Dark Enlightenment and neoreaction movemenet in general

We have IDs here newfriend.

They look silly from here, but they have an important niche memetic advantage in that they use academic/quasi-leftist communication styles while promoting thoughtcrime.
Because people tend to sort ideology by shibboleth rather than content, they present an intense cognitive dissonance trap.

...

pic related

This is a solid point. Reading through Moldbug was a path of awakening for me due to my (inherently irrational) aversion to any content I perceived as lowbrow. This is true for many other educated individuals. Other writers have expanded on the foundation with a more ethnic nationalist bent while maintaining the intellectual style, which as pointed out is an important memetic niche to win over the clever and educated. After all, a "priestly" educated class is necessary to legitimize any civilized regime, and like shit, memes/ideas flow downhill.

Let's see:

>The Dark Enlightenment, or the neoreactionary movement (also simply neoreaction; abbreviated NRx by proponents), is an anti-democratic and reactionary movement that broadly rejects egalitarianism and Whig historiography.[1][2] The movement favors a return to older societal constructs and forms of government, including support for monarchism and traditional gender roles, coupled with a libertarian or otherwise conservative approach to economics.[3] Some critics have labeled the movement as "neo-fascist".[2][4]

Sounds good to me.

Oh wait
Edited in August, source is buzzfeed: en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dark_Enlightenment&diff=733739946&oldid=733739874

No surprise here.

This

ffs Mencius "The Court Jew" Moldbug's ideal presidents are Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos

Feudal
Breeding
Patterns

What nonsense dribble.

I want Iron Pill back.

Sames, getting learned getting swole and disregarding the humdrum of Babylon is basically the best advice you can get

Yeah, no real understanding of what "aristocratic" means in a traditional sense. I think it's because most come from a libertarian background and still carry that government-as-business economic viewpoint with them to a large degree.

Not a secret.
Just none of your buisness.

The Dark Enlightenment is basically about introducing another form of Jewish rule.

It's fits snugly alongside Marxism and Neoconservatism.

What system of government can't be used by jews?

National socialism

Like what they have in Israel?

undervoted.

No. Zionism is not national socialism. Not even close.

What are the differences? I know they're both very nationalist. Israel may tolerate the banks more, but that's the only difference I can think of.

Israel isn't nationalist. Zionism is an internationalist ideology.

Sounds pretty nationalistic to me

The major thing they are right about is democracy. A large number of anons on Holla Forums are still blue pilled about it. You see this in other threads, especially from the anons who argue against monarchy, as bad as the problems with neoreaction, reaction, and monarchy are. You still have people here going, "return the votes to da white man. we waz land owners!" Really? how you going to do that in a system controlled by the Jew and the left? They have control over the masses through the media and education. They push out a bulk of new voters from the education system every year who are default left wing. If that doesn't happen, they import the breeders from the third world. They control large swarths of the legal system to make sure the rules go the right way for them. The people that could help us are either cuckservative sell-outs, or have shifty alliances themselves that make their intentions and future not at all clear (like Trump). There is no way to work inside the system to bring back limited franchise, as good as it sounds. They will shut down any change quickly. The typical retort to this realistic state of affairs is, "ur a demoralizer," which really doesn't help at a practical level, and again shows how deluded some of the democracy-clingers really are (it's also quintessentially typical of millennials: if confronted by stark reality, bury your head in the sand and call people a demoralizer).

There needs to be less talk about policy and systems of governance, and more talk about how exactly, and realistically, you plan to implement the policy while dealing with the enemy. Neoreaction in some parts at least offers a guide for that, which IMO is mostly not that good. Nevertheless, you don't see this kind of talk elsewhere. It's either role playing (muh day of the rope), or policy-pushing/social critique that doesn't account for push back from the enemy ("guys, it's SCALE," huge rounds of applause and circle jerking from paleo-jock bodybuilders).

reddit.com/r/DarkEnlightenment/

I think you will enjoy firstly the theory of The Cathedral

heartiste.wordpress.com/2013/09/09/the-nuts-and-bolts-of-cathedral-indoctrination/

Robert Cialdini is an expert in psychological manipulation, i.e., goal-oriented communication. (Something we all do, more or less successfully, whether we are aware of our own machinations or not.) He wrote the seminal book Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion. What you may not know is that Cialdini was, in many respects, a founding father of Game. He is cited by many well-regarded pickup artists, and his ideas, like “social proof”, percolate throughout the game literature. Game has had, from its inception. some pretty solid scientific, theoretical, and experiential backing.

Something else you probably don’t know: Cialdini was tapped, along with other renowned behavioral scientists, by the 2008 Obama campaign to help propel Obama to the highest office in the land.

heartiste.wordpress.com/2013/09/09/the-nuts-and-bolts-of-cathedral-indoctrination/

The Cathedral — the term of art for the social and political apparatuses of equalist progressivism — is mentioned in the abstract quite a bit at Dark Enlightenment idea factories, but seldom are the actual, unholy workings of the Cathedral’s machinery explored in excruciating detail.

heartiste.wordpress.com/2013/11/04/the-lefts-propaganda-machine/

As what? Propaganda?

This makes it seem as though Evola did not respect Eastern cultures, whereas from what I remember what he criticises in this quotations is the misunderstood importations of them.

Has there been seriously pathetic lulzy shit out of NRx? Yep. Is Anissimov a sperg? Yes. Is Moldbug half Jewish? Yes. And so on.

All that said. It gets a bit too much shit. It really was, especially a few years back, an important group of generally intelligent people getting together to commit thoughtcrime. Like it or not, it's contributed several of the basic ideological conclusions that underpin the Alt Right today. It was always a method of thinking more than a movement. Regardless how valid the pseudo-ideology itself ever was, it had an undeniably important role to play in getting us here. To the extent it exists now, it may yet.

He's also a white nationalist now.

Much of the thought from the Dark Enlightenment has effectively transitioned into the alt-right.

Although the alt-right is the very generic name for the broad mass of the movement. The intellectual, spiritual and ideological side is largely based around the study of older authors.

But the thing is, these slide threads are having less and less influence on the movement as it moves into the real world.

No. He's a sperg who found being 14/88 GTK;RWN!!!!11111 24/7 provided more opportunity signal his superiority and otherwise snark at other weebs online.

I consider myself WN, but wherever you sit on the alt right spectrum I'd be wary of that guy.

That's because there seems to be a group of jews who realize that they will be destroyed by multiculturalism, the question is whether that group can overthrow the pro-multicultural groups within Jewish society.

That's because there seems to be a group of jews who realize that they will be destroyed by multiculturalism, the question is whether that group can overthrow the pro-multicultural groups within Jewish society.>>7460940

Kill yourself kike.

sage

Translation: neo-Jewish-Monarchism

Isn't he a Jew though?

A lot of our problems stem from lack of democracy, not an excess of it.

There was never a referendum on non-white immigration in any white country. My parents and grandparents never got to vote to decide to flood my country with Islanders and Asians, anymore than American boomers were able to vote on the 1965 Immigration Act.

The problem isn't "democracy", it's representative democracy, i.e. "Vote for me, and I'll try to look out for your interests…after I've done looking out for the interests of my millionaire and corporate backers kthnxbai"

That is not Zionism. Zionism depends on the large diaspora of Jews in all nations subverting for Israel.

And what I disagree with about muh monarchism in the "alt right" or whatever we're calling ourselves is mostly that it boils down to a saviour fantasy - that we just need Hitler 2.0 to seize power and then do all the heavy lifting for us

That's ignoring of course the main problem with monarchism/dictatorships, in that said monarch/dictator (outside being even less accountable than a politician) is that they usually end up envisioning themselves as the nation, leading to all sorts of disastrous actions and policies for those that aren't said monarch/dictator

Replace Cathedral with Jews and they're really not so different from Holla Forums. However, (((Mencius Moldbug))) believes in the Holohoax.

It's one thing to reject democracy as a good form of government. It's another to reject it as a possible form of change. That is the biggest folly of DE – its anti-democracy fetish has rendered it impotent. While they're blogging about how the media works, Holla Forums is helping Donald Trump tear it apart!

Complete bullshit. Name one original contribution that wasn't already present in white nationalism, European new right, national socialism, or other existing far right movements.

The original contributions of NRx are neocameralism, moldburg's extremely Jewish idea of how to run a state, and passivism, which is his political strategy that advocates doing nothing except acting superior until someone out there decides to crown you king. Everything else was already around.

Becuase most of what Moldbug argues "the Cathedral" is, is Jews. But since he's a mischling he needs to wildly (and quite Talmudically) prevaricate so as to prove that it was really those damn ultra-Calvinist mainline Protestants that ruined America (Judah Benjamin was Secretary of State for the Confederacy! Ergo, Jews dindu nuffin)

Nrx here, what Moldbug really opened my eyes on was that democracy pretty much founded and propped up international communism, the greatest murder engine ever and that communist style mass murders didn't happen under the ancien regime.

And also that here in America, protests to the contrary, we do have an official state religion, it's called progressivism, a mutant offshoot of Calvinism. (Unlike Moldbug though, who couldn't see the situation clearly through his own Jewish lens, a number of people in Nrx do see the clear Jewish influence in the Cathedral.)

Democracy is a shit system and detached from reality. Equality is a lie, the sexes are not equal, the races are not equal, even the bloodlines within a race are not equal. Aristocracy is necessary for a functioning social order, authoritarian government is vastly better at protecting the 'liberties' of the masses than liberal government, violence actually does solve things, order is superior to disorder and chaos, hierarchy isn't a necessary evil to be tolerated but a positive good to be celebrated, and there's more to human life than just economics.

The main problem with Nrx is that it's trying to convince the current elite to fix their shit and regenerate themselves, when all they want to do is push degeneracy and cuck and self-destruct their own nations. We try talking to educated people in terms they understand, and tell them the kool-aid they're drinking is poison, they just guzzle it down faster and cry "racist!"

The Cathedral was pure Moldbug.

Passivism isn't doing nothing, it's not participating in the (rigged leftwing) political process, but rather building your own parallel power structures and organizations to take over when the mainstream political system fails.

Trump is actually kind of an example of that, as he already made his billions, has his own network of contacts/people he can draw on, before he tried running for president.

He already had his own formidable power structure in place before bringing it to bear against the republican party. Though now that we've seen an actual rightward shift in the overton window, I think rightwing activism actually has a chance at working. But only because there's someone already in power backing it up.

All activism is just a tool of those already in power. That might have been Moldbug's greatest insight. Don't know if it was original to him though.

No it wasn't. He just gave a stupid name to something that people already talked about for decades. Creating dumb new names for existing concepts is something Jews excel at.

Correction: for centuries.

You may think this was a given. It was not. In fact nationalism, ESPECIALLY in the European context was seen primarily as an outgrowth of liberalism. Did the French New Right and so on say something kinda similar? Yeah. And if you were reading that stuff pre-2009, you have a leg to stand on. But you weren't.

A coherent understanding of the left as a purity-based religion and a means of cultural control tied in with liberalism and the expansion of the franchise. "But muh frankfort school!" is not the same thing. If you think this all started with Horkheimer, you're confused.

Obviously, we've all recognized the role of the Jews in all the above. I'm not saying Moldbug had everything right. But he and others in those circles presented a rational dissection, identified the issues, and repopularized (in weird internet right-wing circles), the older and/or foreign texts that were needed to break free from the intellectual constraints of 21st century liberal society.

And of course there were many people saying the system is rigged and victory cannot be gained within the jewish system. This was a common viewpoint in white nationalism from at least as far back as Rockwell's assassination. I can recall Pierce talking about this, as well as Joseph Tomassi and James Mason. Pretty sure even Francis Parker Yockey wrote about it as far back as the 40s or 50s. Again, a Jew just makes a stupid name for an existing concept and then claims to have invented the concept.

Which is actually bullshit.

Yeah, I was.

Exactly the opposite, actually. Moldburg obfuscates or misunderstands the issues because of his ethnicity.

Well that makes one of you. And even taking the FNR at face value, it wasn't like American WN in Pierce era or NatSocs were jumping on board with that (often) hippie shit.

Well clearly he hit them well enough that hundreds of people got involved in the movement one way or another. So they couldn't have been that obfuscated. If his half-Jewishness forced him to create a screen to hide the role of the Yids from upstanding goys, he certainly did a shitty job at it.

Depends. FNR is kosher and gay anyway, but there was a whole lot of overlap with different strains of neofascists (Yockey, who I mentioned was popular in WN).

Never said he was smart, just a kike.

I remember (((Moldbug))) giving a stuttering speech about how America should be split into two with a dictator for both Red and Blue states. I just don't understand their shit.

Yeah man look, I see your points. I'm not trying to write a comprehensive NRx apologia. I'll sum it up like this. If it weren't for the NRx/Dark Enlightenment happening 2010-2013ish, I highly highly doubt there'd be so many people reading Evola, Junger, Carlisle and Spengler now. Let alone the FNR

This.

Yeah, this was a common thought. Tommasi broke away from the old guard ANP after Rockwell's assassination, set up shop in California, then called for guerilla warfare with a militant white cell system. There has to be a buildup of forces before some sort of action, which I can at least compliment NRx on, even if it's not my thing.

I'll give him Carlyle. He was unknown. The others were more or less common reads for the "intellectual" types in WN and neofascism/NS.

But yeah, it was part of a greater popularization, but I would question how much of that actually came from NRx and how much was just coincidental. If we look at the original contributions of NRx, which we would have expected to spread alongside these other ideas if NRx were the true originating source, they are not at all widely known. On the other hand, the memes of WN and NS are, so I would tend to give the latter a lot more credit. The primary populizer of Evola and new right has probably been counter currents, which grew out of WN (Greg Johnson was around in WN for a while).

NRx maybe packaged some of the stuff in a way that was more appealing to disenchanted libertarians coming off the Ron Paul loss in 2008, so I can give them that. Hoppe became the perfect segue for them to NRx.

Well I think that's Moldbug's point. That there is a way to do it without going full retard like above. I don't even really think passivism is a great idea, but that is how I understood it.

Yes all of this. Especially the packaged for libertarian business. That's a bit part of it.

As for GJ, I may be mistaken, but I thought he was identifying as a part of the "Dark Enlightenment" back then, in addition to White Nationalism. If I'm wrong, then whatever, because he was obviously huge in getting that stuff back in the public eye.

Why didn't NRx just stick with Hoppe then, or push him more? He sounds like a good link between nationalism, anti-democracy, and libertarian economics from what I've heard.

Even going full retard will have to be considered an option if things keep getting worse.

It is also huge in Europe. Golden Dawn could probably be said to straddle the line between what they call passivism and activism, since they are a political party but are involved in a whole lot more than just politics. But their political system is a lot different from the American where third parties have no chance.

I haven't heard that name in a long time. How are they doing and what can Holla Forums learn from them?

American third parties come in large bursts after a long, stagnant domination of two parties.
I seriously hope for a Trump win, then maybe an outgrowth based on a more radical American paleoconservatism.

GD was getting a lot a support by being a social welfare group in the poor white neighborhoods. Distributing food, helping with trash, doing neighborhood watch, etc.

I think that's pretty context specific. Say what you will about the white situation in America, there's not a lot of White people seriously hungry and living in places where the social services like trash collection and police just don't work anymore.

If that becomes the case, we need to jump on that.

The connection of Greg Johnson to dark enlightenment probably came through Jack Donovan and the manosphere, funny enough. But he was on VNN and worked on the Occidental Quarterly (Kevin MacDonald's thing) before that. Maybe Amren too, but I don't remember.

For America, we probably need more real life subcultures. We have a good presence on the internet, but irl organization is crap (probably because everyone is paranoid about FBI infiltrators). That seems to be getting a bit better however.

I think working with your community and promoting local white culture is the best thing to me, not to just get good boy points but to actually build solidarity with people. Whites need those feelings again. Legislate all you want, but the people have to be in tune with each other first. I guess that's why I'm looking more into Distributism, Social Credit, and white socialism. Not Marxist shit, but stuff like Francis Bellamy and the English socialists.

You're dumb. DE and NRx are marxism of the right. They're not ideology.

The contribution that matters is a serious attempt to revive the intellectual right.

Not gonna lie user. I'm big on neoreaction. I think it has produced a lot of high worth and I frankly find them to be extremely readable and enjoyable to interact with. I don't agree with everything they say, or anyone else here either for that matter. I think their ideas hold up.

Also NRx has a serious chance at synthesizing a biological, ecological and economic understanding of history (or aka the gene and the meme). If Marxism ignored biology NRx wont.

meinwords.wordpress.com/2016/02/15/unified-theory-of-progressivism/

These are great. Had trouble reading Evola and this definitely gives a great glimpse into his ideas

Not original. All existed in other movements. And I would say they pervert the right as much as they revive it. Sure, they help revive shit like Evola but then completely misunderstand everything (apparent in moldburg's calling technologists and polemicists "brahmins"). This is because most are dilettantes who want the appearance of being well read and erudite but they don't even take the effort to understand what they read.

And even "intellectual right" is a misunderstanding. True right is inherently anti-intellectual. See the third image here:

Uncle Adolf also wrote a bit on this in Mein Kampf, on ways intellectuals read books.

I look to the right and see "arguments against the existence of god." NRx in a nutshell.

I agree with this. I'm not willing to straight up condemn neoreaction. It's flawed. I think it's important to have an intellectual wing that does nothing besides write philosophy, discuss things in a more "high brow" way. Sure, sometimes it's fucking retarded and disgusting like Evola says it is. At the same time, sometimes it's really creative and helps free your mind. I don't always just want to shitpost, sometimes I want to read a long, well written piece about a subject that requires actual research. Neoreaction stretches your imagination and ability to read and process information. I see nothing wrong with that. I actually tend to think they have the most realistic vision of where the race is headed.

moldbug was a damn good writer tbh

Are you a Jew?

No.

There's a lot of misguided people in it, but separating onesself from them, there can be found some good writers. However, the writing has gone down in quality since most of them are exhausted after being exhilterated because of the U.S. presidential election.

Hoppe is the ideal of what libertarianism should actually be. Libertarianism in its pure form is possibly great. When it gets corrupted by social justice and anti-freedom by people like Johnson, it goes south rapidly.

Could you elaborate on why "true right is inherently anti-intellectual"? I agree that the left places too much emphasis on intellectual pursuits, but surely you'd agree that more intellectual writing has a place on the right even if it's sometimes batshit (e.g. Moldbug's neocameralism).

Nah he's wrong. Evola was overextending in that quote.

Not all thoughts and ideas can be expressed in five sentences. The intellectual tradition is largely a literary one. It can't just happen in small posts. Sometimes ideas have to be expressed in essays and books, and processed and given a more serious literary treatment. It's a creative thing, honestly, like art. Any movement that has an intellectual wing will inevitably be stronger and attract more people. Philosophy is ultimately the mental and psychic backbone of what I do in my life. When I want astute philosophical tools to look at modern society and people who are interpreting things through my right wing lens with the level of intellectual depth and flexibility that I enjoy, I'll go to NRX above other most other things. And then I'll come here.

My thoughts on Neoreaction

TL/DR version:
They were really good at critical analysis of modernity but their proposed solutions are kinda crap at the moment.

Long version:
The early neoreaction writers were really good at breaking through the blue pilled world view and seeing a lot of reality for what it is. Doesn't mean they were right on everything, but they certainly had insights you would find anywhere else. Like it or not, a lot of their ideas have permeated through the alt-right and related movements.

In short they acknowledge that democracy is fundamentally flawed in the long term and becoming more of a sham as time goes on. A global click of bureaucrats, business interests and academics, all without strong ties to their nations of origin are manipulating systems to undermine national identities and sovereignty. And that this manipulation involves shaping the ideas and worldview of local populations in a way that does not match up to reality all the time.

Where I think neoreaction went off the rails is synthesis of new ideas for what should be done, both tactically and strategically.

First, ideas like formalism is basically corporate fascism and ignores the soul of a people, feudalism isn't making a come back, and city states while maybe a good idea short term would never last long in a world with powerful nation states and empires.

Second, their approach of what the individual can do are both kinda honest and defeatist. Its true that any relevant right wing (real right wing) would be crushed if it ever got close to true power, so they say don't get invested in politics. At least not at a national level. They also observe the protests and other forms of activism are not what people do to get power, but really actions taken to further cement power after it has already been won, so don't over estimate the value of activism. While the above all have some level of truth, they end up being nothing more than just waiting for the system to run itself into the ground. Not the best move when your demographic is under attack.

This. They're like all other intellectuals in history, afraid to actually be a part of reality and they shy away from actually getting into the shit. The thing is, you could say that we on the other hand are generally to scared to be genuinely creative and intellectual and try to rise above things to look at philosophical ideas in a more rigorous or flexible manner.

I prefer it here by far though.

The one thing I'll say is that I think that now that Holla Forums is a serious belief system or group of people, I think that what we need is an artistic side and an intellectual side. We already have a serious intellectual wing in stuff like neoreaction and the alt-right blogs, yet we don't really have an artistic side.

Vaporwave was probably the closest we've come to having a real artistic/musical wing, yet we haven't really developed a serious musical or artistic wing otherwise. It's something we need, period.

continued…

I know that the Hestia Society has been trying to become the prominent think tank for Neoreaction. I just hope they get over this worshipping of Moldbug and acknowledge where his ideas had failings, address them and come up with a better vision for the future.

Me personally, I got a lot out of reading neoreactionary works, but I don't think it is alone the answer. I've seriously been looking at the philosophy behind fascism, not the mentally retarded lets all larp as Nazis fascism, but looking at its metaphysical worldview, drive for action and how it could be adapted to create a new systems that is healthy for society.

Though on second thought, I can think of two cultural signifiers which we've developed:

-Million Dollar Extreme
-Milo (arguably a comedian or entertainer in addition to personality)

I'm not saying I love Milo however I'm just saying he's a powerful cultural creative individual for the "alt-right" in general. The problem is we have absolutely nobody in music that I can think of that actually represents what we believe. On the other hand, Nick Land for instance is about as serious and respectable a philosopher as is alive today, and he clearly is aligned with us. That is cool as fuck if you ask me.

Where are the musicians and filmmakers though… we don't have any… that has to change. I honestly think that's why music is dying today, because all of the great musicians are in hiding and are afraid of participating publicly because the music industry and "scene" is so fucking insanely leftist. True radicals like Land can't happen in the music world because music has to be done publicly.

Right is opposed to intellectualism for its own sake, would be a better way of putting it. The right sees intellect as a tool, whereas left sees it as a stand-in for virtue (for the left, the more intelligent is "better" without regards for any virtue). There is also the tendency for the intellectual to create abstract systems in a sandbox away from reality.

Hitler said it well:

Peefect description of current year SJWs.

And of course "right and left" are also intellectualisms fitting that description of abstract sandbox crap.

Its basically for libertarians that realised democracy has failed them, and that it always will fail since people always vote for more gibs

It does attract the autistic and the more tech obsessed people which is to be expected given where all nrx dicsussion goes on: blogs, r/darkenlightenment and social matter. You aren't going to find many normies there.
8/pol/ is no different in this regard, there are plenty of autists here.

Not sure what about it Holla Forums doesn't like?
Traditional values?
Hierarchical leadership?
Looking back critically at "settled" history?

Nah, I ain't wrong boyo

...

The core of it from what I've seen is a disgusting mix of post-libertarians and traditionalist catholics/eastern orthodox, creating this hyper-obsession where faith exists solely to maintain stable societies and everything that doesn't constantly masturbate to church hierarchy is somehow a filthy leftist. They throw the lightest pretensions towards "Riding The Tiger" in order to pussy out from actual active politics, but they have absolutely no connection to Evola and anything he writes. It's what happens when you're red-pilled enough to become right-wing, but are still at heart a pseudointelectual cowardly faggot.

If you don't already have a firm grasp on Neoreaction then you can start here:
socialmatter.net/
hestiasociety.org/

For the writings of Mencius Moldbug you can go here:
moldbuggery.blogspot.com/

If you're too lazy to read you can listen to some audio books here:
youtube.com/channel/UCl5ugni6k7TfXrGa5STGnpw

and then the thread dies…

bumping

Though the alt right is analogous to autism, very few people here would identify with the alt right. It's just the kosherized version of many true right ideas without emphasis on race and trying to base it on enlightenment and reactionary thought processes while still buying into the egalitarian scam.

It has no real philosophical foundation outside of mainstream ideas. But it is useful because the money behind it backfired from trying to tame the extreme sections of the internet to feeding that same bloc.

I agree to an extent, there are some underlying ideas that are useful. Moldbug didn't really do anything new but brought up some previously thought of ideas and repackaged them to be palatable to those of us going through a pretentious phase.

Mencius Moldbug is a jew.

NRX wants to get you to pay money to a jew, so that in a future society where this particular jew is the new king you'll have a privileged position in the new society.

Everything I've just said is completely true, and if you take a year out of your life to read the million blogposts these autists have made then all that will happen is that you'll lose a year of your life.

Ad hominem, thy name is Holla Forums

If only.

The main issue with democracy is that it aims to have people control over their society. It's all good and well, until some people start voting not for society, but for themselves, and rather than taking the best decisions for the good of all society even if they are partly detrimental to them, they just pull the cover on their way and try to get the most benefits, disregarding society as a whole.

The second issue is that it's only a tool to oppress minorities, and give power to the majority. If you disagree with the majority, well then fuck you, you lost, and then people are going to explain to you that it's fair just because you're a minority, and that the majority primes over logic, feelings, justice, and everything else just because there's more of them. To a lot of people it makes sense, more people should have more power, but only because they can't possibly consider any other form of comparison. There are others, like intelligence, labor, or money. Some people are just better at taking such decisions, others work harder and thus rightly consider they deserve more, some people amass more money and think it should give them more power instead of being forced to share it. But in a democracy, the opinion of every retarded, homeless, jobless, lazy and cowardly shitter is worth as much as yours. Want to declare your independence? Well, you can't, the majority opposes it. From there, your only options to have your opinion even heard are revolution, terrorism and war.

Thanks democracy.

I can't stand these lot. Nick Land is a schizophrenic.

I think the problem stems from centralising forces in government that reduce civic/communal cohesion.

Imagine you lived in an ancient Greek city-state with ~7,000 or so voters out of a population of ~30,000. Whatever policy you vote on will not only directly impact you, but you'll also be pretty cognisant of the impact of that policy on your neighbours - if you vote to, I don't know, import grain, you'll personally know the grain farmers that get fucked over by that decision.

And now you're back to being a voter in a nation of ~220 million eligible voters with a population of ~400 million. You barely know your neighbours, you don't give a fuck about other regions, so why shouldn't you vote in a way that immediately benefits yourself? And if it fucks over anyone, well maybe you'll chance on a sob story about it in the national newspaper.

One of the major problems we're facing is that policies are decided by out-of-touch elites. If they had their way, Trump wouldn't even be in the running - he'd have been quietly removed from primary ballots for "inflammatory remarks" at the behest of coastal elites.

The problem is that - without going full commie - it really is difficult to ascertain how much of the wealth certain individuals "deserve". The evidence is all around us that those at the top tend to actively game the system so as to earn outsized benefits for themselves at the cost of the wider society - look at that "Silicon Valley cartel" where Apple, Google etc secretly agreed to not hire employees from other firms so as to keep labour negotiation costs down.

Look at our "elites" now. Do you really think a broad cross-section of CEOs, self-made billionaires, etc would support half the shit we talk about?

I know MPC tends to get mocked/disregarded here quite a bit, but I think Pleasureman's onto something with his autism about SCALE.

I mean for fuck's sake we all know how much the Greeks struggled with democracy when the average polis was ~30,000 people strong, clearly it's probably not going to work when people are voting to decide the fates of societies as large as 1 billion.

But we've even had centuries more experience of rule by monarchs and aristocrats, and it's very rarely approached anything like how it was "supposed" to operate. I want the right to vote to decide my own fate, not to get "disappeared" by my landlord's hired goons because he thinks that any peasant that aspires to live beyond the absolute bare minimum is a "filthy commie"

There's plenty of legitimate critique and brutal takedowns of NRX philosophy. MPC have an excellent thread on the subject, and even people in this thread have posted good critiques.

But really, all you need to know is that there's a jew looking for goy shekels at the heart of it. There's zero possibility of anything worthwhile or informative coming out of a situation like that.

I was going to make an effort for a post but I decided against it. I've been done with NRx for nearly two years. I really cannot be bothered.

Land is an autistic millenarian Whig, and a druggy burnout.

Moldbug, well whatever, I literally don't give a fuck tbh. He's just another chinless kike to me.

No, he's just an autistic Satanist larper, instead of a D&D rule book he's got Milton's Paradise Lost under his arm.

Nick Land is a sign of degeneration not the inverse.

He's a clever guy, but it doesn't stop him from being a psychologically deficient edgelord.

I still can't believe Land is in his 50s, an alleged reactionary, and still falls for the individualism vs. socialism meme. What a faggot.

It's probably more that everyone is so scattered about, you're either stuck in a cosmopolitan city or a dying suburb
"local" community for all practical purposes doesn't really exist anymore due to the collapse of trust brought about by a multi-racial society

NRx can be refuted (inb4 fags postmodernly weaselling about pretending that it doesn't already have its own dogma) by looking at it through the lens of one of their heroes, Nassim Taleb.

As Taleb stresses, the unlikely does happen eventually: no matter HOW unlikely, or how terrible the consequences. The Indian caste system may have worked once upon a time, but the consequence of its failure was the permadeath of the continent's human potential. Same with Greece. Same with the Near East. When you consider the inevitability of the unlikely, you realise that commonality between the top and bottom of society is extremely important, and that ethnic nationalism and national homogeneity is L/T the best strategy without exception full-stop.

To say nothing of
FEUDAL
BREEDING
PATTERNS
which, even without miscegenation, are dysgenic as the successful self-neuter to consolidate their dynastic power out of fear of the masses.

It doesn't, it's just people taking it wrong. Buddhism, Zen, meditation, all that stuff wasn't being trashed by Evola, he simply said that a lot of trash will use it as an excuse to be a worse human being, not that they are intrinsically bad.

I think Zizek has a relevant point to make with these eastern philosophies. Basically, they're a tool without - necessarily - an attached moral system. That is, you can just as rightly say "I am one with the universe, the outcome of the actions I'm about to make has already been decided" etc as you're genociding people as when you're being benign or beneficent.

Anyway I believe there's a unity to all these systems, that makes itself more clear the more you study any one of them. It's a real problem with Western civilisation that we take an autismal legalist approach to philosophy and theology. Jews don't do it, Indians and Asians don't do it, it's something curious to Christendom and Islam.

...

Also, if you're not going to be a gigantic faggot, you need to refer to things properly. We don't have a fucking "Cathedral", we have a Synagogue.

why not

I prefer Babylon, myself. It has a certain implied optimism.

Neoraction is Moldbug trying to jump in front of a goyim parade and pretend that he was leading it from the start.

Everyone's always sucking his dick over it though

What makes national socialism immune to Jews?

That's the cartoonish Nazi re-definition of Zionism, not what Zionism actually is. ZIonism is Jewish nationalism, nothing more, nothing less.

The same thing that makes Jewish nationalism (aka Zionism) immune to overt non-Jewish subversion. Obviously, if a group is banned from participating, it can't subvert the system.

That's why a functional democracy requires a restricted vote. Giving it to everyone is what causes the issues you're complaining about.

No, it's a tool for the people to have control over their country, and not let that minority control the majority.

How is that any better under a monarchy? They're not gonna let anyone march off and declare independence either.

So that's not just National Socialism, that's racial National Socialism. And anyway, given how many Jews pass for white, you'd have to run genetic testing on any potential political figures. Which is doable I guess, but National Socialism alone doesn't make your society immune from outside influence, Jewish or otherwise.

National Socialism IS Racial nationalism.
Jews cannot subvert a National Socialist implementation because intrinsically they are disallowed from participating.
If the system begins to allow external/Jewish influences than it is compromised and no longer National Socialism. This is like trying to say capitalism is still capitalism after private property is abolished.
Jesus fuck you newfags need to lurk more.

(Checked)

I know. From what I've read about NRx, even from original sources, I'm not impressed.

That's really my quip. It may be good advice, but too much of this attitude numbs the mind and lowers the level of discourse until it's all hurr PRAISE KEK durr God Emperor Trump hurrdurr Hitler was a genius and a saint… shill, sage, filter, report !!!1

Zionism is not truly Nationalistic because they are Internationalists by function.
They certainly do not allow themselves to be exploited but they employ agents all over the world in order to subvert and directly control other nations. That's not strictly nationalistic and Israel is more imperialistic than anything.

Any system of government that is inherently antisemitic.

You're not getting what I'm saying, user. I didn't say the government would purposely let nonwhites participate. First that genetic testing would be required to prevent any Jewish influences in your idealized National Socialist government. You can't just say "No non-whites allowed" and expect a magical barrier to protect your government from them. Not to mention a number of mixed race folks would be able to infiltrate it.

National Socialism is NOT inherently racial nationalism. There are many different forms of NatSoc, Hitler is not the only one. Maybe you should lurk more, newfriend. Or maybe just do some reading.

You are mixing up what Jews do, or allegedly do, with what Zionism, as defined in the 19th century actually was and still is. Even if they engage in imperialistic practices and foreign meddling, that only means they are pushing their national interests in a particular way (which tbh is used by most nations with the ability to do so, case in point, Russia), but it doesn't change the essential nature of Zionism, which is the establishment and protection of a Jewish homeland.

There are many reason why Israel isn't nationalsocialist.

1. It's itself a Jewish state.
2. Jews do not posses a race.
3. The country isn't lead by a single leader.
4. There is no attempt to limit usury.
5. The country promotes a class system between Jews.
6. Being Jewish they do not glorify good honest work.

etc..

And those are the more universal values, there is a whole subset of values that where specific to Germany of that period.

Let me get this straight, an worldview which has the purpose to remove Jews and other races from a White homeland, is somehow not racial?

WTF!!!

Intense nationalism is not inherently racial.

We are discussing Nationalsocialism as a specific ideology, try again.

All jews are going to the ovens Shlomo even the cryptokikes

I get exactly what you are saying and its completely wrong.

What you are describing is not a system like National Socialism or Fascism, you are describing simple tools necessary to fulfill the pragmatic goal that NS puts forth. No hypothetical barrier would be exclusive to NatSoc, but only that a barrier needs to exist.

You are right, there are many implementations of NatSoc and they all don't have to be the same, but National Socialism without Racialism is just regular Fascism. I'm getting the impression you haven't read any books on NatSoc and are just regurgitating what you've been told prior.

The point of National Socialism is to prevent your race from being explotied by other nations which also have their own unique races and interests and cultures. The point is to do everything we can to retain our nation and therefore race. As Jung had said, history is not contained in books, but in blood.
National Socialism IS NOT CIVIC NATIONALISM or FASCISM.
Without the Racial component it is no longer National Socialism, get that through your fucking skull, newfag.

TL;DR you are a dumbass and are confusing concepts with physical details.

I agree that the concept of Zionism is supposed to be Nationalistic, and very closely resembles National Socialism, but that lasted about a week after they first settled Israel, and then they realized they could just hire Palestinians instead and the whole plan to reform the jewish people failed.

meant for

AYYYYY

Check out this writer

WTF Nick 'muh jew wife and kids' Land hates NS & Fascism. Read his blog or twitter

typical nrx fanboy

Land hates the fact that NRx is now a subset of the "alt-right" when two years ago it was the opposite.

They are an international parasitic swindlers state, incapable of any form of manual labor, agriculture or production. They rely on imported second tier citizen arab labor or even scam Christians into come farming for them for charity.

If they were not constantly infiltrating western governments and essentially stealing foreign aid and military protectiob they would instantly collapse.

National Socialism demands national autonomy in the highest form possible.

Are you fucking retarded or shilling?

It was and still is exactly what it was always meant to be. A home-base for international Jewish swindling. The Jewish racial soul is deceit and parasitism. This is their biological function.

reddit.com/r/DarkEnlightenment/

Riddle me this. What do you get when Hecate flees and Goat Rider leaves?

I bet you are one of those people who likes to say "communism has never been tried."

.kcab og ot evah uoY

Right. Autarky and national self-sufficiency is a primary leg of NS. Israel is far from autarky, but is instead a parasite state that would be destroyed without help from big brother America.

Pointing out how his ideas may be motivated by Jewish self-interest and bias is not ad hominem anyway. Look up the definition of the term.

This is a big point that people don't understand. Jews cannot have national socialism because it is, by definition, anti-Semitic. One of the core tenets of national socialism is that culture and political system arises from the racial soul of a people, so it is inherently essentialist. So one cannot just take an abstraction of the system from one people to another and say they are the same. This is a false analogy in national socialism.

Yes it is. Kill yourself.

That second image on Tradical posers is quoting Evola out of context. The book in question was on 'hermetic tradition,' and he was warning against charlatans like (although not specifically naming) Aleister Crowley

We can not state that all Jews are Bolsheviks, but without Jews there would never have been Bolshevism. For a Jew, nothing is more insulting than the truth. The Blood maddened Jewish terrorists had murdered sixty-six million in Russia from 1918 to 1957 -Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

There should be a combined /fit//lit//k// board for this.
/iron/?

Yes it is. I didn't actually look it up right now, but IIRC , an "ad hominem" is short for "argumentum ad hominem", which is Latin for "argument to (that is, against) the person". It means that you are trying to discredit an idea by discrediting its advocates.

Contrary to popular belief, an ad hominem is not necessarily a fallacy. The fallacy is counting an argumentum ad hominem as a rebuttal. Instead, the ad hominem tries to persuade the audience that, even without a rebuttal, it would be unwise to take the proposal at face value, because of the assumed motivations of its advocates. So, the problem I see with ad hominems is not that they are fallacious (some are, some are not, in most cases it's hard to tell) but that they discurourage further analysis of the ideas themselves, thereby dumbing down the level of discourse in the forum, imageboard, etc.

Why not just this place with cycled threads? Assuming the vols aren't all subverted by this point.

To expand on that, if the guy from the Flat Earth Society claims that 3+4=7, we don't need to lose faith in arithmetic.

But if the guy from the Flat Earth Society claims he can trisect an angle with only a compass and straightedge, we have a duty to be very skeptical regarding his methods of derivation.

…but …but … no enemies to the right….

whoops

Honestly I've found the best gauge to judge any political grouping on the "far Right" or whatever we're calling ourselves to be where they stand on the Jewish question.

Indeed, I wouldn't insist on calling Zionism a form of National-socialism. I'm just saying it's a form of ethno-nationalism in the more general sense, without getting into specifics such as its vision of society, economic system, foreign policy guidelines and so on.

nice

No it isn't. You misunderstand what it means. Ad hominem would be saying "this argument is wrong because the guy expressing it is a Jew." That isn't what anyone said.

That being said, I don't believe in ad hominem as a fallacy. There are a few assumptions underlying the view of it as a fallacy that I don't agree with.

What you describe is an ad hominem fallacy, which is not the same as an ad hominem argument. I explained the difference. Read again.

To illustrate:

Question: "Shlomo says 2+2=5. Can you refute his assertion?"

Ad hominem argument: "I can't think of a refutation, but there must be one, because Shlomo is a Jew and Jews always lie"

Ad hominem fallacy: "Sure. Shlomo is a Jew, Jews always lie, therefore 2+2 ~= 5, QED"

This. The other major things their network produced was an analysis of "the cathedral," aka Jewish method of ideological control of the West. Nothing less than a study on the corruptibility of democracy.

Then the theory of progressivism as a modern religion. Then they helped bring serious attention to HBD and its relevance to history, synthesizing evopsych, IQ studies and genetic research. Germ theory of faggotry (toxoplasmosis), for example, would not have the reach it has today without NRx's network.

The last thing was a revival of reactionary and traditionalist theorists like Thomas Carlyle and Julius Evola, foregrounding the importance of truth above all.

NRx is nothing more than the result of academics who were forced to their research underground, on paraacademic blogs. They're not a unified movement, just persecuted intellectuals, resulting in them being the intellectual wing of the new right. Just because (((Moldbug))) refuses to name the jew doesn't mean his (((Cathedral))) theory isn't useful, even if it's really just an expansion of older NWO analyses and fairly primitive.

To summarize their contributions:

eg
What this user doesn't understand is that it doesn't make a difference, if they needed to put it to a vote, the nikes only need control of academia & the press for so long before they could change the opinion of the average voter. There is no good democracy.

There is no reason to assume a benevolent and empathetic monarch/dictator is an impossibility. Hitler is an example, Frederick the Great is another. Follow anti-Machiavel, not Machiavelli's Prince, cuck.

Originality isn't what's relevant here, kike, and criticizing "intellectuals" is different from criticizing reasoned theory.

This is true. Land holds a lot of capital in artistic and critical theory circles, as he stands as one of the most radical theorists to reference in the aughts. In the game of extremist one-upmanship, he's successfully flipped the avant-garde from the far left to the far right in the course of 5 or so years.

Hyperstition is another word for meme magic. Nick was experimenting with it long before we ever were. See his description from 1995:
It's very clearly the exact same phenomenon.

This. The key thing is a collective volk, where everyone stands as brothers. Every person in the nation identifies with the nation collective, not their fellow shitskins or fellow kikes. Volk simply cannot exist without ethnic homogeneity. NatSoc is always and inseparably ethnonationalist.

Can't believe no one has called out this shill yet.
Jews are a race=
You fucking kike.

Israel is not an ethnonationalist state in anything but the most literal interpretation and a look at its border policy. The reason Israel isn't NatSoc, as the user has spent half the thread trying to explain, is because it's an entire governmental structure exists on the condition of international jewry used to fund the state. Rather than being a self-contained nation, it relies on ethnic diaspora. This is not ethnonationalism or natsoc. It's Zionism, it's international jewry and it's a parasite that must be eradicated.

This thread:

You silicon valley nerds alredy have Reddit. Go back to the kiddie table. Men are talking here.

These are the threads that keep me coming back

In propaganda form

better size

And how does monarchy and aristocracy save us from that, user? The kikes were already overrepresented in newspaper ownership in the "good old days" of Imperial Germany as one example, or how about Poland, where the NOBLE ARYAN DEFENDERS OF THE WHITE RACE would let Jewish tax collectors take the clothes of the backs of Polish peasants?

The history of humanity shows that for every "good" king or dictator there's usually ten other shitty ones. Few of the supposed "checks and balances" monarchists defend ever actually work out - at best they get overthrown in a palace coup or other intra-elite squabbles.

I don't pretend to know the answer, but I do know enough to say democracy isn't it.

Dark Enlightenment is Libertarianism mixed with Red Pill/PUA and a dash of transhumanism.

It's a retarded ideology. Most of its adherents imagine themselves as dispossessed feudal lords that are just missing their plot of land and a few peasants to work it for them.

The problem with DE is the same problem that all the little offshoot-ideologies that are sprouting up have - outside of their little clique of fellow as-yet-unrecognized-important-people, nobody gives a shit what they think.

There's so few of them, they're not even worth making fun of.

My pronouns are Junker and Freiherr, serfboi

user, you're saying you are perfectly happy with the destruction of our race being an option on the table, provided that we're allowed to say "no".

That is suicidal thinking, racial suicide should never be an option for our people or government, anything that allows racial suicide is a failed system.

This wasn't always true, though we have repeatedly confused laws and morals because legal systems are based on moral foundations. I maintain a fervent belief that that is one of the largest problems in our societies and a major reason Hitler was so successful.

Theologically that is true though but it's only bad when outside subversion is allowed and secular humanism starts to creep in.

This. We ought not to depend upon the democratic vote to preserve our race and principles.

If democracy cannot help us preserve and thrive, we ought to do without.

I'm saying it was never an option in the first place.

And a monarch or dictator would be axiomatically opposed to "racial suicide" because reasons?

Just as old conservatives in Europe were capitalized upon by Fascists and National Socialists after the assorted republicans and monarchists attempted to use active right wing parties for their own benefit.

Either monarchists, feudalists, reactionaries, and traditionalists submit to active and virile Fascists and right wing revolutionists or they allow themselves to be swallowed by Marxists while patting themselves on the back for trying to suppress the wrong side while they are detained or executed.

Informative links. Anons note that NRx has really drifted away from Moldbug and Land recently and become far less of a technoLARP.

Helpful summaries of some related ideas.
Checked.

Hypersition is indeed very close to some of the memeworking you see here. Land is insane, but it looks like he hit on something here.

comparet.christogenea.org/sermons/babylons-money

Because we people are the Children of Yahweh, we want to know what our Father's will is. Then we want to live according to His will. It is no news to you that we have reached this particular point in history. We are in the end times, the last days. We are at the point where we can already see the rapid approach of the complete collapse of our civilization.

I have no optimistic message that if we just close our eyes it will go away, it won't. We have already shut our eyes for so many generations, we are now going to have to open them and face the facts. We are at the point of the collapse and destruction of our civilization, because there is no evil being done today that we did not permit. Our leaders have betrayed us. Not the least of those, in this corrupt betrayal, have been those in the organized church system. These false clergymen have led the betrayal.

Somebody once asked Satan, "What are you going to do when you run up against the great truth? This truth is so plain and clear, you can't refute it and you can't twist it." Satan replied, "Oh. I'll just organize it."

This is the way it has happened. We have let Satan do the organizing and you see what we are coming to. Today we see ourselves threatened, not by one dangerous evil, but by many. They are all coming together at once, just like the spokes of a wheel. These evils start out at different points on the rim and they run in different directions. However, they all come together at the same place, at the hub. They are all part of the Babylonian system, which we were warned to get out of. "Come out of her My people, lest you be partakers of her sins and suffer your part in her plagues."

Today I wish to teach you about Babylon's money. The enemy, the children of Satan, have tried repeatedly in the past to overcome and destroy us by force and by military attack. This has always failed because there were enough of us, true to Yahweh, that Yahweh always came to our defense and destroyed the enemy army. The enemy has learned if they can control our money system, they can enslave us more completely than they could by military force. What is more, they can make you pay the cost of your own enslavement. They don't have to spend a penny of it out of their own pockets.

The liberals have preached to us, for a long time, that the only function of government is to tax its unfortunate citizens into such a state of destitution; they become dependant on the government for a handout, for their living. Then these destitute people can be sternly warned, unless you vote this same administration back into power, your welfare check is going to be cut down. This has been done to perpetuate our own slavery.

The other function of the government, of maintaining peace, should be abdicated in favor of allowing riots to go on. This is because the rioters provide one of those minority groups that help to rule and keep the majority under control. One, if not the most important function of government, is issuance of money.

don't have to start in at the beginning and explain to you who the devil's children are, you know this already. One of them that came to the United States in 1902 was Paul M. Warburg a German citizen, a member of the German banking family, which owned the House of M. M. Warburg Company. They are the big German banking firm with headquarters in Hamburg and Amsterdam. They are the chief representatives of the banking firm the House of Rothschild.

This Jew, who came over here from Germany, never did learn to speak English very well. He came over here to tell us how to run our money system, not for our profit but for his. He succeeded in getting through our congress the Federal Reserve Act in 1913.

In 1912, with money put up by the members of the Jewish banking firm of Kuhn Loeb and Company, a Marrano Jew calling himself Woodrow Wilson, was elected president of the United States. When Wilson's family lived in Germany and were openly Jewish, they spelled their name Wolfson. When they moved to England, they followed the Jewish custom of changing their name and they became Wohlson. When this family then moved to the United States they changed their name again and became Wilson.

Like most democratic politicians, Wilson was touted as being a representative of the people and against the great financial interests. Instead Wilson was the banker's hireling, they owned him like you own your dog. He came to heel just as obediently as a dog, and helped these Jewish international bankers get the Federal Reserve Bank Act passed through the congress of the United States.

First these Jews tried to set up one central bank for the entire country, however we had managed to stop this several times. We fought off a central bank in the early days too. Andrew Jackson succeeded in defeating it once and we stopped it again during the Civil War. Finally these Jews went through the formality of setting up a system of twelve banks, in twelve of the major cities of the United States. The only one that has much money in it is the New York Federal Reserve Bank. So, New York runs our money system and as you know, there are more Jews in New York City than there are in Palestine.

It was claimed the Federal Reserve Bank would strengthen the banking system and consequently there would be no more bank failures. But the Federal Reserve really wasn't established to help the banking system at all. In fact, there have been more bank failures since we adopted the Federal Reserve System than there had been in all our recorded history before this time.

Between December of 1913, when the Federal Reserve Act was passed and May of 1929, which was five months before the crash came in October of 1929, under the Federal Reserve system there were 4,500 bank failures in the United States. History records how the banks crashed, on a wholesale scale, under the Roosevelt administration. Franklin D. Roosevelt was another Marrano Jew.

The Jew bankers set up this Federal Reserve System to obtain the right to issue the money for the United States. There is no more excuse for any banking institution to have the right to issue money than there is for any private institution to take over the entire Defense Department and have the right to determine whether we fight for our liberty, or whether we surrender and let ourselves be butchered. The issuance of money is a government function, pure and simple. Turning this function over to any private organization is totally indefensible.

Are you wondering what all this has to do with religion and the laws of Yahweh? I intend to teach you the laws of Yahweh that we have violated. I also want you to learn the consequences of violating these laws.

Why do we have the Federal Reserve banking system at all? We can go back, read the leading magazines from around 1900 on, and read in them exactly what I am telling you now. Some people were worried about the possible outbreak of a large scale war in Europe, because so many nations were maintaining large scale armies and navies. There was bitter trade rivalry between Jew dominated England and Germany. People were afraid it was going to develop into a real shooting war. All the leading economists said this was impossible because the nations of Europe couldn't finance a war.

In order to get the white Christian nations to kill each other and destroy each other's nations for the benefit of the Jews, and in order to pour billions of dollars into the coffers of the big Jewish banking houses, it was necessary to bring about a war and to find a means of financing it. The European branches of the House of Rothschild were capable of financing one side of such a war, but not both sides. Consequently, these bankers had to mobilize the financial resources of the United States to finance the other side, otherwise there could be no war with huge profits for these Jewish bankers.

The war was held off until they got the Federal Reserve System set up in this country in 1913, and then they started their war in 1914. The big banking houses affiliated with the House of Rothschild were J.P. Morgan and Kuhn Loeb and Company, among others. These American banking houses bought enormous issues of British and French bonds. They were able to get the money to buy these bonds through the Federal Reserve System. It began to look as though Britain and France would lose the war and be unable to pay off the big Jewish banks on these bonds. There was no way they could get the United States government to pay off French and British bonds except to get the United States into the war.

Woodrow Wilson (Wohlson) ran for his second term in office on the platform, "He kept us out of war" this was 1916. Wilson had already pledged the international bankers to get us into the war. This was Wilson's definite commitment to the Jewish bankers who put up the money to elect and own him. Yes, this is a characteristic of these democratic saviors of the people.

Franklin D. Roosevelt promised, "I hate wahr. I promise you, as I have said ovah and ovah again, your sons will nevah be sent ovahseas to fight a foreign wahr." This was when he had already sold us out and had already made the commitment to get us into the war. Do any politicians tell the truth?

Well, these Jewish bankers got us into the war. We financed the entire Allied side of it and the big Jewish banking houses made a great many billions. Out of the war profits, Jacob Schiff sent some twenty million dollars to the Bolshevik Jews, to finance the communist Jewish revolution in Russia. These Jews discovered they hadn't totally destroyed the Christian powers; they had to have a second world war for this.

So they got the Second World War started, which almost completed their control. Now they are getting ready for a third world war, to complete the job. This is the octopus, which has this strangle hold upon our financial system.

In 1913 the Federal Reserve bank was started with 143 million dollars, this is how much the stockholders paid into it. Its assets today are hundreds of billions or maybe even trillions of dollars, and they haven't produced a thing. This all came directly or indirectly out of the suckers, the poor hard working citizens of this country. Now let's take a look at where this has been leading.

Yahweh promised us we would have prosperity if we would obey His laws.

When we fought World War II, to destroy Christian civilization in Europe, we didn't pull our punches; we didn't say anything about not wanting to win this war. We didn't say we just wanted to get the Germans to the bargaining table. When we were fighting Germany, we didn't utter any pious platitudes about not bombing the enemy's factories because they were in cities where people lived and some of these people might get killed.

The worst things that Hitler was ever accused of doing, and they were lies, weren't half as bad as what we did as a matter of government policy. We talked about the unconditional surrender of Germany as being our only policy.

Our government deliberately ordered the bombing of residential areas in German cities. There weren't any factories and there weren't any anti aircraft guns or anything else, to make them legitimate targets. In Hamburg and Dresden our bombers turned whole cities into a solid sheet of fire, deliberately burning to death the civilian population of old men, women and children. Dresden had been declared an open city so it was crowded with refugees. It was also one of the great art centers of Europe, comparable to Paris. But now we are too noble to bomb Hanoi, lest perhaps some of the commies get hurt in the process. What is the difference?

Yahweh also said, "You are my battle axe and weapons of war, for with thee will I overthrow nations, and with thee will I destroy kingdoms." This means that we have a job to do. We have a choice; either do this job in obedience to Yahweh's laws and do it with little monetary cost and very little loss of life. Or we do the job in a way that violates Yahweh's laws and pay the heavy, bitter penalty, and you have to do the job anyway.

You know what the Jews want to do to Christian civilization, I don't have to give an hour's sermon on that subject, and you should know these facts by now. We have allowed these Jews to get this power over us. Yahweh warned us never to let a Jew live in our land. I will say this for Hitler, if he did what he is accused of doing; he wasn't doing anything wrong at all. He was obeying the laws of Yahweh when he started cleaning these blood-sucking parasites out of Germany.

Do you know why we got into World War II against Germany? It wasn't because of fictitious atrocities, those were used as a propaganda justification for our involvement later. Hitler didn't have any Jews in concentration camps until after the war had started. He had allowed the Jews who wished to leave, to get out. After the war had started, Hitler rounded up these communist Jews and put them in concentration camps.

If this was so terrible that Hitler put his enemies in concentration camps, what did we do the Japanese in California and to many Germans all over the United States, after we got into the war? We did the same thing it is only common sense.

All during this time, some of the Jews were running around loose in Germany, the rest were leaving the country. They were trying to decide whether they were going to later charge that Hitler killed ten times as many Jews as there were in all of Europe or just ten times as many Jews as there were in Germany. The Jews were getting us into World War II and Roosevelt had given his pledge to them that we would enter it on the side of the Allies.

The only reason the Jews hated Hitler was because he saw what the Jewish economic and banking systems had done to Germany. He was determined to break the Jewish power, so they had to get rid of him. At this time, the communist Jews had control of approximately 50% of Germany.

Germany is a nation, which, like England, does not have within its own borders all the things it needs in the way of raw materials. Germany has to import raw materials, and to buy them, they have to export some of their finished products. This is the same thing Britain has been doing for a century and a half, and Germany had to do the same thing to survive.

As a means of strangling Germany and destroying her economically, the Jews started a worldwide boycott of German products. As you must be aware of by now, the Jews control the commerce in all the nations of the world. This boycott was a declaration of war, as Samuel Untermeyer said himself. The Jews declared a holy war against Germany. Organized Jewry conducted this war here in the United States, against Germany, several years before the actual war started in Europe.

Hitler was starting to put into operation some of the laws of Yahweh and he was proving that, in spite of this Jewish boycott, Germany could become prosperous, by going back to the economic laws of Yahweh. The Jews couldn't let this happen because other nations might follow his example and break the Jews strangle hold on the economic and banking systems of the world.

Against all the efforts of the devil's children the Jews, to strangle and destroy her, Germany was becoming prosperous by going back to the economic laws of Yahweh. This had to be stopped, no matter how many Christians were butchered in accomplishing this goal. This is why World War II was started and why we were dragged into it.

Woodrow Wilson, sometime in 1919, testified before a congressional committee that the cause of World War I was economic rivalry. We were told it was because of those phony atrocities that Germans were supposed to have committed. Then the congress asked Wilson, "Do you believe, if Germany had never committed any atrocities, nor anything that we could call an act of war against us, that we would have gone to war against Germany anyway?" Wilson's reply was, "Yes, I do believe so."

If Franklin Roosevelt had ever spoken a truthful word in his life, he could have testified to the same thing about World War II.

What should we have done? The taking of interest, which in the King James Bible is call usury, is forbidden in the Bible. Today just about any interest rate is accepted. Pawnbroker’s charge 42% and more, you know who they generally are. The meaning of the word usury is anything paid for the use of something, which has been loaned. If it is a billionth of one percent per century, it is still usury. One cent compounded yearly at 6%, at the time of Christ, would be more than all the money that is in the world today.

Exodus 22:25 warns us, "If thou lend money to any of my people that is poor by thee, thou shalt not be to him an usurer, neither shalt thou lay upon him usury." Leviticus 25:35-37 reminds us, "And if thy brother be waxen poor, and fallen in decay with thee; then thou shalt relieve him: yea, though he be a stranger, or a sojourner; that he may live with thee. Take thou no usury of him, or increase: but fear thy God; that thy brother may live with thee. Thou shalt not give him thy money upon usury, nor lend him thy victuals for increase." It didn't matter whether you loaned him the food to eat or the money to buy it, you could make no charge for the loan.

These economic laws were for one Israelite dealing with another. It wasn't the intention of Yahweh for all the other races that hate us, to come in and enrich themselves at our expense, by borrowing from us and paying nothing for it. Deuteronomy 23:19-20 tells us, "Thou shalt not lend upon usury of victuals, usury of anything that is lent up usury: unto a stranger (here the word is nokriy, an alien of another race) thou mayest lend upon usury but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon usury…."

In 1998 all the top people in our defense department and foreign relations are all Jews. The degenerate President Clinton has appointed more Jews than any other president in history.

With financial disaster comes the closing of the factories and the throwing into the streets millions of unemployed people. These people can be led into riots and revolution, like the Negroes. These Jewish bankers can tell us to finance our own defense because we are broke and in a depression.

First these banksters took all our gold, now they have also taken our silver. They have left us with worthless paper and they will laugh at us. We will be told our paper money is nothing but worthless IOUs of a private banking corporation. We don't have anything to pay you with except more paper IOUs, what are you going to spend them on? Who will accept this worthless paper? It will be just like Germany when it took a bushel basket full of money just to buy a loaf of bread.

Then these Jewish bankers will gloat that they have all our gold and silver. This is the real money with intrinsic value.

Ezekiel 7:19 promises, "They shall cast their silver in the streets and their gold shall be removed: their silver and their gold shall not be able to deliver them to the day of the wrath of Yahweh: they shall not satisfy their souls, neither fill their bowels: because it is the stumbling block of their iniquity."

James 5:3 says, "Your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a witness against you…" Something that is kept in use is not the thing that rusts. It is the thing that is set away and idle that rusts out. These Canaanite banksters are taking the gold and silver away, so it can't be used as our money. Instead they are going to use this silver and gold to destroy us. Yahweh warns us in James 5:3, "The rust of them shall be a witness against you, and shall eat your flesh as it were fire. Ye have heaped treasure together for the last days."

Yes, the Bible reveals that these children of the devil are coming to their final doom, for having done this to us. However, you must remember that as long as we are in the same boat with them, the process of sinking that boat is going to be rough on us also. Isn't it about time we came out of the Babylonian system? We can't get out of any of this trouble until we get out of the system of Babylon's money.

Because the whole point of a democracy, and the reason why people are apparently so happy about it, is that it is supposed to be a way for everyone to have a say in decisions for the society as a whole. If the end result of it is simply to have everyone state what they want for themselves, while everyone disregards the greater good, we don't need democracy for that.

And because it's difficult, most don't even fucking try. But then it certainly is easy to see what makes people feel like working more to have more, like giving them more, and what makes people give up, like stealing everything they produce as "taxes for the greater good". Those that are at the top certainly deserve to game the system to some extent, they BUILT the system.

I wouldn't trust them either. Because the issue boils down to the idea of a "vote".

I'd rather have actions. I want my choices to matter based on what I actually, not based on a vote. I refuse to just sit on my ass and ask for things, I go fetch them myself. Because fundamentally, a democracy rests on vote, not action.

We only support a dictator in the event that like uncle Adolf, they act for the sake of the preservation of the race, and the prosperity of the people. If they did not do that then we the people would be axiomatically opposed to them.

Yes, making that work would require tremendous amounts of effort in shaping the consensus on what to do and how to act on every level of society, that's partly we're currently stuck with "just tick a box every few years and all your problems will solve themselves goyim" democracy. But what we know for a fact is that it can be done and when implemented correctly will fix things very fast. National Socialist Germany went from being one of the most impoverished and degenerate nations in history, to one of the most advanced superpowers in history, within 5 short fucking years.

Modern society is a problem that we already know how to solve, it's only a question of putting it into practice in a modern context.

Is there any other interpretation of that term?

NatSoc is a very specific form of ethno-nationalism. Describing Israel as NatSoc is a much stronger claim than as ethno-nationalist.

No nation is strictly self-contained, all nations depend on each other to some extent, every nation pursues its own interests in the international arena. This is particularly true of small nation-states, whose economy can be crippled by a trade embargo. This is nothing unique of Israel.

This was probably true at first, when Israel was still weak and its economic policies were closer to socialism (and hence to economic disaster) than it is now, with a strong military and an a sensible right-wing economic policy. Nowadays, describing israel as " incapable of any form of manual labor, agriculture or production", like does, is just plain wrong. For instance, see:

bls.gov/fls/chartbook/2012/section2b.htm#chart2.8

As you can see, the breakdown of Israeli jobs by sector (industry, services, agriculture) is similar to that of the USA and other developed countries. 20% of Israelis have industry-related jobs.

You are grasping at straws to deny Israel its obvious ethno-nationalist nature. This is because you want to claim to support ethno-nationalism for every nation, while lambasting Israel as an abomination that must be destroyed. Of course, there's no need to actively support Israel or even describe it in favorable terms, but there's no solid right-wing ethno-nationalist argument to be made against Israel's existence. You can't have it both ways, deal with it.

Israel's military is entirely propped up by American military in training, weapons and funding. Remember those articles about how Israel's armed forces ran out of ammo during 2014 Hamas insurgency? Guess who they scammed out of bullets. That's right. American taxpayer. Israel still very much relies on ethnic diaspora, because it's a country that needs constant funding to survive. Without it, Arabs would have ravaged the place by their massed assaults until they'd win. Without diaspora, Israel has no allies.

Israel is also not an ethno-nationalist. Kikes are not strictly one ethnicity. They are one subhuman bag of mixed breeds. Some of their policies might be reflecting ethno-nationalism, but they are the result of creating a kike safe-haven for kikes who fuck up scamming the west. Where do all these caught kike pedos and spies go once public wants to lynch them? Israel is a parasite rogue state running off parasitic elements in other countries. How is that nationalist? A kike cannot be a nationalist because he does not have a land. Ethnicities without blood and soil are scum of the Earth - from gypsies to kikes.

>>>/oven/

Israel's military is far less dependent on the US than that of any European country.

Irrelevant. Nations don't stockpile more ammo than they need to. Do a google search for "run out of missiles" and you'll find several examples, some involving the US military. It doesn't mean shit.

The fact is, Israel BTFO'd all the Arabs around it, TWICE, without any US troops. Few other US "allies" can boast a similar capacity. The only reason why Israel can't exterminate the Arabs is that US leftie govt would give them the Serbia treatment. Get that sandnigger cock out of your mouth.

Yes they are, it's a complex, nested ethnicity with a few subdivisions. Ashkenazi Jews are highly homogeneous, that's common knowledge. The other kinds of Jews are mostly along for the ride, but they are sub-ethnicities, other branches of the Jewish tree, of which the leading branch are the Ashkenazi.

Yes he has a land. Israel is his land. Stolen by sandniggers, now recovered by its rightful owners.

It doesn't show that at all. This is lolberg propaganda.

Most Kings are reasonable rulers, not sadists or tyrants.

The major failing of monarchy is what happens when the King dies.

If he has no direct heir, it means a civil war.

If he has a very young heir, it means some other guy rules for a decade while the other nobles stew about it. Maybe the other guy bumps the king off. Civil war is always possible.

If he has too many sons, one of them may decide to press a claim anyways.

The advantage of democracy and republucs -really the only advantage- is that when it comes time to pass off the baton, the chance of war is lessened. Every four years (eight in reality) you elect a new president. All the people who want power queue up in line or shout at each other instead of building an army.

That's it. In all other respects democracy is vastly inferior to a monarch.

Great, you're the smartest retard. It's also not true, the French invade Africa every couple of years and control most of French-speaking Africa's governments though energy concerns. In comparison, Israel can't even project power into southern Lebanon or beyond a few airstrikes on the other side of the Golan - a serious strike on their main rival, Iran, is an impossibility.

The last time Israel won a war was in 1982. The last time they won a war without US assistance was 1967. Israel lives in fear of an overextended guerrilla army because they got rekt in 2006, on literally every level.
atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HJ12Ak01.html
atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HJ13Ak01.html
atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HJ14Ak01.html

Hilarious.
gbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/5/1/61.full.pdf html
Southern European, Middle Eastern, and Eastern European ancestries, in agreement with recent studies and oral and written traditions. We conclude that the genome of European Jews is a tapestry of ancient populations including Judaized Khazars, Greco–Roman Jews, Mesopotamian Jews, and Judeans and that their population structure was formed in the Caucasus and the banks of the Volga with roots stretching to Canaan and the banks of the Jordan.
You have no race, Jew, and even your own people say it.

See above, there are few, if any, Jews to whom the biblical promise should apply alive in Palestine today.

>>>/gaschamber/ kike, and take the rest of the semites with you.

Yes, tell me more about how the kikes playing shell games with Fed money on Wall Street deserve everything they earn, and if you disagree well you're just a commie loser who can't hack it in the modern world.

Again, you're ignoring the impact of how complex our societies have become on how people vote as more and more power is taken out of their hands by unelected and unaccountable bureaucracies. The solution is to return decision-making to the lowest community levels, i.e. decentralise everything outside a handful of government functions that can't be decentralised.

So the problem isn't "democracy", is it? I seem to recall that Hitler was elected - he wasn't the younger brother of the king or leader of a fucking military coup.

And then 10 years later was smoking rubble.

Not because of any failure of its own. Nazi Germany fought extremely well considering that damn near the whole world was united against them for threatening the central banking system.

Not quite, the problem is representative democracy. The difference between the election of a dictator and the election of a parliament is that the former has both the absolute power to carry out his policies and the absolute responsibility for their effects, while the failure of the latter is quite easily observed by watching your local public service channel whenever a debate is on - you can't rally against an enemy you cannot define, and it is very difficult to define a hydra of 600 men as anything other than vague democracy itself; which leads us to the present problem where voters elect local representatives who campaign on local issues and who are incapable of getting anything done, even in the rare instances when they actually want to work, and when it doesn't work, can ascribe the blame to non-entities like political parties and whips, ensuring no one is ever truly responsible for anything, as there is always one more man involved somewhere, and convincing people that the only way to change things is for enough of them to vote to switch blue to red countrywide, so the government can push through whatever it wants anyway. The system ends up as a dictatorship of the 51%, and on the rare occasions the parties or factions collaborate (usually out of common backroom interest) to screw everyone, you have to praise it as bipartisan democracy in action, or otherwise struggle to find a way to rally against something more concrete than "the system".

Which is the point. The system offers a fake solution within itself, which is best portrayed by pic related, that only restarts a cycle of political churn. Unsurprisingly, that results in electoral turnout records being broken for all the wrong reasons - a result of an electorate made demoralized and apathetic by a system whose only effectual results are stagnancy, corruption and policies of managed decline.

The only effective resistance is to make that "democratic" system itself your enemy, because at least that's something to rally around, and participate in it only so far as it furthers like goal of ending it. That doesn't quite amount to a declaration of war on democracy itself, but more a desire to limit it to those local, direct levels where it can be most effective.

Except they don't. A shit king or dictator is rarely overthrown by the mob, so much as they die or are overthrown in intra-elite squabbles.

Because you need to decentralise power to local communities, states, etc first. Our "democracies" promote apathy because so many issues simply can't be resolved by local politicians because of all-powerful central bureaucracies in government departments.

There's an eligible voting population of ~235 million in the United States, and to represent that population there are:
435 voting Representatives = 540,229 voters per Representative

I know it's an oversimplification, but I don't think there's any way one person can reasonably represent the interests of ten thousand people, let alone 540 thousand

Following that, the present system is totally reformed around the Fuhrer principle, where absolute leaders are elected on principles, not political affiliation or constituency boundaries, held in check by an armed population educated in nationalism, and advised by an appointed, though not excessively large, senate which is (theoretically) composed of the best men of the nation, in a similar way to the informal dictatorship of scientists in Nazi Germany.

Or that last part is the theory anyway, considering Hitler never followed it nor had any real reason to.

Nick Land is not far right. At all. He is extreme leftist by all measures. The only success he has had is selling left wing ideas to idiots and making them believe they are right. Nick Land actually has his own term for the right wing: HRx.

An "ad hominem argument" isn't a thing, you dumb turd. Go back to reddit.

And how many democratic governments have been overthrown "by the mob"? At the very least, a man at the top gives a symbol to strive toward or revolt against - when you're dealing with products of a system you're perpetually bogged down in futile attempts to reform the bloody thing rather than do anything "undemocratic".

Politicians cannot do anything because they cannot agree on anything. Every time MP A gets his way, MP B gets the opposite even within party lines - which leaves you with a situation where nothing gets done until it either becomes a national problem with a mostly homogeneous opinion behind it or someone pays for a solution in campaign donations.

No one disputes the need for decentralization, but the form it should take. There's not a local assembly in the world that doesn't act as a microcosm of what goes on in the central parliament, and they (the assemblies) are usually irrelevant anyway. But on the other hand, when people are elected in an area they could be reasonably expected to have some knowledge of, like for towns, you get more effective and prompt results.

To use hyperbole, that depends on the interests are. Central governments shouldn't decide when the bins get picked up, but you equally need a certain amount of consistency for effective government - just compare Himmler's reorganization of the entire security apparatus of the Reich to Goering gallivanting around in his Prussian fiefdom, where nothing was subordinated if only to maintain his own independence. I think the solution depends far more on leadership and the structure that comes from that rather than a purely top-down model; to go back to Himmler, he was a very capable leader because he knew how to identify capable and loyal men and knew to give them the autonomy they needed to operate, even within an arguably centralized structure.

dont mind me , bumping good threads