Would you support killing all rightists?

That's because you're a 15 year old having a phase, you will give the left a bad reputation for a while and then be a centrist by the age of 20.

but user, i don't want to kill my entire family and most people i've ever known

Its not really feasible, killing all X rarely is, also you have to consider the material benefits

How do you do, fellow communists?

No, they're just brainwashed
Sometimes by default, through tradition or common sentiments

kill the men, take the women

No, they are our comrades

Some can convert by reading, some people can be de-spooked. But most Nazis have ultra fixed ideas, I had a hard time giving up on my Nazism 4 years ago but I did it.
I would say that the KKK type, ultra conservatives, dixies, etc should just be killed tbh it's not efficient to try to de-spook inbred retards who don't read it will take you a life time.
White Trash is called White Trash for a reason. These people are shit.

Because rich whites hated poor whites and thought they were as lowly as blacks? It's not like that term was invented by leftist anti-racists, it was invented by people who were both wealthy and racist. It's also a vaguely classist term now, because it implies said racists are racist because they are poor uneducated rednecks. When of course the reality is that plenty of racists are rich, and plenty of rich people are racist.

No. Most people are apolitical/moderate, in such conditions they will see left ideologies as something cruel and dangerous. Anti-left, anti-communist, far-right ideologies will become popular, lots of people would revolt against such regime, and right-wing revenge gangs would kill anyone who they see as leftist.

Alt-lite, no.

Alt-reich definitely, as is tradition.

Working out well for the left so far….

It's probably easier to do that than come up with a left wing solution to the immigration problem that isn't open borders.

That would still happen even without any overtly violent challenge of the status quo.

Dunno, do you have a proper way to identifying them? Like an objective test? If not, it would be pointless because the cunts will keep being born and ruin everything sooner or later. See: Yieltsin.

I sometimes play with the thought of using eugenics or genetical manipulation to remove conservatives from population.

dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1342239/Brain-study-reveals-right-wing-conservatives-larger-primitive-amygdala.html

Do you know how many people on Holla Forums were full liberals before?

My theory is that they are natural born conservatives that have been fed liberal propaganda.

White trash refers to white people who’re poor.

Far right & conservatives get the bullet. Centre & Centre-right get sent to Labor camps. Liberals get sent to re-education camps.

That’ll never work.

hi Holla Forums

Nope, I know plenty of them, they don't speak out or go to rallies, they are isolated in their peer groups. They were full blown liberals, on race, the whole lot. I believe the inconsistencies in Liberal thought in obvious areas and post modernism have triggered the fuck out of a generation of white men and they aren't going back as the polarisation is only going to start hitting the streets.

bring it on fags

I want to kiss 2b!

...

Top kek

we
are
pantifa

Fuck yeah, this is exactly the sort of thing I mean when I say we should find biological markers for reactionarism. Can you imagine the potential? "I'm sorry Mr. and Mrs. Yeltsin, but little Boris' cingulate-amygdala comparative density was… I'm sorry. Yes, it was well beyond margin of error. He ranked as Paleolithic. Yes, considerably more primitive than even Neolithic, in fact. I'm glad you understand, it's better this way for everyone".

Seriously, is that on the right a mental illness? How is that a healthy thing to be doing?

These, however, are terrible. I give it 1 out of 5 meme points, because an attempt was made, but it wasn't the right person making enough of an attempt.

Nigger it's an MSPaint tier shoop.

remember saltleft you lost and will loose again

Not the bloody smash the Nazi shit ffs.

You've reached the point the feminists have in 2015, you're on your way out.

That's not the image pointed to you stupid nigger.

its not the current year

Yes that image, no not the t-shirt, the fetish. How is it healthy?

It is for you

What, the actual fetish itself? I don't know, people will do anything with their genitals.

how does it feel knowing the supreme court is out of your hands for a generation

Needlessly cruel. Just let them do therapeutic compulsory hard labour until they are too physically ruined to be a danger to anyone.

like your meth head friends?

Completely the same as it has always done as it was never in my hands. The DSA is the closest American party to leftypol.

Looks like normal Americans tbqhfam.

keep blocking the roads my friends

Antifa will never recover from this one

Keep bombing Syria, poking the DPRK, sending troops to Afghanistan, keeping Obamacare, not building the wall, getting /your guys/ fired, and cosying up to Israel, Holla Forums.

keep on crying stormcuck

Holla Forums's ability to outrage themselves never fails.

top kek

i shake in my boots thinking about pantifa coming after me

He could kill you with that you know

Been manly don't protect you from 7.62x39, but I definitly think you should try

...

...

glorious aryan master race

They look like locals not neo-nazis?

yeah man those right wingers aren't even armed
i mean its not like generations of them have collected firearms and passed them down
and those 30 million veterans in the us? pffft

They are. French neo nazis who threatened migrants in Calais. But the press just told they were local affraid by crazy niggers n' shiet

You will always side with the bourgeois state in the end, so be armed or not we have a bigger deal

They lived in the houses by the camp ffs, and your pictures show them hunting not any para activity. They didn't threaten them I saw that video the migrants surrounded their fucking house.

*teleports in front of you*
*whacks you with a stick*

lahorde.samizdat.net/2016/01/25/calais-un-neonazi-menace-les-manifestants/
lahorde.samizdat.net/2016/01/26/calais-portrait-du-pseudo-riverain-excede-veritable-skinhead-neonazi/
He insulted them first, people were just protesting
I didn't send the picture for the weapons, only to show their glorious racial superiority

How can you not have sympathy with them, if they had money they wouldn't live there to be mobbed now would they? It's a disgrace people have to endure that in their own homes

those "30 million vets"
totally dont think you're commies based soley on the NutSac title you proudly carry

...

Yeah, the French magazine say's so. Anybody would react the same way. That is their life not liberals flying in to the camp and getting pictures or the housewives mid life sex crisis.

No decent people would help them, like some locals do, not beeing politcaly active in far rights organisations. Even the father is

I hope you guys do support this. I would love to see blue-haired dykes and their soyboy pets try and turn this into an actual civil war. I pray for the day antifa stop being afraid to act and actually give us a reason to shoot.

t. Langley

No, I support converting them through the demonstration of the superiority of the glorious socialist market. Former porky rightists would have to die though.

...

congrats, you called a marketfag a commie.

so you try again

I support killing anyone who says no.

...

This is your brain on Marxism

You guys can't help being sensitive faggots even on an anonymous imageboard, can you?

stickcuck is a methhead with a shitload of priors

Having a culture shock coming over from reddit?

unfortunately this will never go over well with a popular vote.

normies think that have a "bigger" anything is better. They don't consider having a hyper active fear response to be a bad thing or consider that is might override rational judgement.

To them being "hyper-alert" is a beneficial mutation and they actually spin it to say that leftists are deficient in recognizing threats properly.

anonymousconservative.com/blog/liberals-have-deficient-amygdala/

breitbart.com/big-journalism/2012/05/17/don-t-fear-the-amygdala-progressives/

facism=/=capitalism

You aren't even politically literate, I'm not surprised you call this place home.

Nice projection.

It won’t go over in a popular vote because this probably won’t stop reactionaries, will end up catching plenty of innocence, and sounds anti-privetcy, creepy and invasive.

During a revolution it will probably happen so yes.

So much for the materialist left.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism_and_ideology

I'm sure a horde of trannies, cuckold numales, and 80 Autism Level niggers will terrify the white men on the right who have been waiting for a chance to spill blood for decades. I'm sure they are quaking in their boots as they ready their collection of guns.

Fixed it for you snowflake.

...

you're in a republic schlomo, inalienable rights mean they can never be taken by the state because the state didnt give them and the nuclear option of the 2nd inalienable right means that you can't have 51% vote to kill the other 49%

The jokes write themselves

meant quotient

You skinnyfats can't shoot worth shit and are already quaking in your boots over burger antifa knocking down trashcans.

kekd, I know a green beret who burst out laughing at the idea of trannies revolting

ITT:

Do you unironically believe that a group of people who as a whole don't like guns, denounce violence, and have no military or combat experience would stand a fucking chance against a group who is obssessed with weapons, guns, and combat, and who have been preparing for a civil war for decades? Are you seriously this delusional? If you want to be a retarded leftists, be my guest, but at least accept the reality around you. The Right is considerably more prepped for combat and it would be a fucking bloodbath as things stand right now.

I've never met a leftist IRL that I have ever felt physically threatened by. They are all skinny soyboys and travel in groups to mask their individual failures.

Do you even know where you are? Fucking cucks need to lurk for five minutes and read the faq.
I grew up in Texas, you faggots would fall apart at the first shot fired at you and are almost all fat or skinnyfat.

If you said this in England you would rightly be called a faggot.

The mentalities on this site make up a small minority on the left. Most of your side is terrified of guns. Even the most moderate conservatives, on the other hand, are gun enthusiasts.

If I went to England I'd probably get blown up by a Muslim before I had a chance to say anything

check it out, the nazi is projecting again

fix website pls

...

You don't even know what the left is.
And they will not function outside of a shooting range.

London is less than 50% white. It isn't even a meme at this point. If you are trying to imply I'm D&C, I would gladly die to protect my ancestral homeland and my brothers across the pond.

Epic BTFO you are a masterminmd

You really are triggered, aren't you? It was a just a joke, friend. Take deep breaths. If you get this upset when somebody attacks your nation, even on an anonymous imageboard, why are you a lefty faggot? You sound like a nationalist.

spooks, will not make any meaningful change in your life or the lives of others as long you keep those in power. Keep blaming the powerless.

Are you all just angsty teenagers?

Are you implying that people who practice a lot at a shooting range will not function as well as leftist faggots who have never even touched a gun?

I don't blame the powerless. I blame the people who own manufacturing industries, own the media, control international trade and finance, and lobby in every single foreign government. The shitskin parasites that infest London (and every white city) are simply a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself.

the left is socialists, communists, and anarchists who have made a century long career of kicking right-wing ass.

You really don't though.

Yes, I'm sure the genders study class at my local university are all extremely deadly in street fights. Just like all of the fatties and fat-acceptance whores in your movement will surely be strong, healthy mothers for the next generation of commie scum.

Not the working class ones. They're simply either uneducated on the topic of leftie politics or are brainwashed. But we should kill the upper class though. We literally have Kulaks running around, we need to do something about that.
youtube.com/watch?v=I0ua1n1Bsfg

Isn't DC one of the most violent cities in the US? I am not American but I remember something about it being the murder capital of the US. That was years ago though.

Wow cool image I'm convinced now

It is. Just look at the demographics of the city and you will already know how violent it is. A lot of niggers in DC.

No, I assume when you hit 13 you will be though. Maybe once you lose some weight and get a job you'll stop being a cuck.
You fags can't handle a gun in a firefight and will probably shoot yourself or allies more than you shoot communists. We could probably toss a trash can at you and watch you gun each other down.

So which wave of cancer did you join the internet with, 2013?

This is your brain on Marxism.

It's funny watching leftists try and appropriate our memes and language because they can't make anything of their own to resonate with normies. Sucks not being able to seize the memes of production, doesn't it?

This is what i think about your hypocrisy:
youtube.com/watch?v=3AJpiMw33-g

US military is shit and can't handle guerilla warfare, not to mention how they all get fat when they're out.
I'm not the one who slobbers while porky takes the product of my labor bucko. Come back when you get a job.

Its funny that I made this thread and now I'm banned for a week, yet rightists in here are talking about killing us and its perfectly okay with the mods lol.

Unban the IP of the thread OP please

I didn't make a retarded argument. I said I would probably be blown up by a Muslim if I went to London. If you took that seriously and couldn't recognize it as banter, you have actual autism. And I said you were triggered because instead of recognizing an obvious joke, you went and screencapped demographics of DC to try and discredit a fucking joke. You have autism.

Okay, bud. Keep projecting.

We must stand with reactionaries in their struggle against leftist shitposting.

I bet you don't even know what my flag represents.

I'm going to try to teach you something new. Socialism is actually the most diverse category of politco-economic thought in the world, it includes ideologies so different from eachother that you'll question why they're labeled under the same category. The failure of the Marxist-Leninist model does not disprove socialism as a whole, especially not market socialism, which you probably haven't heard about until today.

Oh, you. Are you basing this off of Vietnam and Iraq/Afghanistan? If so, I would strongly encourage you too look at how effective the US was in Vietnam before the ROE was changed, effectively castrating our military force. The same thing happened in Iraq. Before and during the invasion of Fallujah our military was kicking ass and taking names. After Fallujah there was a public outcry, and harsh ROE were once again put into place. In the only conflicts we have faced guerrilla fighters in, we have fucked them up so badly until liberal cuckolds back home shed tears over it and forced us to change the ROE.

Funny, even though they are too afraid to fight, liberals still manage to kill our own with cuckold politics.

your an idiot
military already got tricked into killing brown people and they know they got a bad deal. VA sucks and GI bill takes a lot of work to get what your owned. Recruiters lie and vets know this more than anyone. They see their friends die by their side and know its for nothing. Theyve been sitting at home watching the war wage on for over a decade and they know its bullshit. Many voted for Trump because hes claimed to be non-interventionalist.

And you think those people are going to take up arms against citizens of their own country?

The only people who are as angry as you and have these ridiculous mass murder fantasies are other neckbeards that can't climb out of the basement without assistance.

No you wouldn't you bloated twelve year old. Maybe after you do a stint you'll realize this, but I doubt you'll be able to meet the fitness standards.

no
Gulags, on the other hand…

The people are interchangeable, user. Kill them all while not changing the system and nothing changes. Good that you've understood that capitalism is the problem though.

Are you capable of providing data that refutes that, or are you just going to keep hurling out personal attacks? Typical lefitst. When you can attack the argument, attack the person making the argument.

Stopped reading there. You are either shitposting or retarded.

Now why would you go and kill the average farmer and worker?

so its a hybrid like social democracy

doesnt matter though because no matter what mao and stalin killed the most

Legit Nazis and Fascists are the only ones who'd be willing to swap on over.
Hell, quite a lot of traditional fascists and Nazis had rather radical leftist ideologies in their early years.
Even Codreanu let out Communists to help inspire workers.

I know, I'm saying you're extremely out of shape.

If it gets you back to reddit than yes. The US military won't be able to handle an insurgency and the militias will fall apart when faced with armed combatants. Deal with it kiddo.

Again, instead of debating what I said you resort to shit personal attacks. Why don't you try articulating why you think our military magically started losing those fights directly after the ROE was changed, and why there were doing so well beforehand? Or, if you don't believe that narrative, why don't you try disproving it? Are you capable of doing that?

This is a chan you underage redditor, stop being an insufferable newfag and lurk.

That's what I thought, incapable of having an actual discussion beyond shitposting. At least you admit it, albeit in a very roundabout way.

I think the exact opposite is the case - ideologically we have far more in common with liberals. Traditionalists and other hardcore reactionaries are directly in opposition to Enlightenment values and thought that is the foundation of both liberalism and socialism. Liberals for example usually think that the communist utopia is desirable, whereas reactionaries would think its egalitarianism 'unnatural' and thus 'evil' in their perpetual naturalist fallacy.

...

...

To be fair the lion's share of today's fascists only oppose Enlightenment values to signal that they don't like liberals. These people spend their days on places like 4chan and Reddit, for Pete's sake. They have no commitment whatsoever to traditional values or communities (they might have aesthetic preferences in line with traditionally powerful institutions, but having a preference for an aesthetic does not entail a preference for the elimination of the complementary aesthetic), they're just alienated as fuck and see Enlightenment as the embodiment of that alienation, not the subset of Enlightenment we call capitalism.

Agreed. Burger conservatives are more hopeless than fascists. To become a fascist, you would have had to think outside the box and question your beliefs at least once in your life. That's not the case with patriotards.

...

...

It sure is easy to claim victories when you bomb "insurgents"!

...

And this is exactly why normal people doesn't join the left. Because yes, you are like nazis. A bunch of violent fascist retards

I'm 3 months banned for saying antifas are a bunch of violent animals that should be ,and will be, in jail

Everyone is banned in this puritane modtriggered board, get used to VPN's. You mass murder apologist whinning kiddo

So you don't need evidence for killing people? Interesting.

By the way, you mods are useless and just as ridicolous as r/socialisim is. If you can't stand others opinions just kill yourselfs because you can't even reing in your own board, useless pieces of shit

CIA is that you?

The majority of the reactionaries of Europe in the 20s and 30s were the same way. Fascism and its near neighbours are aesthetic movements, the reality of politics or society is just an afterthought. They would even back then invent a 'glorious past' and then paint that construct as a past to return to. It isn't really ever even relevant if that 'glorious past' ever existed in the way they think it did. Radical alienated d.egenerate petit-bourgs idealising a traditional rural blood-and-soil life and yet never actually taking any steps to live that life was the reality of nazism even back then.

weewaaweewaa politically illiterate triggered liberal coming through

You should sign up for debate class when you get to high school, you have a few things to learn.

You're all flour from the same package. One day the world will realize that it's you turds the cancer of the planets. Not the muslim terrorists you paid with your taxes dollars.

Almost nobody said that they'd want to kill rightists.

Please, try again. Is the argument not that we don't know if these people are insurgents, so we have to err on the side of caution and kill them?

Generally you impose extremely strict rules on the population of the land you have occupied. No men meeting in large groups, strict curfew, search all caravans/vehicles that are coming/going. That was standard practice in Vietnam. There was a 6PM curfew and anybody who wasn't military personnel outside past that time was open season.

You also have to punish people who traffic/hold weapons for insurgents swiftly and severely. At the beginning of Vietnam we burned down entire villages if one house was stocking weapons for the VC. We didn't do this in Iraq or Afghanistan, and as a result the civilians all worked with Islamist extremists, because they were more afraid of them than of the US military.

You get an F in counterinsurgency theory

Yes, surely the strategy employed by nearly every large invading force in the past 500 years is wrong. You know why? BECAUSE LEFTIST POLITICIANS SAID SO!

I constantly bash antifa and I've never been banned for it, even though my flag is one of the most hated ideologies on here.

Evidence for killing people? Yes. Evidence for killing sandniggers? No.

None of what you said has any relation to the idea that it's more difficult to make a reactionary into a leftist than a liberal. "Ideological distance" is not necessarily a useful metric in determining difficulty of conversion; moreover, as reactionaries are primarily LARPers, the ideological distance is lower than might be thought.

What I was trying to say is that their purported support of traditionalism and traditional institution and opposition to d.egeneracy has little to no bearing on how they actually conduct themselves. Just because Holla Forumsyps are LARPers who fap to traps and cucks all day doesn't mean they wouldn't welcome a state that would force them to stop push their habits to the underground and out of sight. Or that they don't actually hold essentialist worldviews, quite the contrary in fact. The benefit the far-right has over liberals is that they recognise that the world can't go on as it is right now, even if the things they tend to think are wrong or at fault are silly.

Amusing. This didn't help the US win the Vietnam war either.

It's very obvious that you have no actual concept of how warfare in general works. Your CoD tier description of battle involving literally K:D ratios proves this. Let me explain warfare in a broader sense so maybe you can start to understand why you're wrong.

Warfare is a means to achieve a specific set of goals. Whether it's making some other nation capitulate and formally surrender, or to claim some piece of territory, or to eliminate specific people or governments, the reason you start a war is you have a specific goal.

Once you have outlined your goals, you then begin envisioning how you intend to go about these goals and formulating means of actually beginning to engage the opposition. You outline what "victory" will look like. What does it mean to obtain these goals? If your goal is "take this piece of territory", then you have to begin stating what is acceptable and what is not acceptable terms of "claiming it". Do you need everyone who is not your team off? Do you just need to have rights to it? What if the reasons you're taking the territory, resources or structures or whatever, is damaged?

From there, you can then start actually conceiving how you are going to go about taking it. Only now do you actually start looking at your military equipment, your soldiers, and operations. You begin to outline how and when things are to be used, and who moves where.

At the very last stage of planning do you set up tactics on what the fuck soldiers are actually doing in a combat zone. This is where you start defining combat tactics.

Vietnam was never going to succeed, no matter how many VC houses burned, because the goals from the very beginning were royally fucked. The intent was to create a South Vietnamese government who would act as another of the US's client states to protect Southeast Asia from the gommies. This was never going to happen because the South Vietnamese government was incapable of handling the task. The US government didn't pull back because "fuggin lefties", they pulled back because they realized years too late that they were never going to be able to prop up SV. They were there fighting a war that was never going to end because the goal of that war was unreachable.

Here, we have a different, but similar problem. The actual stated goals of invasion, namely to eliminate the top of alQuaeda's leadership. remove the Taliban from power, and to remove the Hussein government, have broadly been achieved. even binLaden, someone who the Bush administration said was irrelevant to "winning" the war, is now dead (presumably).

Now, if you're going to argue that there are well defined, achievable objectives, please, go ahead and spell them out. If the main objective is now "fuggin insurgents" then this is a pointless, unwinnable war, no matter what your RoE are. By that metric, the insurgents are going to win, because you literally can not win if you don't have any win conditions.

I am not a apologist of mass murder… I have never defended capitalists.

Actually K/D was the only way victories in Vietnam were measured. It was called "Seek and Destroy". Victories were measured in body count, not in ground taken. Do you even know the basics of Vietnam?

As far as Afganistan and Iraq go, we didn't invade Afghanistan, we were invited there by the ruling government to help them police their country and remove Al-Qaeda. I am primarily an isolationist and think that was a stupid thing to do. Same thing goes for Iraq. We shouldn't have been there. My point was, that IF we do send our military somewhere, we need to take the gloves off and not stifle ourselves with ROE or we can't do anything effectively. I wasn't arguing whether or not we should have been in those engagements from an ideological perspective.

Except for the only victory that mattered of course - final victory.

Which was only achieved because our military had its claws and teeth pulled out by liberal politicians.

You keep thinking that sweetheart.

Nice argument, faggot.

Keep thinking that.

So Seek and Destroy was not the primary military strategy employed by the United States in Vietnam? Interesting. I guess the reports written by the commanding officers that served in that war are all completely wrong, and they actually weren't using that strategy at all. In fact, after talking with you, I'm quite positive the Air Calvary, the entire division of the army that was specifically designed to use this method of attack in Vietnam, probably didn't really exist at all. You have truly shown me the light, user!

So then what was the main foal of the Vietnam War? To go kill a few commie ricepickers, get some of your own troops killed, and leave?

Holy shit, you are a fucking moron. I've said over and over again that was the STRATEGY used by our ground forces in engagements, not the fucking goal of the war. The strategy one uses to fight and the end-goal are two entirely separate things. Did I really need to spell that our for you?

In my initial post I said:

We lost that war because our combat strategy was changed by the new ROE. I said that in the first fucking post you replied to. Does following the flow basic conversations usually give you this much trouble?

And again, as I have pointed out, it doesn't matter what your strategy is if your goal is unachievable.

The South Vietnamese government was never going to be able to stablize itself. Once that becomes apparent, then you can argue literally all day about de-fanging soldiers and it will be utterly fucking irrelevant.

And once again, what is the goal of the current wars in the middle east? What was the goal of Vietnam? If you seriously disagree with me that the goals of these wars are unreachable or undefined, I want to hear it.

I have already said I did not support us deploying the Middle East in either war in two separate posts. I don't know how many other ways I can say I don't support those wars. I will try one more time. I did not support the occupation of either Iraq or Afghanistan. Okay? Can we move on from that now?

And this entire thread you have been arguing that the primary tactic used by the United States was NOT seek and destroy or "kill ratios" as you put it. At no time did I ever argue for, or against, the political goals of the Vietnam war. You are moving the goalposts because you know you are wrong about the strategies used.

I argue that they're irrelevant. It's amazing just how much you can miss this. You can have a kill ratio of 1,000,000 to 1 and still lose because you still haven't achieved your political goals.

WARS ARE A MEANS OF ACHIEVING POLITICAL GOALS. IF YOU CAN NOT ACHIEVE YOUR POLITICAL GOALS, YOUR WAR IS POINTLESS.

READ THE ART OF WAR YOU FUCKING DUNCE.

Since you seem to be so utterly devoted to the retarded idea that you'll win if I admit Seek and Destroy was the US's tactic: Fine, sure. It was. I'm perfectly aware of it being the US's tactic.

Now answer this: How did this tactic help achieve the goals of the war? In what way did it push towards the primary, end-level goal? If you can't answer that, then there is no reason to use this strategy, no matter how good it is.

If you can't comprehend this very basic concept that strategic victories need to translate into progress towards a goal, in the same way that you need to build a spaceship to reach space and not build the best F1 racecar there is, then I'm not going to bother continuing this argument.

you people think you are against the establishment—-you ARE the establishment(Judeo-Masonic conspiracy)

youtube.com/watch?v=aTRRfhcUBwk

The general idea was that if you kill enough of the people who support the new government, they will lose power as a majority. It was actually working when we were able to kill entire regions/towns that supported the new government. When we were only able to kill off people who were actively shooting at us, things changed. Most people who were in support of the North Vietnamese weren't active combatants, they were doing things like providing food, supplies, and storing munitions. When we could operate free from over-restrictive ROE and kill those people en masse, it made it extremely hard to gain any political progress for the North Vietnamese out of sheer fear of the US military. If you supported them, we killed you. End of story.

If they refused to support them, couldn't the VC have killed them too?

Indeed. It is a fact of war that those who suffer the most are non-combatant civilians. Civilians died at a rate of 20:1 compared to military personnel in WW2.

take your meds

Now how does this translate into sustaining the South Vietnamese government, which was a separate entity from the North Vietnamese government, and not some political party of the unified Vietnamese government needing majority parliamentary support? If you're still not disagreeing with this being the political goal, you have to explain how the one translates into the other. Otherwise all you end up with is a bombed out, destroyed Vietnam, who the Communists would have been all to happy to show how the Americans were just ready to kill everyone who disagreed with them as they put food and security back into the hands of the Vietnamese.

Some things are moral imperatives. Things like end of slavery, universal suffrage etc and this.

And I really shouldn't be surprised the fuckers tried to spin this already. "Buuuuuh please don't kick us to the curb, even viruses have an ecological niche"

What could be more materialist than neurobiology?

That's one of Stalin's many errors. Even if you nevermind all the innocents caught in the mess, you could arrest every single damn reactionary but the bastards will keep being born. It has to be a continuous process.

I confess myself surprised a nazbol is bringing this up. Anyway, it's just a matter of refining the research enough, same as any other thing that is now considered a public health issue.

Fully objective reactionary purge soon.

I'm always more than a little disturbed when I hear this, because it essentially means "yeah we could have committed genocide if only them pinkos didn't get in the way".

Just remember that if it ever comes to civil war in the US to murder every last person who dares to utter the slightest bit of support for your opponents.

Those retards are like the hydra. Physically killing them would only fuel their delusion.

...

Stop
Also, stop with the moralizing, the righteous indignation, and the wholly anti-materialist stance

I'll never stop, user, not as long as enemies of reason vie for power.
What's wrong with Liberté, égalité, fraternité anyway? Think carefully about your answer.
I agree with the second part of your post though

where all the 2butt at

Read Dialectic of Enlightenment. Myth is already enlightenment, and enlightenment reverts to mythology. Adorno in general is pretty cool as well

Well since Holla Forumsacks agree with you on more topics than your average normalfag, I would hope you wouldn't kill us.

No. Centrists (real ones, not 'liberal') would go with it easily and the "liberals" (mostly upper class) might lose some people with them, but the real revolution would have happen at the poorest level and have it stick in order to get the bourgeoisie right-wing shitters weaker. If there's some people who literally want to die or if there's some heinous fuckers who shouldn't be allowed into a socialist society that could accidentally not exist anymore that wouldn't be such a bad thing.
but nah depending on how dramatic your revolution is gunna be i'm sure most people could be converted just by full social-democracy-with-capitalist-infrastructure and beyond. Most Americans at least.

Post it

No need to.They're testing of the goebbels meme-truthism works in real life, i'd just point out that picking bullshit every time it is possible does not add to it's convinving power.

of course only the leftcom understood. thanks.

Funny, as a "fascist" I feel the exact same way about communists.

Why stop at just the rightists?

No, I would not. I have friends whom are right-wingers.

No.

I support loving them.

If a lot more people loved each other. The world would be a better place.

These levels of idealist moralfaggotry are getting intolerable.

I love you

Well, I love you user, but you'll get gassed if you'll go full mahatma

I love you too