How many of you does this video accurately describe in your political transition?

The veil is off, commie.

There are literally tons of Liberal/Cuckservative>Libertarian>Fascist>Traditionalists.
But never the reverse. I have never seen someone do the reverse path or going to Communism later. There was a guy on Holla Forums claiming that, but he was just lying, he was a leftist all along and is a notorious shit head in all boards.

You know, if you just keep digging, you'll arrive at this position eventually.
The path to Communism is to never dig, but to follow what your hip teachers/television tell you to do.

Now spread the word and redpill. Watch The Greatest Story Never Told, EUROPA - The Last Battle and read Web of Debt by Ellen Brown.

Traditionalism leads to Hoppean libertarian which basically states we should return to a city state/local community model with a much reduced global population.

But anyway, OP is from bunkerchan which is pretty hilarious. I like these older school marxists, they are getting eaten alive by the SJWs.

I can vouch for this, I have gone so far that I believe in that very idea; I like to call it "Localism" myself. It just seems natural to worry about our local surroundings rather than the big picture out there.

The four stages are gencon, libertarian, traditionalist, radical right

Knowledge without action is useless

Traditionalism leads actually to Small-scale Monarchy, similar to the little kingdoms of the Holy Roman Empire or what would be a Monarchical/Hierarchical Switzerland.
The extended version of the image was made by butthurt Libertarians. Hoppe was pretty much a Monarchist and he was mostly right with the reduced scale things, just not economically.

Yes they are, and many are seeing the same things the guy in the video is pointing out between "us" and Communism, for instance, Bourgeoisie/Capitalists = Jews/Bankers/Media.
They just haven't had the spark to jump ship toward us, because, while they're still glued to concepts, like "Capitalists", we actually know everything about them, their names, their religion, how they operate, when, why, etc

please explain

He is still a Libertarian.
mises.org/library/mind-hans-hermann-hoppe

He still thinks some Commodity is money and that the private sector should take care of it.
He also is extremely market-decisions oriented, when we already know that the market is not free, but manipulative.

Agreed, its bad. But the idea of "small scale monarchys" or "localism" or as Hoppe calls it "communalism" is probably the future (unless the jews succeed in brainwashing everyone).
As an side, it makes someone like the OP a possible ally. There can always be a communist city state, although I think it would fail. So we can work together to take direct action against the current system until it collapses, then go our seperate ways.

lol, Holla Forums you are too obvious

No, I think the case for OP is that he might think that, because it's just so common of a path for everyone, that might be that it was all a manufactured/ruse emotional way.
When in fact it's not, it's just the pure truth.
You just keep digging and keep discovering, it's the most natural thing ever and many people actually had the same trajectory because the things dug are the same, and the youtube recommended list is also the same.

Yeah, this is Holla Forums.

I may agree that in a non-raceconscious world or a world with jews that we would continue on our present course of being subverted and destroyed even in a libertarian order that he envisions, but I don't see how that makes him wrong.

I'm here for our racial survival. Whatever it takes. But once that is assured, I see nothing wrong with hoppean systems. I can't recall any logical problems off the top of my head. There is no reason even that they must be antagonistic to something like a federation of peoples like I think natsoc would entail (over time). Now, if you think it can't work with nonwhites, I can't disagree. But who cares? We're white. It won't work for horses or cattle either.

I just said them: He's fundamentally wrong on the nature of what is/should be money, who would get to control it and he still believes in the free market fallacy.
Read "Web of Debt by Ellen Brown", it's a must read for Holla Forums and lays out everything, historically even.

You don't like what he says. That doesn't make him wrong, as in incorrect. You're talking shoulds. If they are related to how best to break the grip of the jews, I have no problem with that, survival must come first.
I'm not sure why you think that applies to hoppe. But I'm basing that off of the summary, I don't read women authors without a good reason.

>You don't like what he says. That doesn't make him wrong, as in incorrect.
He's fundamentally incorrect. First, the free market doesn't exist outside of conceptual analysis.
Secondly, money is not a commodity, and the creation of it should not be on the hands of private individuals because of the problems of interest.
Because it's a deconstruction of the Libertarian economic system top to bottom. You haven't read it, so you wouldn't know.
Her book is just a huge compendium of citations from male authors, happy now?

I'll call him up and let him know he is disproven because you say so.
if true, then yes I'll look into it.

Again, economically. Libertarian economics is extremely flawed.
But politically? He was spot on.

lurk two years before posting, shithead. If you're going to kill a thread, yours better have some depth of thought behind it and bring something interesting and worthy of Holla Forums's attention.