-26-2016 11:56 PM)Valentine Wrote:  

3) Not sure where you're getting the idea of hating other people for their skin colour from. His organisation is very clearly a reactionary, not fascist one - about nurturing white population rather than wanting to eliminate others. You're getting white nationalists confused with white supremacists, just like all the old media does.

I'm all for a group that wants to nurture the white population, but claiming that's your goal and then throwing up a Nazi salute is kind of like buying a shotgun for home security and then threatening to snipe the kid walking his dog because he was on your sidewalk. You're doing both because you have some kid of dislike/hate in your heart, not for "self-protection/preservation".

The salute is an homage to Nazism, that you can't deny that just like you can't get away with flying a swastika on your patio and claiming it's because you love Hindu philosophy. And you can't separate the salute from the genocide and racial hatred because it was the core principle of what made Hitler Hitler and the Nazis the Nazis.

I echo Kona's opinion: If you want to LARP as a Nazi, grow a fucking pair and go all in. And I'm definitely not buying that those untermenschen were plants.
They're the same kind of guy who will sit back during a fight like a bystander and then rush in when the dude is knocked out to kick his head in like a soccer ball. Weak. I understand that fracturing within the "manosphere" is not what is needed but you've gotta draw the line when these weak bitches are scurrying around at these meetings and acting like full-on autists. This community isn't defined by a political movement-- in my opinion, it's defined by a bunch of men who share a common philosophy, opinions, likes, and goals. We meet each other in real life, and this vetting allows us to screen out the weak bitches, the feminist infiltrators, the agitators, and the idiots. Hitching the entire community to the wagon of some political group/movement seems like an unwise gamble when a lack of vetting means you're relying on a proverbial roll of the dice for each new member of the group.

[Valentine]

(11-27-2016 12:49 AM)Kona Wrote:  

(11-26-2016 11:56 PM)Valentine Wrote:  

3) Not sure where you're getting the idea of hating other people for their skin colour from. His organisation is very clearly a reactionary, not fascist one - about nurturing white population rather than wanting to eliminate others. You're getting white nationalists confused with white supremacists, just like all the old media does.

Well Richard Spencer's " the most dispicable creatures on the planet" comment is where I got my idea. I'm sure you can big-word that to tell me he's referring to something I don't understand. And I'm pretty aware of the difference between white supremacists and white nationalists. The differences, to a sane person, are too subtle to really matter. The similarities are right there in your face.

I'm not going to big-word you, I just personally can't see that he's referring to race in that comment. I thought he was referring to the left, in particular the old media.

(quote at 30:48)

(11-27-2016 12:53 AM)Space Cowboy Wrote:  

I'm all for a group that wants to nurture the white population, but claiming that's your goal and then throwing up a Nazi salute is kind of like buying a shotgun for home security and then threatening to snipe the kid walking his dog because he was on your sidewalk. You're doing both because you have some kid of dislike/hate in your heart, not for "self-protection/preservation".

Other than dislike/hate, there's a few other reasons why he could have chosen to do this:

- Controversy = more media airtime = more traffic/followers/eyeballs to your organisation and movement
- Wolf whistling to white supremacists in order to gain more support because their goals are somewhat aligned (similar to my earlier post about the New Right and Alt-Right working together)
- Cause other thought leaders who call themselves "Alt-Right" but never discuss ethnicity to either identify themselves by a different term or promote the entire philosophy

I'm not denying that he's displaying Nazi symbology, but there are a number of alternative explanations for his actions. Also after listening to him speak I think it's a far jump to say he hates other races as he was focused entirely on speaking about the survival of the diminishing white population and didn't discuss reducing foreign ethnic populations.

[Phoenix]

(11-26-2016 11:56 PM)Valentine Wrote:  

Not sure where you're getting the idea of hating other people for their skin colour from. His organisation is very clearly a reactionary, not fascist one

No I disagree. I finally had a look at this guy and what he says (because he seems to have been significant enough to get condemned by Trump).

1. He envisions a new Roman empire, but just for white people. I think this by itself is enough to call him fascist, based on the constitution and behaviour of that society. You can't call that merely reactionary since it's more than a thousand years old. He didn't say "Roman republic" he said "Roman empire".

Quote:

I think we should have a new Roman empire...a grand ethno-state for all Europeans to come together.

2. He wants State-enforced eugenics. This is too far right to be considered merely reactionary. By "it sounds terrible and nasty" he's implying sterilization.

Quote:

"We are undergoing a sad process of degeneration,” [Spencer] said, coming back to minority births in the U.S. “We will need to reverse it using the state and the government. You incentivize people with higher intelligence, you incentivize people who are healthy to have children. And it sounds terrible and nasty, but there would be a great use of contraception.”

You could argue that it's reactionary for eugenics to come back, as it did exist in some relatively minor forms from time to time. But a great use that is terrible and nasty?

3. He founded the website AlternativeRight.com in 2010. For this reason he does have first claim to the label 'alt right', and for this reason I think the brand label 'alt right' should in fact apply only to a white nationalist and fascist movement similar to his.

4. He thinks race isn't just important, it is the foundation of identity

Quote:

“race is real, race matters, and race is the foundation of identity.”

That's clearly fascist. This monotonic, single-trait view of "one of us or not" goes hand in hand with rigidly unifying a society. As a reactionary I consider that being white is a part of my identity, but only one part among many. Something about calling it the 'foundation' of my identity makes my skin crawl, as does this guy overall frankly.

5. He uses the term 'ethnic cleansing'. Advocating ethnic cleansing is a well-known far-right position. It isn't merely reactionary or conservative.

6. His organization's blog 'radix journal' is hostile to capitalism. For me this is the first indicator of a right-wing movement being fascist, a.k.a far right. This is when you start to see the 'national workers party' kind of emblems and rhetoric that characterized fascism in Germany. Fascism dislikes capitalism because it's focused on individual businessmen putting themselves and their families first, instead of enterprise being about furthering the state as a unit. This is why under fascist Germany and Italy, businessmen's activities were all reined into the state apparatus. Reactionaries want a reversion to earlier capitalist free-enterprise societies, not binding business into the state apparatus.

I'm sorry, but if this guy isn't fascist then fascists don't exist. If you want to support him, fine. But don't then pretend he's not a fascist. Call him a 'mild fascist' or something.

And frankly that's the last I want to read or hear about that guy. Way too many red flags coming off him. If he just stood for white rights, fine, but if you look at the fact he wants a white ethno-state, ethnic cleansing, eugenics, an empire, plus he wears the haircut preferred by the SS, and he's done a Roman salute (which is now called a Nazi salute for exactly the same reason -- the Nazis wanted a return of the Roman empire too)...

If it sounds like a duck and walks like a duck, it's probably a duck. This guy couldn't be closer to a Nazi unless he outright said "Hitler was a hero".

So let's cut the shit. This guy is at the very least a stormfronter. We should ignore him and distance him. That doesn't mean to fight against him or ally against him. Simply he should be treated as a group we do not associate with, such as stormfront. Everyone who has distanced themselves from him was completely in the right.

[CynicalContrarian]

(11-26-2016 08:56 PM)ivansirko Wrote:  

I dont personally consider myself a member of the alt-right. However,...

Personally.
I'm still waiting for my membership card to arrive in the mail...