In our struggle with the forces of Marxism and Liberalism it is important to understand the root of the disease, the hidden theology of the revolutionary spirit, which has been bred in the heart of Western civilization since its beginning with the rise to power of the Papacy and the final sundering of the Roman Empire.
To this end I'm leaving some sources here that may be of some interest. Obviously, they are not written from an explicitly Fascist perspective but they would have been sympathetic to the movements of Franco and Codreanu.
These notes provide an excellent overview of the history of the revolutionary spirit, although the author is not sympathetic to National Socialism, seeing it as another manifestation of the revolutionary spirit.
pic related although the source of the french revolution can be traced even further and has its roots in St Thomas Aquinas, Joachim of Fiore and St Francis of Assisi.
Adam Campbell
...
Colton Cruz
Well, it seems Holla Forums has gone downhill since I was last here. Are all the Monarchists and other reactionaries gone?
Isaiah White
What are you even on about?
Kayden Martin
Most people on Holla Forums can see the massive list of terrible monarchs and incredibly shitty decisions made by them.
There are far better alternatives when it comes to leadership, and you can't point to a single monarch today who isn't cucked or powerless.
Dominic Myers
If you look at history you'll see that Russia, which was under Orthodoxy and therefore didn't fall prey to the revolutionary spirit bred under Roman Catholicism, has bailed Europe out several times and that it was done under Absolute Monarchy. Whether you have a cucked monarchy or a stable monarchy is based on which form of Christianity it is under.
The Republic is far worse, it is merely the Revolution in a more "legitimate form", and it tends to degenerate into tyranny such as with the Marxists in Russia (who came from Europe).
Gabriel Parker
The history of the spirit of antichrist.
Adam Price
try again
Hudson Robinson
Whew.
Hudson Martinez
Of, course the Jews are also heavily involved in all this. But take the French Revolution whose origin is recorded by Abbe Augustin Barruel in Memoirs Illustrating the History of Jacobinism. Voltaire, Montesquieu, Diderot and Especially Adam Weishaupt all seem to predate Jewish involvement.
I'm not implying that. I'm stating the historical fact that it was Orthodox Russia (slavs) that bailed out Europe when the spirit of the Revolution was sweeping across under Napoleon.
They are, but the marxist disease actually grew out of the Vatican before it returned home. I'm not sure what your post is trying to say? Its not relevant to anything I said.
Sebastian Butler
try again
Ian James
All products of the same source. Yet people idolize Hitler here while claiming that they are conservative…
Quite strange tbh
Joseph Sanders
Kek, fuck off christcuck and take your jewsus with you >>>/christian/
Tyler Hughes
I'd argue that it was never the willingness to take up arms to claim rule for a perceived better leader (or leaders) that was the problem; many civil wars happened throughout Europe, even Rome, and Ancient Greece and Gaul before that. Old tales of the unjust, or very just challenging their tribe's chief for dominion are incredibly common. Such themes are not the cause of the modern day perception of 'rebellion' as being about 'freedom', and that the rebels are inherently the good guys (as opposed to 'terrorists', and before that 'Communists', the new terms for 'bad rebels'; though this is not to say that Communism isn't bad, it is of course one of the greatest evils known to man).
It is some blend between the French revolution, the US war for 'independence', and subsequent propaganda campaigns (at the behest of jewry) that have to the average man painted a false picture of reality, history and morality. The idea of servitude today is one that is scorned, despite the fact that if anyone truly acknowledged what they did in their day to day lives; they would realise that they are most certainly servants in many ways. A job is for the vast majority of people a time where you serve others and are compensated for your effort. Family, and indeed all social interactions are much the same. I would argue that the dissolution of the (Occidental) Roman Empire was infact one of the few times where we came close to having the ideal philosophy for leadership, whereby leadership was perceived as 'servitude' (the idea of Christ as the Servant King forming the basis of what a leader or King was supposed to be).
Throughout the Middle Ages the relationship between the different classes was, at the offset at least seen as two groups willingly exchanging their services for the other's services. The foundation of feudal society (immediately after the collapse of Occidental Rome) being the peasantry would work the land to provide the necessities of everyday life whilst the (usually) once-Roman aristocratic families would provide them with that land to work on, as well as with protection with themslves and their families (and favoured children of the peasantry) being inducted into the warrior classes; and from here we would eventually evolve into true principalities with all the various classes that we all know about.
It was rightly understood that you served in one way, whilst they served in another; and together society advances. This of course fell away due to despotism over-time, though even as late as the Victorian Era we have many people understanding that the Monarchs fulfilled a certain role and that much was owed unto them; and in turn the common pleb pledged loyalty to them to repay the favour.
This idea has only truly died in very recent times where all forms of 'servitude' are seen as inherently wrong and oppressive. Quite frankly it is stupid and anyone who took a few moments to think about it would see the problems; but a multitude of writings from various 'revolutionaries' glorifying the French revolution, the American war of independence, and harkening back to stories of Spartacus or Thermapoylae and distorting their meaning; whilst also introducing new stories like 'Star Wars' and the whole pseudo-history of the Atlantic Slave Trade, as well as the independence of South Africa, India, and other previously Colonial nations has firmly placed in everyone's mind the idea that all forms of servitude and hierarchy are inherently wrong; and most importantly that all rebellion is inherently moral, which thus leads to the average pleb wanting to have a 'revolution' without truly understanding why any revolution in history actually took place.
Tis a sad state of affairs.
Ayden Gray
But that wasn't implied…
The implication was that National Socialism is part of the same revolutionary phenomenon as the others and that its Utopian goals are equally unrealistic. Its simply a different expression of a metaphysics of pure "becoming". Spengler is interesting to read to understand the zeitgeist of that time.
Camden Evans
thinking in epochs (everything was good/bad before/after point x) is a reflection of christian historiography and should be rejected in itself, because it only leads to wrong generalizations and confusion.
Julian Brooks
This isn't thinking in epochs its pic related. Every moment involves the same struggle between movement towards Eternal Life and movement away from Him. The spirit of antichrist is simply that which influences us to move away - it isn't a matter of epochs.
Camden White
That's even dumber than I thought. National Socialism is based on laws of nature which makes it not only realistic, but also the best tool against kikes. You and that other retard don't have a clue of what National Socialism is about.
Spengler's Decline of the West is a nice book, but with many flaws.
Ethan Jackson
>>>/christ/
Adam Robinson
There's nothing inherently wrong with a revolutionary spirit OP.
Sebastian Torres
lol, very rational, is it? Which Enlightenment Deist gave you that idea?
Again, its on the same side as the kikes even when exterminating them as the kikes themselves are merely a tool of a greater power.
Agreed.
Levi Morgan
KIKES ON STICKS GTFO
Monarchy tends to go to shit after a few generations because the leadership gets too full of itself or stop upholding their end of the social contract and enrage the people.
Oliver Bennett
Ah, yes! Your particular utopian sect is the true one. Now I see!
Hardly, Monarchy tends to last longer than any other system. Revolutionary governments almost always burn out after a few years and all they do is introduce ever higher levels of cuckery until it stacks up to what we have now.
You do realize Hitler was a degenerate who thought marriage was old fashioned and people should rut like animals to produce more soldiers for him? I'm sure his evolution/neopaganism synthesis hasn't ben tried before totally original idea, yeah…
Logan Foster
Laws of nature are the absolute truth, christcuck. Something that's based on the absolute truth can be realised no matter the time and place. You obviously know nothing about them, since your religion is anti-nature.
A tool of what greater power? There is no good and evil, kike worshipper, only what's good for me and bad for you, and NatSoc is good for my people and bad for kikes.
Jonathan Rodriguez
kek, even the scientists don't believe this any more. You are an Enlightenment Deist! Scientific laws are reductionist, the Logos is integral. Check out some fully sik Herakleitos - he is a greek but not a slav
But there is absolute truth? Nice try, kike, but you fucked up.
Anthony Long
Hey Goy, check out my fully sick neopagan evolutionism! It is totally scientific, brah. There is no good and evil…now help me sell this porn of your wife fucking a dog - its natural and a symbol of vitality.
Noah Collins
>>>/youtube/ >>>/christian/
Jeremiah Thompson
WEW
Yes, because Monarchy becomes possible only when you have a strong and respectable ruling class who lead their people and the funny thing is that it was slowly eroded by kikes who came to Europe under the protective cloak of cuckstianity. Also, Monarchy in which descendants of leaders have the automatic right to inherit their place is not a good idea since there's no guarantee that the descendants of the leader will always be the best suited for the job.
Monarchy through Meritocracy is the best system because it's based on nature's law of selection of the fittest. It's what our ancestors had before cuckstianity came and it's what National Socialism would have become if WW2 would go in their favour.
Do you even know what I'm talking about? Everything is a part of nature and everything is subject to its laws, including us. Nature's law for example is that the strong will always prevail over the weak. That's the absolute truth.
No, you're just a dumb kike worshipper and can't into reality. Let me explain it to you. For a deer it's evil if wolf hunts it down, but for a wolf this is good. This here is a contradiction, in nature, everything can be both good and evil, and there are no contradictions in nature's law. I don't really get how there cannot be an absolute truth without the validity of good-evil concept.
Sad. I never mentioned theory of evolution nor did I imply that I support degeneracy. You're deliberately building a strawman and you don't hold monopoly on morality and especially not on European values and ideals, because guess what, kike worship is not European.
