Feudalism Thread

Surprised nobody has done a thread about feudalism.. Ever..

All of our problems, liberalism, immigration, socialism, capitalism, communism, all stem back to the few decisions made by a group of men during the French revolution. The revolutionaries sat on the left, while the monarchists sat on the right; this is where we get the "left right" dichotomy from. The events leading up to this turning point of history started a few hundred years prior when the merchant classes became stronger and more protected.

Feudalism made a strong case before liberalism even existed, yet nobody talks about it. We keep talking about "freedom" and "free trade", things that existed only after a few centuries ago, things which are currently destroying the west.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droit_du_seigneur
theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Green-Wise.html
traditionalright.com/resistance-is-feudal/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Feudalism is nigger-tier. I say this as a descendant of nobility and royalty.

You can have a monarchy without feudalism. A good case can be made for a monarchy at that. But feudalism is shit.

What's so bad about it, if I may ask?

Local lords have too much power. It would be batter if they just get removed from power.

I thought we had a non "kangz" edition of this already in the US. Each state was to have its own local barons "mayors", its only laws "sate level that trumps federal", culture because of there own unique land space. Its failing because everyone (((Commiefornia, Jewyork,DC))) seems to want to push there shit upon everyone else and corrupting are youth and lesser "adults".

If I'm wrong, sorry, but this is my take on it.

And of course, you imagine yourself as some kind of Baron?

Modern system is practically feudalism (there is practically zero concrete difference), they are just fooling the goyim calling it democracy and all that.

Monarchists belong in the ovens, along with their inbred subhuman "royal families" (that are most likely jewish as well)

Ok, hope you enjoy being a shitter from a village that serves as nothing more but money factory for your lord. Oh, you think you can preserve your wealth? Sure, you might, at the cost of your leased land and by extension your life. Feudalism is one of the worst cancers in the world.

Just came here to say this. Although powerful lords seem like a good thing, they turn a country into a nightmare when they dismantle the rulership of the king, essentially dividing (or utterly dismantling) the central rulership of a nation (see: Magna Carta).

Germany was the best example of this. Lords had so much power in medieval times, a central rulership was impossible to establish until the 1st Reich. They were just bands of loose, battling confederacies until Barbarossa decided to put an end to this.

Nevertheless, it failed in the long term. Germany has managed again to devolve into the band of loose confederacies it was before, again, until Napoleon decided to rule over Europe. A common enemy, then, made the Germans more united, reducing the number of confederacies from 190 to just 39. In a sense, we can literally name Napoleon as the father of Germany, since from there on rose an interest of German confederacies getting their shit together, like Austria and Prussia being formed (and the confederacy of the Rhine, but they sided with France so that's another story). Then, you had Otto von Bismarck, who was basically the greatest benefactor to the German people, effectively establishing a true Germany from then on. Then and only then, were the Germans capable of showing the world who they really were.

Just goes to show how much Germans would prosper if all of this unification shit happened in the medieval ages, instead of them waiting for an enemy to knock at their door centuries after.

Forgive any mistakes, I am very new to the history of Germany.

Why would you care about wealth if you are given land than can make you self sufficient in exchange for a part of your produce and your services in times of war?


But how do you replace the barons you obviously need a middleman between the king and knights making the title not hereditary seems like a good option but not much batter.

Lords are given no power at all. They're given a fief (a contract of land in exchange for services). The lords likewise give a contract of land to the peasants for their services; of the contract, the right to be protected.
The reason feudal lords became so powerful is because of mercantile attitudes created by a protected merchant class. The merchant class was disparaged in Japan, and they had relative peace for a while, and a continuing feudalist tradition of social rituals.


There's a HUGE structural difference. A feudalist society has no material anxiety whatsoever. Think about it this way; money was created to impose debt-anxiety over the common worker so they'd work a little bit harder so the capital owner would get interest off their labor; if laborers didn't think they were getting what they worked for, they would say it's unfair and ask for more. In a feudalist society, there's no debt-anxiety, because the people are afforded a living wage (maybe even moreso, so they can buy luxury); the very fact that they're not sickened by the anxiety of materialism, they have no need for "material wealth".


This is what I'm talking about. Had it not been for a capitalist mindset, you'd be happy with your own life as it is. The best intentions of good parents is to see their child grow up and live; being loyal to a lord (and the king) gave you protection for you and your family.

Not to mention they were only required due to physical distances which don't even matter these days since you can circle the globe in a days time.

Feudalism still exists dumbass.

It's called mortgage.

In fact, the government initially merely replaced the king.

The government grants land to others.

Being a slave has no material anxiety as well, if you look at it from that perspective. Modern feudalism and slavery depends on psychological control (hence the anxiety), old one depended on physical control.

please read

Mercantilism and the Merchant class are at the top of this society. That's a BIG difference, for one. Feudalism isn't controlled by progressivism; that's why feudalist countries are so stagnant.


Feudalism is about the LACK of control that the system has on people. Sure, slavery is about the same idea, except for the fact that slavery was a market institution. If times were hard, slaves were killed to avoid the cost of maintaining them.

Not quite.

Government is still in it's lead position.
That's why everyone pays taxes.
Or you lose the grant in land.

"Feudalism is nigger-teir"
I'd agree with user on that. But thats not to say their are no advantages to this dog-eat-dog world, as you can imagine. Im not well read on the history of capitalism and that shit, but we've all noticed basic Feudal structures and appreciated their merit. its hierarchy. Knowing your place is a good thing if you ant the nigger. Don't get me wrong I'm all for social nobility, but a lot of where social status comes from is from the identity and race of the individual. I disliked Jews for instance long before fortune for the sole reason that they are all disillusioned by their parents into believing their path to being King is by divine intervention.

muslim faggot out >>>Holla Forums

Hijacking this thread with no survivors

Why don't we make a cursory headway into the political structure of our time, Holla Forums? My news sources (and their comments sections) are of the mind that governments these days are interfaces for the corporate class to execute their whim; if we could deign the denominations of these two I'd say we could dispel a lot of the (reluctant, corporate driven) stigma about shit like political lobbying and such. I'm Australian myself so I don't particularly understand how the US system works for big business but it's an absolute laugh down under how easily they get away with it.

Democratic capitalist societies are inherently mercantile. Look at America; the biggest candidates either have a history of being in the government or have a wallet full of cash. And look at the lobbyists; they're paid to get into government to pay the government and tell them what to do. They bail out crooked companies which lead to debt being imposed on the backs of hardworking people.

I own 3 lines of credit; i do nothing with them, and I'm considered "smart" for it, yet it feels like common sense not to touch them, because they drive people into debt.
Money itself is a form of debt, created during the agricultural revolution when capital owners would build up a monopoly and sell at high prices so the people would work harder than they have to, to give the capital owners more money to invest in better tools. Capitalism is progressive, but it's only progressive off the anxiety of debt and interest.


The left-right dichotomy was created in France; the people opposed to monarchy and tradition sat on the left (they were freemarket capitalists, revolutionaries, etc), while loyalists sat on the right. Historically, capitalism and "muh freedoms" are relatively new in the world. They're not even western values; they're middle eastern values perpetuated by international jewry. Jews were at the center of the whole thing, because they were the reason the declaration of the rights of man was signed in the first place.

Liberalism is the dominating political theory in the world and has been for years. Government is created by the hard working people. These people generate money and invest that money into its countries markets to live the good life, in a basic economic a basic social society where monarachs and fuck shit have the final say. But because we live in 21st century international markets r e q u i r e free trade and your country to rely on trade + investment that when you get mad and pissed off at the jews you want to fuck shit up. you can't. because international liberalism creates a demand for peace through economic incentive. IF you dont comply they won't do business with you and your people will eventually be conquered.

Where have you been all your life?
In a bubble?
Do you follow politics at all?
How old are you?

refute a premise, when you find an inconsistency to the conclusion. dont be a pleb and say to me I'm
delusional.

Money is a store of wealth and a means for transaction, the function of debt is as old as humanity itself and worked on reciprocity basis and obligation to help one another.

Feudalism in the strictest sense revolved around loyalties between the suzerain and vassal and the relationship between them and the fief that was exchanged. The actual setup of land economy was one of rents and taxation, as the land was the property of the lord in question - it differs little from modern rentier capitalism where profit is made purely from ownership of land and properties and does not rely on any production save of those that pay the rent.

If you want to look at development of feudalism, money and labour, I suggest study of Roman economy and transition it made into Middle Ages and then transition of economy into capitalist one following Black Death.
Also, lay off the materialist angle, you sound like a textbook commie.

I'm a big fan of feudalism. It's a very human system, because your "government" is always a person you personally know, who is personally responsible for your well-being, and you have personal access to. It's not like democracy, where, because of the population sizes, you vote for people you'll never meet, to decide over BS nobody understands.

I don't think we should go back to full feudalism, but we should take a page from its books: Nobody should rule over you that you can't personally access (and punch in the face)

That means more decentralized governments.

focusing on this concept I want to formulate an argument for confederacy.
two lessons from Feudalism and liberal democracies

Yes, let's go back to a time when we were poorer and weakerthan the Indians or Chinese

That's completely wrong though.
Money gets its power because we agree on the value of money; if the value of money is always decreasing (or I'm being paid less than I sow), then I become controlled by the anxiety of debt. It's not the same as "You give me some apples, and I'll owe you", because, in that case, someone would have the option of breaking their promise, whereas the legal tender in a state is backed by the governmental powers that protect it.

It differs a lot. The fief in question is a an oath of loyalty; there are no powers that actually enforce it except the loyalty of their role.

Communism is a byproduct of the capitalist system. Look at modern liberals today; they mimic the old liberals who believed in free markets; they want "progressivism" and "freedom" and "equality". Karl Marx even said his movement was based on a modeled projection of capitalism. Communism is literally capitalism 3.0


A capitalist is happy with his phone until a new one comes out on the market, then he wants the new one. Capitalism uses progressivism to think you're benefiting your fellow man; that's a social trick it pulls to appeal to your altruistic nature, and it reels you in with the individualistic bullshit.

Happiness isn't about being "stronger" or "more advanced". The Japanese, after warring for so long, finally were at peace in an ideal feudalist society until merchants came along and imposed self-interest and debt-anxiety.

please stop, that's not even a legitimate theory

There were actually a lot of powers to enforce it. Middle Ages were rife with cases of local wars, fief revocations and royal threats against nobility.

nah mate, you buy into the scheme and dialectic of Marx and absorb that nonsense just by talking about it as a valid theory. You already failed.

More pseudo-leftist drivel.

No, the Tokugawa Japan declined internally as the samurai caste became useless in peacetime and turned into a decadent class while economic laws and political system served to fuel status quo that left entire Japan behind the rest of the world. Meji Restoration was a salvation for them, otherwise the would have gone the Chinese way and end up colonized/influenced.

You are either very naive or you are reciting Das Kapital without even realizing it. You are either a student or someone who read few articles and thinks his wide-eyed view of the world was suddenly validated.

I have some sympathies for the feudal system. Especially for the life with nature and production of everything you need within your small community. Also, all the items have meaning. Did you ever throw away something you had no use and thought to yourself: "someone made this, his effort went into this and we just bought it and used without consideration. It's all so sad". There's something deeply tragic in the way modern world is structured and we interact with it. I'm no Luddite, but I can appreciate this stuff.

In either case, feudalism as such won't work today nor do we have a way of transitioning to it. I welcome the discussion about it. It's so beyond the pale even here and it shouldn't be.
Here, have a meme.

It's common sense. If you can't feel anxiety when in debt, there's something deeply wrong with you.

Oh wow, you live in modern day and dare complain about petty noble squabbles in the Middle Ages? Talk about deluded.

Found the ideologically pozzed modernist.

Sounds like you are projecting. Does that college debt bother you so much? How big is it?

Yeah, talking about history in context of your examples is deluded, especially when your points are getting knocked down, but ok.

I did not say anything to the effect, but nice strawman.

You have no point to make and you are now attacking me instead of my arguments. Stop embarrassing yourself and get off the computer for a bit, pinko.

The oath is a contract and the contract will be enforced by the lord, his willing peers and any higher lords both legally able to and desiring to involve themselves in the matter.

Yeah, a bunch of wealthy capitalists funded marx while he pissed away his life.

Communism holds more in common with feudalism than capitalism.

Some people enjoy making war.
Some people enjoy having slaves.
Some people enjoy being destroyed.
Happiness is not something unto itself. It's merely the result of an individuals satisfaction with their achievements and/or the current situation they find themselves in.

How can one force self-interest?
How can one force debt-anxiety?
Both can only ever result from voluntary participation, knowingly or unknowingly, in such a system.
Both can only exist within the individual.
They cannot be implanted. They must already be there.

You're playing dumb and know nothing of pre 18th century politics. How hard you miss the point of everything, might as well be talking to a communist.

Point out the things I don't understand. Pray tell, which parts of Feudalism I did not understand? The ones described in your holy book? Because I have my degrees in history and philosophy and I follow evidence and not historic materialism?

Dude, if you have nothing to say, then keep quiet. If you do, point out what I missed and then we can have a productive debate.

We'll end up back to Feudalism soon enough, once expansionism of Capitalism slows down and genetic modified humans become the norm creating new hierarchy. The ruling class of today is already "copyrighting" genetic code for tomorrow, someday soon you'll be able to simply buy human-like creatures to work for you.

Feudalism is really the result of rationing essential resources(land, water, food; mostly focusing on land though according to history) becoming consolidated over multiple generations. The owning, celebrity and warrior classes always turn into a royal caste given enough time. The only way to stop it is through eternal revolution and wanton destruction of bloodlines or through endless expansionism that allows competing new nation-state powers to rise. Rising states is something the ruling class must stop if they are to survive in the long run, especially today simply because the danger of nuclear weapon to the entire planet.

Kys lad.

Yes, being 100% dependent on your local lord is freedom.


Only a retard would accept "his place" that's not based on merit. Being ruled by those who are inferior to you just because they got born at the right family is against natural law and utterly degenerate.

I can't believe people are unironically shilling for feudalism here, like ancap was not enough.

If you're thinking about low literacy, that can be remedied today with technology that lets us to access data from far away.
And if you're thinking about religion. The picture has a point that modern world lost Truth and cares only to put heresies and modern lies into your head.

...

Well, yes. You'll be happier the less you are subjected to communist, libertarian, progressive, whatever ideas. You think I'm gonna tell my kids about how communists view the world? Fuck no. Leave that to the experts and aristocrats of the soul. Regular people needn't hear this drivel.

When you get your argument for confederacy fleshed out, I genuinely want to read it

Wow, actual political discussion on Holla Forums. This is a welcome development.

Just dropping this:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droit_du_seigneur

There was apparently a legal right of a lord to cuck - yes, literally cuck - your serfs on their wedding night under feudal systems.

By regular you mean weak? You say you want some kind of faggy hugbox because "muh fee fees"? A man can stand commies, we all do now don't we?

Rarelly used, and cuckoldry was often in the higher ranks of nobility who wanted a bastard son of the king.

Because if such a right was used, you could claim rights of Nobility even if you were an illiterate Serf. So it wouldn't be in Nobility interests to make being Noble a normal thing rather than an elite thing.

Also such claims appeared mostly in Catalunia and Alentejo, zones in Iberian Peninsula with biggest Marxist propaganda movements.

That's all I'm seeing in your post.
Top pozz m8

Holla Forums is not a representative sample of the population and the political system needs to take this into account.

No, I'm saying all men should strive for the strength of the soul and to not behave like scared women.

Piety, friendship and work. Search for Truth. None of them related to evil ideas per se.

He's 100% dependent on you.
You're given the right to be protected, land, and a living wage, as long as you work on his land. The fief is generally up to the lord. You could theoretically go anywhere in the land and live on your own, but the fief is what guarantees you protection.

Tell me more about "natural law". It's natural for one human to be ruled by another human (an alpha); that's how the world works, bub.

Anarcho-retardism meets NRx?

Feudalism is inherently nationalistic.

In such a system where participation = protection, without a focus on protecting all state citizens, and without the utilitarian regards for human life, groups like Black-lives-matter will always single themselves out of existence. Besides; every feudalist society is and forever will be a nationalistic nation; nationalist beliefs are inherent in nationalism just as liberal values are inherent in capitalism.

Along with everyone else who isn't blackmailed into an anti-Nationalist system, which divides states into hereditary bureaucracies that place more value on "citizen participation", aka serf mystery meat, than serving the wider nation.

People get confused by the word 'feudalism' though.

Lots of people confuse it with the manorial system. Also there've been a number of different academic uses of the term. In the narrowest sense, it was the supposed system set up in Norman England by William the Conquerer, of giving of land to vassals, like in your pic.

On the otherhand, the term is used in a much broader sense, to refer to somewhat decentralized systems where noblemen own their own land and have their own local authority.

Often "feudalism" in this latter sense is contrasted with more centralized forms of government, as the monarchies of the early modern era began centralizing power more and more.

Too centralized a power, however, is obviously unstable. The ancien regime kept on chugging along with its 13 parlements - once they were abolished, everyone who wanted power set their sights on the monarchy.

Some form of subsidiarity is ideal in a society. Let the localities handle local matters, and the regional governments handle regional, etc. As ability is passed via heredity and wealth passes along in families, it's always been a part of the natural order to have some kind of local gentry managing local affairs.

Leftist changed that, with its drive to make everyone appear equal. In place of local gentry we get lots of easily bought out politicians, leftist entryists, and the general fracas of modern progressive politics, where any charlatan can get himself elected if he's a charismatic enough liar and willing to do whatever the financial interests backing him want.

Feudalism would be vastly preferable.

Yeah, feudalism is great. It is the purest blood and soil system, since only the best of the blood can own land.

Feudalism is nationalism in its purest form.

I'm from a relatively ethnically homogeneous community. We have an accent that is different from the rest of the entire country, and we're only a small population of about 10,000 people, but we have a different culture, a different ethic, different everything. One guy on the internet wanted to start a Canadian nationalist movement. I just didn't see any point, because I don't care about people who look and sound like Americans; I don't think of myself as Canadian anymore; I have a greater sense of belonging. Now when you say "Serving the wider nation" while saying that you're someone who isn't blackmailed into the nationalist system, you've kind of proven to me that your sense of nationalism is based on some arbitrary physical factor rather than a group of people who belong together.

Feudalism has a lot of power because of constant shows of loyalty. Without the drive for money, there's no incentive to want to protect other groups of people; there becomes literally no point in being diverse, because progressivism has no meaning. The modern system relies on patriotism to the country, even while that country has immigrants; but those immigrants are freed to become citizens, in which case you're forced to actively try to benefit their existence in your society. Saying "We need to have a libertarian nationalist system" is meaningless to me, because libertarianism serves the self, while nationalism serves the people; we've seen what happens when a bunch of white men decide to have a country with those kinds of values; it turns into America where less than 15% of the people are the descendants of the original founders.

>>>/reddit/ is more your speed, civic cuck.

What kind of communist fantasy is this? Money isn't going away, the economy isn't going away and progressivism is a disease that's only sold on an economic basis to the right, to the left (which won't disappear either) it's a genuine system of beliefs that compass an entire worldview.

Not only is America a terrible example of nationalism, you're completely ignoring how it's racial heritage was undermined by immigration "reform" sold as left-wing egalitarianism and right-wing globalism.

I didn't say it was. What I'm saying is that the powers that facilitate the spread of greed won't exist.

Because of capitalism. Before capitalism mainstreamed, people had a more social-view of eachother rather than being a meritocracy or progressive clusterfuck. Everything progressivism is about mirrors word-for-word Capitalism.

Human nature won't exist? If you genuinely believe this, this is getting downright Orwellian. Being happy with what you have is one thing, but turning races into psychologically lobotomized slaves is the kind of shit ZOG faps to.

As evidenced by what? You're fundamentally ignoring the fact that multiculti is only seen in terms of economics by the cuckold right, on the left, they believe in enrichment, in diversity, in the evil divisive forces of the White Man, etc. And the Jews/ZOG/whatever see the erosion of ethnic/racial identity as a key part of the implementation of economic globalism and eventually whatever form of apocalypticism, if any, they believe in.

There's even more degeneracy and greed more than ever.. Is that "Human nature"?

Jews were behind western liberalization to begin with. They were part of the merchant class that gained international protection; that's when feudalism ended, when the merchant class became powerful; this is why Jews run the banks and the social media. It has NOTHING to do with the fact that they are Jews; it has everything to do with the fact that the self-interest (due to the Jews being ostracized by society) led them to being even more greedy than the lowly merchant class of Europe; but because they monopolized the merchant class, they were able to turn it into a power even greater than a monarch.

"Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws!"
-Mayer Amschel Rothschild

In a feudalist society, the power to issue and control money belongs to the king.

As you said, it's beneficial for the economy in some cases, like to allow immigrants that benefit the workforce. The reason the left want diversity, is because they are in conflict with the ruling system; they want equality. They only want equality because it's in their self-interest. They try to benefit everyone likewise, because it's instinct to want to benefit everyone when some wrong is done to you. They want racial equality BECAUSE of the current income inequality. The income inequality only bothers them because they have anxiety about the possibility of them being in the position to attain money. This anxiety is created by the capitalist system. NO feudalist society has ever cucked itself like ALL modern capitalist societies.

True. but the origin isn't Capitalism, it's natural - the same for the spread. What you'd end up with isn't no, or even less, greed, but simply a lack of nation-destroying "weapons-grade" greed.

Jews have been obsessed with persecution, revenge, subversion and subjugation for millennia - like Canaan, the Exodus and the Plagues, the Roman-Jewish wars, and the crucifixion and condemnation of Christ. That's what we're seeing now in the post-Holohoax generation of Jew elites, and what we saw previously in those named in the "stab in the back", the Protocols, the International Jew and successive generations dating back to the original "blood libel" driver expulsions.

Jews may well have conquered mercantile classes to protect themselves and strike back at Whitey, but it certainly did had something to do with Judaism, and something very intrinsic too, given the consistency of their behavior.

In a nationalist society, the power to issue and control money belongs to the national government. Why are you trying to sell that as something special?

Except leftist progressives are usually (1) trust fund babbies who will never need to seriously work and never intend to; (2) idiots who are selected into jobs for their personal beliefs, usually in IT by Jews or by harpies who got into HR; (3) upper-middle class boomer children who walk into in a mid-tier university for an english or arts degree which will guarantee them some form of employment, at least enough to sustain them within the echochamber. In other words, given their typical economic background and propensity for living in gated white neighborhoods, they aren't affected by equality, diversity and all other forms of social justice at all. Meaning, it must be a genuinely-held belief of some kind, since they cannot benefit economically by it.

NS Germany. You might make the argument that they didn't last long enough for a full expression of the ideology and it's failings, but Fascist Italy collapsed like a house of dominoes when the Allies landed, the Germans did no such thing.

I'd also have suggested (modern) Japan, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're referring to all forms of societal illness and not just the cultural enrichment brigades.

Oh I see.. So degeneracy is just natural, and all cultures have this much degeneracy? It's not just a modern phenomenon?

People completely unconnected to Judaism, like Tim Wise, while Jews, are always inevitably at the front lines when it comes to this shit. Look at the "Rightwing" now.. People are supporting a Jewish Homosexual, and I'm being quite literal; he literally talks about taking black dick on a right wing stage.. The people supporting any modern party are supporting nomadic interests. Nomadic interests is WHY degeneracy is happening all over. People make the mistake of hating Jewish people for no reason; they hate Judaism and they empathize with Islam as a source of courage and masculinity, but this is the drivel you're expected to swallow, because even though you may be right wing, you're still under the influence of the capitalist mindset. Jews prospered because they were a nomadic group who became protected by LAW.


Because there's a lack of self-interest. If a man can't gain anything by money, he won't abuse it.


But they do benefit from it. Human nature is altruistic; if society as a whole is comprised of "Group A", they treat any group outside of society (Group B) as a foreign entity. But because the state tells you that your black neighbor is part of society, and society as a whole recognize this (because the state tells us so), then there's no basis for conflict. The state protects groups of people for no reason at all; a fiefdom protects on the basis of who that person is relative to society. In a society based on loyalty, your status isn't determined by money but by your job, your rank. In ALL feudal societies, historically speaking, someone who was outside of society in some way (a foreigner or an immigrant) was ostracized and outcaste; Someone who has no honour in society can't be a protected group of people.; someone's honour is their value in a society.

National Socialist revolution was built in retaliation against communist and capitalist ideologies; the same state-wise mindset still existed and people were still driven (especially in big cities) by the anxiety of materialism. He was on the right path though, until he decided to expand.

A LOT of degeneracy comes from Japan, but they've just become a capitalist society recently. The more modest and traditional peoples retain a sense of propriety because they're usually the middle classes. The middle class in western society, likewise, is the most conservative, because they have no conflict with any system; they're not poor, so they dont care about handouts; they're not rich, so they dont care about free trade; the people with a good sustainable average income tend to be the most conservative, and that's true for any modern society, simply because they aren't dominated by systematic greed like the rest are.

Now you're moving goalposts from destructive greed to degeneracy. Greed is absolutely natural, "muh dick muh stocks muhfugga" isn't and the latter is a symptom of cultural degeneration. While there is a finanical element to what is being sold as desirable to people through media, that's only on part of it - and there's no one out there thinking, "You know what will make me rich? Gay orgies".

Because Jews are a race, culture, and religion and the three are inseparable branches of the same tree.

Tim Wise, to use your example, is a (mild) zionist and "White anti-racist" despite being atheistic.
theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Green-Wise.html
There's no pretense of the involvement of "nomadic identity" in this, just Jewish identity. These same supposed external contradictions in atheism and Jewish racial-religious supremacism occur in both Israel and the diaspora the world over, from the relatively mundane reluctance to divulge criminal secrets to gentile police to the peaks of men like Soros, out to destroy Europe not for capitalism (because refugees don't, and are often legally unable to, work), but for Israel the state and Israel the people, despite having, again, no religious connection with them.

So the king is immune to self-interest because he already owns the country? I think you need to look into exactly why the NSDAP weren't monarchist, if you believe that.

Boiling that down, you don't like that the state does x, the "sheeple" agree to it, and think the solution is an entirely different system with vague underpinnings, with an unhealthy dose of idealism. Looks like we're back to Communism again.

That's not the point. The point is that we have a desire to be rich in the first place. We have a constant anxiety about being poor, not having enough money, etc. This is what happens when you individualize people through economics. When you give a man everything he needs, he no longer has anxiety about debt or having enough money to do "this" or "that". The reason for degeneracy is that people become individualized, and they take up traits of a nomad, going from one place to another to benefit themselves. Capitalism is built on the fear of scarcity and the availability of abundance. A man so self-interested, out of fear of scarcity of intimacy, would get into gay orgies; a man, out of fear of scarcity of food, will eat himself to death. Degeneracy is in the presence of scarcity.

Then Judaism would benefit the Jewish race, but that's not what happens.


Read it.. He doesn't have any connection with Israel. He's a Jew in heritage only, and that's partly why he does these things, because he understands that he benefits from white privilege whether or not he's "racially white", hence the nomadic interest. If Jews banded together to hurt the goyim for the sake of Israeli interests, Israel wouldn't have as many faggots. Most zionists donate to israel, because they don't cognitively think that it's hypocritical to oppose white privilege yet be in favor of Israel; it's the same as blacks who oppose white privilege while use the "Oppressed minority card" all the time. They're just not aware because they're blinded by self-interest.

No person with absolute power is ever corruptible if they're not afraid of their power being challenged. I own my own house; I have the power to do anything with it without suffering the ramifications. It's not that I'm immune to self-interest; I simply have no interest in doing shit to my own house; on the contrary; It's in my social interest to keep the house clean and maintain it for when people visit.

You're missing the point. I don't want feudalism; I want a big flat screen tv and a better computer and maybe some video games. This "Feudal theory" I'm talking about doesn't address what people want, but why they want it and how to make them want something that is less materialistic and more ethical. People go their entire lives trying to reach that high that they once experienced, either through drugs, sex, money; it makes no different what substance they take; they're always consumed by the anxiety that there's something "better" in life than what they have, this anxiety which is created by scarcity, is perpetuated in the modern capitalist system.

nRx faggots are crypto kikes

fuck off shill

...

Fuck off molberg

Just learned that term today.
Did some brief research into the movement. Can't say I agree with all the ideas, but it speaks to me volumes more than any other system. It's ironic you would call me a crypto kike, considering that Judaism is behind modern liberalism and republicanism.

Considering that the chief architect of nRx is a kike who is constructing a system where kikes would benefit the most I think it is retarded and shit

Also anti-feudalism is not kikeish, it is pro white

Aristocracy was filled with kikes

Actually, everyone was once a feudal society.
The only reason aristocracy filled with Jews is because the merchant class was protected without reason.
Every system after democracy is liberal shit-tier and cucked.
This can't be argued against.

Now, I admit that some feudal societies fielded some awesome fighters.

On the other hand, pre-Christian Scandinavia was pretty awesome too. I don't think they had feudalism.

Here's a system that I propose: THAT EVERY MAN BE ARMED.

No sumptuary laws restricting the right to bear weapons.

No restrictions on training to fight.

And we all carry weapons as a matter of course.

Incidentally, if you have an interest in feudalism, check out some pseudo-Roman writer at:

traditionalright.com/resistance-is-feudal/

Marxism 2.0
>>>/anywherebuthere/