Some major redpills

Hello there you cunts, I'm here to drop some important red pills which, on the first glance, might not seem as important or knowledgeable to you, but if you ponder and understand them, you'll be sure to be redpilled further than "gas all the Jews".


This is often rephrased as "right can't take left's tactics". A shill or a dumbass might think this is futile defeatism, kinda like how : "hey goy, you can't do this thing that makes us win" would sound. But this narrowly means that there is one specific part of left's tactics and that is protesting. You'd see how MLKjr. protested and got everything he wants, how women protested and got everything they want, how antifa burn down the city and basically get away with it and you think to yourself - we can do it too. No dice, and to fully explain that we will introduce and explain several concepts, first being :


First used by Sam Francis to describe something minor, but finding its best example in today. Anarcho part represents the corporation with the monopoly on the just use of force (the State) not using it to protect the innocent - examples being antifa riots, BLM riots, Islamic terror attacks, Islamic rapes, etc. Tyranny part representing the State using force for the sake of unjust or disproportional punishment - examples being jailed for Tweeting, throwing bacon at Muslims, saying Holocaust didn't happen, etc. The end goal is that the State is far too weak to defend the defenseless and attack the attackers, and too strong and finding excuses for violence everywhere. This is a given thing of any bureaucracy that thinks itself as a natural state of affairs and not an organisation that takes energy to maintain - an organisation that cannot comprehend the concept of "barbarians", an autonomous and violent people not answering and not liking what the State can offer. Nice concept.

Except it's wrong. Sam Francis was a conservative, and that is one step off from being a full blown SJW. Why is it wrong? Because

Other urls found in this thread:

unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2011/03/
freenortherner.com/2016/04/17/passivism/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

In any given situation, sovereignity is absolute power, power above all other powers. Just as how someone always occupies the center - no matter how unstable the centre is. All human activity is fully indebted to some tradition or traditions (more concretely understood as institutions) that enable the said activity. Capitalism is a product of institutions that enable free trade and currency . Socialism is a product of institution of capitalism and liberalism.

Elements of sovereignity are conserved, and can be taken apart, but nevertheless still exist - much like how you can write 15 = 10 + 2 + 3. Example is "free press". To say what is true and what is not, to craft narratives, is an element of sovereignity, and the moment an "outside" entity capitalizes and takes over this element, the prior sovereign loses one part of his power. Same is true for the power that defines who should hold power - this power being held by priests, sociologists, and then university proffessors. This naturally leads you to assume that power is centered in media and academia, which it partially is. But that's not where you'll find the bulk of it. So we return to the concept of


Since sovereignity is conserved, there is no separation from the civil society and the state itself. Everything is political and politics is everything - you can note this maxim in increasing politicization of everything. If everything is politics, the liberal state where the state is limited is a poor joke. A state can only be limited by another state - thence it is not sovereign, or it can by limited by itself, thence it is not limited. Thus, the Republican idea of a limited government is a lie, and sovereignity, like life/evolution/water, always finds a way. If the State is designed by the State to prevent the State from acting like the State, then the State will use alternative means to act like the State. This means using "informal" means to do things it wants to do. Example being the high-low alliance that was noted by everyone, from Sulla in Ancient Rome (Populares wanted Samnites to get rights, Samnites wanted to rape and kill Romans), Marx in 18/19th century Vienna (Bourgeoisie wants to retain power, and use lumpenproletariat to do so) to you guys today (Jews want blacks/Muslims to get more rights, etc). The idea is to let loose the crazies in society to act as a means to break barriers that allow the planned change to occur because by definition the liberal and tolerant State cannot rule overtly. If you want historical examples, find premier Peel's usage of crazy Whigs to overcome the corn laws that would foster industrialization, find USA using MLK's protests to desegretavistock the segretavistockd, and find Europe using Islamic terrorism to pass laws to use against right wing activism. The notion that Whig loonies are responsible for industrialization is as absurd as the notion that negroes are somehow capable of changing and influencing civilization in a non-primitive manner. From this, we jump to :

Whenever you want to learn if the rebellion is truly grounds-up, rather than being organized, look where it's got its funding (follow the money). And you will learn that no true rebellion is grounds-up, and that whoever funds it does so with clear agenda and profit to be made. Example being John Wycliffe (of the opinion of pre-eminence of secular authority) being proped by John of Gaunt (of being secular authority), Jan Hus (of Wycliffe's opinions) being allied to the court of Zbynek Zajic of Hazmburk (Catholic Church did not send five crusades over an issue of who gets to drink the fucking wine in communion), Martin Luther (of the whole fuck the Catholic Church) being sponsored by Elector of Saxony. But that is boring old timey stuff. More pressings are Rosa Parks, activist for the NAACP (founded by WASPs and Jews such as Rockefeller and Garland Fund) that had such a sufficient surplus of funds to invest in sotcks and bonds. And you can even go to the MLK Centre which has Rockefeller and King on note as being good friends.

The means of informal rule are called NGOs, or non-government organizations which are nothing more than government organization. No one ever refers to McDonalds as NGO. The central power (the liberal State) nudges high power (NGOs and Jews, if you like) funds the low power crazies (Muslims, BLM, antifa) to make suitable pushes to make the central power (liberal State) give up and say "oh boy, we have no choice but to do this".

Sovereignity is conserved, and not just in case of proactive legal statements or norms passed down, but also by what it omits. That there was no lynching and crucifing by the Appian Way following many of the negro riots proves beyond the doubt that there was support for the negro riots. And why was there support for the negro riots? To advance the ideas held by the elite in central power. You will note that everytime a raghead goes boom in Europe, there is a pressing note to protect the raghead from the rightwing. When power wants something, power will get something. Look at how China is dealing with Muslims (hanging Chinese party flags with the statement of "love the party" over their mosques) to see how you should deal when there is political will to deal with Islamic terrorism.

To repeat, sovereignity can permit as it can forbid. Permission from sovereignity is necessary condition to exist under the sovereign We will now bounce back to where we started :

Current right wing activism, such as UTR at Cville is the low crazies fighting another low crazies propped by high and central power. Spoiler alert : they lost. When the State does not want someone to exist, they will persecute and destroy them hard. It will work out absurd laws to persecute (tyranny part) and conveniently pull a blind eye on the "illegal" violence of antifa (anarchy part). That a guy who was surrounded by violent lowlifes retaliated by trying to get away from them is made more pressing that ragheads blowing up children for lulz is indicative that right wing activism lacks the support of the central power.


No! Trump became the president, but he did not win the presidency. Some might feel like picking the President is akin to picking the CEO of McDonalds. It's not. It's more akin to picking who will play Ronald McDonald. There is an entrenched alliance of various people and organizations that last far longer than 4 years. Ask yourself, who holds more power, a guy in "power" for 4 years, or the people advising President for 10+ years.


Bottoms up revolution will not work. Degenerate Weimar was powerful enough to thwart Hitler, what makes you think that USG will not rain shock and awe on us? You will note that Mussolini's march worked because King was a huge fan of his. Who in USG is a huge fan of you? Do you really think that people in control, people whose life and comfort draws from being in control, people who fucking hate you and who you fucking hate will bend over a weak tiki-torch protest and willingly go into gas chambers with "oh well, was fun while it lasted :D" mentality?

That means, tops up revolution it is. Found organizations akin to their own liberal NGOs. DO. NOT. MARCH. WITH. THEM. They are sacred chess pieces to be kept far from any harm. These organizations are to worm their way into government (central power), and worm their way into funds (high power).

Elements or liberal sovereignity are universities and media. It would be ideal to drive a tank into Harvard and the NYT . But, baby steps. Find agents of it, and "observe" them. Find and focus on one specific professor or journalitst, and "observe" him. Either found alternative means of sovereignity (the antiversity, the antimedia) or capture existing ones. The former necessitates that you first destroy the existing ones, as two tigers cannot share the same mountain.

When you have the central power, high power, and antiversities and antimedia, then it's time to create low power. Capture skinheads and low life right wing proles and send them to do violence. Then you craft the narrative of left wing terror and violence and absolve the right wing protestors as innocent victims.

o sum it up

Organizations with purpose of infiltrating USG.
Organizations with purpose of appropriating funds.
Organizations that craft the narrative and preach it to the proles
Organizations of low quality proles ready to fuck shit up
The hard part is central and high power, but absolutely integral one. How to make them, I'll leave it as a story for next time.

TL:DR

Nice slide thread kike.

You're trying to reinvent the wheel at General Dynamics. Have a bump for the effort though.

pretty good primer, a lot of newbies who came in recently should read this.

tldr: power flows from the top, seize the organizations that hold power or create alternative organizations to displace existing organizations

2 examples for school:
ex1: go to school, hide your values, become a sociology professor, carefully walk the line as a hidden agent until the time arrives while secretly advancing agendas that support your values.
ex2: found alternative educational/informational systems, gain power, and displace the existing educational system by surpassing it in every aspect.

Many other examples; eg, banking and crypto, companies, ngos, many many more.

OP is ok, bump.

This also explain why (((they))) want to drive whites out of universities: to prevent another long march from the other side.

As a side note concerning future rallies such as Unite the Right: Do not enter into battlefields controlled by your enemy. I suggest plan rallies in places outside of cities controlled by those who are highly unsympathetic to the liberal state's dogs of war.

congratulations on finding Moldbug

unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2011/03/

etc.

Yeah, we're aware of Moldburg, kike. But he conveniently forgets all genuine populist movements (like he conveniently forgets a lot of things, such as Jewish power).

>This also explain why (((they))) want to drive whites out of universities: to prevent another long march from the other side.

Holla Forums Free University when?

>This also explain why (((they))) want to drive whites out of universities: to prevent another long march from the other side.
Agree. Between this politizacion from one side, the commercialization from another and the possibilities of the internet, the very concept of "university" is rapidly becoming obsolete, though. Only boomers are still impressed with this or that toilet paper. It might be an empty castle they're defending in the end. Only thing remaining will be mission-critical subjects like medicine or engineering where politics will sooner or later hit the brick wall.

Nope, you've got it wrong.
The system we have is built on rotten ground, there's no point in infiltrating it.
The fact we have fiat currency alone means we're headed for economic collapse eventually, pair that with social unrest and you've got problems for the system

Hitler came to power because Weimar republic stopped being able to provide for the lemmings and Hitler proposed a system that could(and did).

basically

Holla Forums is already an educational institution, user. I'd post the "once you're here, you're here forever" caps if I had them.


OP's message didn't suggest that power vacuums were not relevant, and in fact specifically mentioned the transitions of power and varying weights of those powers several times. Also,
is not a solid plan. Most happenings these days are directly under the influence of the power structure, orchestrated as you and I and OP all know to benefit certain groups while undermining others. Waiting for "the collapse," romantic notion though it may be, isn't feasible and should not be relied upon.

Anyway, OP, I liked your post and made some quick caps in case anyone else did as well. Have a bump.

Antifa is Soros funded Otpor niggers. Sage for faggot slide thread. Put your head in a fucking jet turbine.

Looks like our (((friends))) don't want this discussed.

Maybe you should write a book about it, like Vox Day did?

OP has failed to understand that the left has closed the door to power behind them. It is not possible to infiltrate the system because the left practices insane levels of thought policing. The only reason they were able to take complete control is because of this asymmetrical process where the right allows "free speech" while the left purges for even minor dissent. Obviously after a long enough time this asymmetry results in leftists controlling everything. Even if you infiltrate, it will amount to nothing because you will have to act like a leftist so in practice you will be a leftist. And they will not allow you to create parallel structures either. The only options are to either foment a military coup, which is not likely because military is full of boy scouts and cuckservatives, or to try to push the current system to collapse.

This. If you infiltrate sooner or later you'll be uncovered.

Or there is an option of foreign backing, but that would most likely get us arrested for terrorism or treason and tortured.

That's leaving aside how the system is extra cautious of straight white males. You would probably need to pretend to be homosexual or genderfluid or something even to be allowed in the first place. You would literally need to suck cocks to infiltrate the system as a white male.

This, I have no idea why we don't gather up the others on this board and cause a lack of faith collapse in the economy now. If we did it before the holidays this year it could be fucking devastating.

This would be more Reactionary Future and other absolutist neoreactionaries. Besides, Moldbug did not "invent" anything. His contribution was that he read and interpreted old time philosophers and thinkers, back when the barrier to be one was absurdly high. Carlyle, De Jouvenel, Le Maistre and others.

All genuine populist movements must garner support from the central power, or get more power than the central power. Otherwise, they do not exist. Mussolini's march succeeded because Victor Emmanuel fancied him, as even prominent leaders of Blackshirts told Mussolini that they would not march against their king. Hitler's march didn't succeed.

Hitler, being heir to nationalism and socialism, as well as having some pretty huge and novel propaganda techniques, won democratic support because A) The range of acceptable discourse was way way to the right there and revanchism as well as dislike of Jews wasn't that extreme B)The said propaganda techniques C)There was no Hitler to call him Hitler and demonize him.


There is no "system". System is a placeholder for power/authority/sovereignity/whatever you want to call it. You are true that system is rotten and decaying, but the power sustaining it is pure and immense. I am not saying "capture the system". I am saying "capture the power, and supplant the system".


Economic funds will get you so far. You either need economic power to supplant actual power (then it's a coup d'etat) or actual power to foster economic power. Would UTR and Boston go any different if there existed an anti-Soros who funded equal amount of anti-antifascists? No, not really. Because they had the blessings from the relevant authorities (mayor and PD) and protection from consequences of their actions. A right wing activist can get killed, and it will be buried and shilled. A right wing activist can hurt someone in self-defense and media will quickly accuse him of aggression.

Economic power (Soros) is necessary, but not sufficient prerequisite of capturing power.


I wasn't discussing this. This is a paradox of tolerance (not the (((Popper's)))). The untolerant minority wins by default if the majority is uncaring. Does it matter to you or me or anyone else really is the milk you drink kosher/halal? Not so much, but it's big with certain interests groups. So it makes economic sense to slap "halal/kosher/ sticker on the food because you're not losing any customers, but gaining new ones. This is why "gluten free" food became popular.

Now, the places where left can practice thought policing is the one which is the least involved in direct power. Universities. When I say University as an institution, I do not mean the building and the such. I mean the abstract notion of "knowing" how things work. You can have that without a degree. You can ferment a narrative on how world is and why it is and how it can be fixed without being in the Uni. We have that already, it just needs to be articulated. Mix ethnic biodeterminism with game theory, add a dash of redpill regarding women's status, and build on absolutist and totalitarian ideology.

When it is done, it needs to be lobbed in Unis. I repeat, system cannot be infiltrated. System is a sham. Power must be infiltrated, and the system supplanted.

There is no bottoms-up revolution if the sovereign does not wish it, revolution must be from tops-up. The arrow goes "get military" then "tank in Harvard" rather than the other way around. Civil war is only option.

I repeat, I am not saying "just go into Unis goys, and then scream Sieg Heil" and focus on nothing else. I am saying go into relevant centres of power - not in Uni. We have University on Holla Forums, we have Media on Holla Forums. Get economic and militaristic backing to promote them in Uni.

And the question of how exactly you organize and/or infiltrate economic and militaristic powers in such a manner that it is both impervious to leftist infection and capable to supplant the State, that's the question I'll answer a bit later, and the answer might no be true or convincing because it's not really been tried in today's hyper technological and polarized world (or, ever really, today is special). I wanted to stick with the cold facts today, and tomorrow I'll write my speculations and theories on how to capture power.

But do note, they will be speculations and theories. Nothing more.

The cycle will end, we will foster the next one.
And this time it will not be bound by time.

Now we just need to find out WHY our pineal glans is crystallized, and counteract it to allow for an Aryan transcendent awakening.

Impossible in the way you suggest.

False. It is the same in all centers of power.

False again. The system is very important.

False again. This is a huge blind spot of NRx that ignores much of history.

Practically impossible. Economy is being more and more purposely centralized and made to exclude anyone not compliant with the system.

I would be interested in seeing it, but I have strong doubts that such a possibility exists at this time.

This was pretty funny though.

read

Zero to One: Notes on Startups, or How to Build the Future

...

I did not suggest the ways of capturing power

Not really. The more reliant on reality a power is, the less likely it is to adopt stupidity and blatant lies. Reality is a force that hits hard, but it depends when it hits. In universities and philosophy, anything goes. I mean, literally anything. The consequences of female emancipation will not be felt for up to 20 or 30 years after it begins. Absurdity has its purpose.

Compare this to the media. Media is definitely on the enemy's side, but even they cannot help but to broadcast terror attacks. When Muslim goes boom, they must report it. They would rather not, but boom makes a bigger, well, boom, than raped children.

And finally, contrast this with economy, in which adopting diversity and feminism is either a strategy to disrupt other companies, or the privilege of the very strongest, or covered behind hypocrisy. Both Yahoo and Google adopted feminism and diversity, but Yahoo was stupid enough to go overboard. Google is hypocritical, but out of necessity.

And I do not believe I can say anything about the military.

I am not saying that thought policing is non-existent, but rather weaker. You will never ever ever infiltrate university. You will never ever infiltrate media. You will never infiltrate economy. Etc.


I make a distinction between "system" and what props it up. I call the latter power (though system is apt to name it), and the former combination of CURRENT University/Media/State. There are basic facts of reality that cannot be ever ignored, some more urgent than others. Hierarchy, specialization and delegation of power, that kind of stuff. Those things are jars. Specific King, specific philosophy (with the accompanying philosophers) are the water that fills it. What do you do when the water goes bad? You throw it out and rinse the jars.

Liberalism and others say that there is no jar. There's always a jar.


Maybe I wasn't clear. There is no organic "it just happens" revolutions. There is either sovereign backed (or permitted) or sovereign forbidden revolutions. The latter divide themselves in those where revolution is weaker than sovereign power, and stronger than sovereign power. We call the latter, Civil Wars. This is what we need.

Can you tell me a situation where revolution won without it being favored by the sovereign (Civil Rights in USA, Protestant Reformation in Europe) or where it wasn't stronger than the current system?


No shit that it's practically impossible. The Western civilization is a giant hulking behemoth, and this behemoth has been hijacked by a mind virus. Revolutions require hard work, and not just typing on the computer.

Ok yeah. I think we were talking past each other here and are actually in agreement. I would be interested in hearing your proposals. I am not sure you are correct about the smaller degree of thought policing in economy, but your point about reality-based vs not is interesting. When the ideology gets in the way of the practical needs to sustain the existence of the institution itself. This doesn't exist in university (unless they were teaching anti-intellectualism or something, which would never happen).

Of course they are TRYING already, but the hard limits of physical reality make those subjects much less malleable than the talky-talky ones.

redpill or

Careful posting this kind of stuff here, you'll be banned. Mods here are ideological purists and won't appreciate the neoreactionary talking points you're espousing here, even if you're right.

How do you figure this is "neoreactionary?"

This reads like an instruction to how to Weimar.

This is a basic neoreactionary talking point, NRx strategy is something called passivism. Read about it here to understand:

freenortherner.com/2016/04/17/passivism/

OP said he was more in line with reactionaryfuture, who is still a tard and sperglord who can't go two paragraphs without contradicting himself.

Read Carlyle, read de Maistre, read de Jouvenel, skip the NRx tard shtetl and their third rate interpretations.