Tenets of National Socialism

This is actually the header of their blog, lol.

(Checked)
Holy shit

...

I've got another question? How do you deal with poverty under an NS state?
Genocide and deportation don't count as answers, as even after those policies, you'd still have poor citizens.

Ever heard of work camps?

NS society in way a society designed by a sperg.
Maximum efficiency, maximum productivity in the material world coupled with maximum spiritual development of oneself.
Imagine Buddhism adapted to Protestant mentality of work ethics. Much more organized with clear goals and not shrouded into vague concepts.
The American NS would be more in a way of individualism, but would achieve the same goal.

Assuming you have a National Socialist state, you essentially have an ethno-state that puts the interests of its people, racially defined, above all. Right?

So "genocide" and "deportation" are not NS solutions to "poverty." You don't kill your own people, because that is incompatible with the stated purpose of NS. Deportation same thing.

Poverty is both a material and a spiritual problem. Suppose an NS government took power tomorrow in our current context and deported the non-white population or gave them California or something. You would have lots of very poor, opiod addicted, nigger-tier whites.

First, the state would create a culture that breaks the left's meme of "poverty" being basically a good thing, a sign of positive victimhood. You would crush drug peddlers and addiction. You would glorify industrial work, creativity, industriousness. You would restructure social policy to reward and incentivize work rather than reward and incentivize being poor.

Standard economics. If you subsidize something, you get more of it. So you subsidize work, not poverty. Tie economic success to productive enterprise. Invest massive amounts of money in actual physical infrastructure and construction, architectural projects, engineering, the military, manufacturing, etc. The NS economy is premised on tangible, physical productivity and output rather than abstract financialism. Create policies and culture which promote this.

Now of course, some people simply cannot work. Some of those people are born disabled or invalid. Those people should be sterilized but cared for. It is far more cruel to allow those people to spread their unfit genes to the next generation than it is to mercifully care for them without asking for work in return.

Others become incapable of work due to illness, disease, disability, etc. There should be insurance systems and safety nets in place for workers who admittedly may become incapacitated because shit sometimes happens. These insurance systems could be private or public, who cares. That's irrelevant. The state would likely insure that they exist, and that they are adequate, because otherwise you have a subclass of poverty-stricken retards who will resort to crime, substance abuse and degeneracy, trailer-park living, etc. That does not promote the best interests of the nation/race.

In short, you commit to eliminating structural and cultural poverty using proactive and effective economic planning to and cultural reprogramming to encourage and rework productive work for wages.

Again, keep in mind that the entire point of NS is that application of its doctrine is contextual. Not all poverties are different. Different solutions will be appropriate for different types and causes of poverty in different contexts.

You continue to reply with really well-written responses, thank you user!

A similar role to that of a good father in a family.
A strong, firm, but benevolent leader, a teacher and an example of moral, decent behaviour.
The state should arrange all civic affairs for the benefit of the whole population/ family, and encourage healthy habits and pastimes, while discouraging degeneracy.
Housing and basic healthcare and enough money for food should be guaranteed for all, but no welfare without work.
No un-earned income is an idea I read about somewhere, and remember liking, but I 'm not sure how that would work.
Personally, I would like it if government corruption was a capital offence, on the level of murder.
Education would include the idea that you are an inividual, but that you have a duty to your folk to be the best individual you can be, for the good of the race, it's not acceptable to be "me me me"
This includes taking care of your health and diet to ensure you don't get sick and become a burden on the healthy population.
The idea of self-actualisation applied to the entire race.

is gud thred

The state should fuck off of the privacy of the citizens, the state should give general directives and should focus on the generally most important variables of what makes a healthy society. Not the opposite, today i have the impression is like a social justice warrior that focus on banalities, doing short sighted short term solutions just like the stock market or businesses that come and go.
The state lets its directive dictate by businesses that are operating on short term solutions just like daimler chief CEO zetsche that thinks if he imitates steve jobs and believes really hard into his vision and then believing in the 2nd german "wirtschaftswunder" importing millions of immigrants makes a lot of sense.

The problem here in general that no nation is autark or they are a let less autark in the times of globalisation, that is why they follow this shit because they have to. In a way it increases the "creativity" because creativity in that context is impulsive and short sighted but it is the minor variable in that equation, just like a not so fast frog posted on Holla Forums.

And i would disagree, what you aim at (basic values) will automatically be achieved if the state would focus on the most important variables because what you want would automatically take shape.

The reason of feminism etc. blabla only exists because the boobanimals are forced to work, and therefore the dynamics change and therefore the landscape, more intelligent people with the same software that gets dictated by the zeitgeist only means you run the same software on faster computers, but the outcome is the same.

People should view big brother in a different way, big brother only exists because there is a need for big brother to exist in this framework.
To give you an "visceral" example the listen and believe shit you see from the feminists is that they have a certain belief system similar what i described above that involves all that micro aggression/microshaping shit and focuses only on that, which means once you establish a certain belief system with these base variables you have to logically come to that conclusion, that means if a bitch says shit it has to be that way because otherwise the belief system wouldnt compute.

That also means if you have a certain need to control people, it would materialize in a certain way, and that means if people act "out" and propose a certain threat to the status quo certain mechanisms would make "click".
Just like thomas sowell said "60years ago you would be considered a radical, 30years ago you would be considered a liberal and today you are considered a racist", the quote in essence describes in such a potant way how belief systems change and also the way how the "enforcers" would act upon and in a way you can shape what should be enforced, like an emotional currency that goes to whatever seems to be the new shit.
Like a online dog food delivery company at the height of the dotcom bubble that is worth billions, and in a way "social justice" is the height of the human emotion bubble ready to pop. Like human energies that need go somewhere beause just like money it has to be invested.

I've been interested in the economic platform of NatSoc. On the topic, I found an interesting bit just from search results on Jewgle. Lead me to Ironmarch and, after some scrolling, found this.
I don't think it's honest to weigh a wartime nation on equal footing with peacetime nations, though.
On the topic, what are your thoughts on social welfare? Is welfare inherently destructive to the character of the individual/creates dependency, or is welfare just being abused? I think (same with healthcare and the rest) that there should be some minimum amount put forth (paid by taxes), but that private options should exist. More so of a mixed economy, if you will.
However, Goebbels did seem to be quite "socialist". Goebbels says: Lenin is the greatest man, second only to Hitler, and that the difference between Communism and the Hitler faith is very slight.
Then he has says: To be a socialist is to submit the I to the thou; socialism is sacrificing the individual to the whole. I can respect the servitude and duty to the people and the nation. What is disconcerting is the following: We are against the political bourgeoisie, and for genuine nationalism! We are against Marxism, but for true socialism!
Does this "true socialism" refer to the whole "the state will provide things like welfare, but if you are a leech, you will be removed" thing? I'm not quite sure what he was on about; it seems as if he was privy to the Jewish coin of capitalism/communism, though.

kek

The government creates jobs itself, both government paperpushing jobs and government funded projects like the Autobahn in Nazi Germany. Even people who can't do most work can still have some easy, largely symbolic job so they have something to do and a way to earn their handouts instead of getting them for free. Help you help yourself.
The government helps you create jobs, funding startups and giving grants to promising ideas. This creates more jobs as people start up new businesses, but also creates more jobs for the government to oversee this system. Help you help others.
The government funds youth programs like the Hitlerjugend, gives young people a paid year off to travel and figure out what they want to do with their lives, which leads to better adjusted workers. Help you know yourself.
I'm far from an expert on how National Socialism works though, so if that's wrong feel free to yell at me. It's just observations from tidbits I picked up here and there.

Some of you guys are a lot better read and smarter than I. Interesting thread.

I've always wondered: would capitalism still work though if the society was all white and there were no Jews to exploit the imbalance of wealth?

And the frogs ask "how do we get some boobanimals": the more the zeitgeist and the "public opinion" shapes people into faggy shit the more they (boobanimals no matter what intelligence bracket) crave the cavemen and the less they want recognition from the rainbow pony fags. In a way it is their emotional g-point because unlike males that only focus on the superficial goods on a more primal level the boobanimals focus on the opposite.
If you are a "ten feet above the ground" nerd on that level the boobanimals wont notice. Boobanimals want intellectual dominance on their plane, which means the here and now and over the other boobanimal defiler, which means ceativity and linguistic skills.

NO it wouldnt if you take it take it to certain level, just a different sorting mechanism, captitalism is pretty decent if it goes to a certain level and then gets reset. But it would never work if it would go on and on without said reset. That doesnt imply that any other system is better, i prefer a decent way of capitalism which gets a reset every know and then.

No. Capitalism is hyper-individualist. It is diametrically opposed to any form of collectivism. No state can interfere in free trade whatsoever. As a result, national identity and social cohesion will falter. The "society" will not be a community of people anymore. In essence, it's the same issue I have with the environmentalist faggots who whine about climate change. Allow me to elaborate: climate change environmentalist policy must be a global effort, or it will fail. If even one nation exists as a safe haven for companies to flee to, then they will. And if the world is a closed system (as they claim), then the effect will still be felt just the same (i.e. doesn't matter if every nation outlaws oil companies, if China doesn't then it was all for naught). The same goes for companies and third-world labour. If even one white nation decides to allow third-world labour to out-compete their native population, all other white nations will be forced to open up their borders to compete with the cheaply produced goods (and allow those same spics or gooks into their lands). Autarky should be the goal.

The owner of that site is a Russian kike and wrote this little gem:

archive.is/fLCjM

Then a pretty easy way would be making products that are at the release state of the art but their main characteristics are unwasteable durability and also a certain type of upgradeability. The problem with the current metapshere of innovation is that you always have to have the best shit even though most of the goyim are not even using all the shit current technology provides they only use it because woulda coulda shoulda.
I would assume that most people only buy the newest iphone or samsung smartphone because it is the newest without any significant improvement what they are going to do with it.
If you can forge a brand that is known for overall quality that is known to be with the user till death do us part, that would be something to market, on every level, until the market makes a demand that the build in hardware isnt sufficant enough to fullfill the contemporary tasks to a a decent level.

Lot of it has to do with the conditioning TO be one of the people in the commercials. Touches into mass media a lot. Then again, consumer rationale isn't always… rational.

I dont even think it has to do with the people in the commercials they just want the newest shit so they can talk to their peers that they have the newest shit, and in this day in age it connects the old and young on the same level. The old fag will think that having the newest iphone makes him cool because the young fag thinks it is cool because all the other young fag thinks it is cool.
I think the "cool people" in the commercials are just tertiary effects to market it on a contemporary sophisticated level. I mean you cannot run a commercial (i dont watch commercials) that in its quality reflects badly on the product. That means if the commercial is shit tier it also reflects on the product because it is shamefull, uncreative, old baked, or somehow akward. Commercials are expected to uphold the level of the product otherwise the commercials would be pointless in itself.

ANd if i would market such a phone i would portray a person that walks through a city shifting the focus on said goyphones, like a girl that has to change her makeup will she looks into a mirror so once she has done one side the other side will already fade and a young guy taking out his phone and speaks in short sentences while has a battery of alphanumberical sorted phones in a big back pocket to underline the point of the low quality of other phones which will strike a cord to a lot of mobile phone manufacturerers.

Where have you been for the whole Bepis shitstorm.
It does have to do with fitting into some specialized social niche, too.
Commercials ought to be advantageous for the sale of the product, that much is self-evident.
Not sure how this fits into the whole capitalist point I responded to, though.

88 precepts.

My phone fits into my pockets just like i fit into my jeans, it also shows the usage and renders the outlinings of the phone and the young man changes to an old guy with the same body weight just a little greyed beard. The bitches that want the man stay the same just their clothings change but the tits and ass is visible through their cloths shit.

I think I follow, but how does this tie into the original point?

I don't think that's the same guy.

That means your commercial shit doesnt mean jackshit it is like the cloths that cover tits and ass, the whole art is of commercials is just pimping the tits and ass, without tits and ass your comericals are pointless. I can market big tits with a pushup bra, or i can market big boobs in some elegant cloths, they will always look pretty but you can make big tits look bad if you tryhard.

Why are all of your market analogies centred around tits.

Because i like tits a lot.

See, a good product and a good commercial go hand in hand, you can market a shitty product like a-cups in a pushup bra and you can also make a good product look bad. But in essence you would make a good product and some good advertising.
Or you can take apple for an example, apple makes products that are usually inferior to other android products in terms of power but they last longer in terms of my experience and they have been marketed cultlike like a-cups or asses, so they build on that. But then again the commercials tie to the product and the "culture" of the product which also means that only apple products can have a certain type of commercial while for other distributers which have a majority of a different marketing group would look strange. If you have a skinny girl on a fashion show she would be just right, in a nigger club not so much i would broadly assume. So the art is to find the right pitch for marketing.

If for example i would market huwaei, i would mock the ignorance of european users and asiatic users, since huawei is mostly known for chinks, i would connect that to a certain meme.
All the chinks do something that occurs really naturally to them, like someone yells something and other chink fellows react positively and energetic to thatand i would repeat that image in different scenarios, and then i would show a chink in a typical euro city yelling the same word to another euro guy and no reaction happens everything is silent and i would then show the brand "huawei, trying to connect people".

Ever thought why certain classical music or some 70s rock is immortal, because whats in it is what speaks to all people and and it speaks to all outliners at the same almost eternal like big tits speak to my eyes and they speak to you too, and it doesnt matter if it is a crescendo or diminuendo, it is the flesh bell curve and the female version of it will just stick out more at the center just how we like it.

And just like music has many generes tits have many shapes and even more words in every language, and since music is the king of arts and words are the king of thought, and since your eyes are the king of sense and since the your senses make what you are and king of sense will make king of thought and since the chinks have a different perspective but at the same time tits will look the same, marketing on this level will work just as fine as it will on europeans. And that means if i can sell the essence of tits to asians and tell the european that asian tits are in fact tits, that would mean my accumulated 10 terabytes of tits would make a god.

The NatSoc government would eventually need to free up the markets, get rid of a lot of the ridiculous regulations (while keeping degeneracy in check of course) and dismantle a lot of the socialistic policies eventually, because their economic agenda was unsustainable. I'm not saying switch to unfettered capitalism, but if the reich were to have won the war, they would've learned quickly that socialism is unsustainable.
The labor-backed "Labor treasury certificates" were a genius idea, it was debt free glory. The elimination of usury and parasitic banks was what allowed for the economic miracle. It's amazing what can happen to an economy when you do that. They were shackled down by the Weimar republic, and the destruction of the banks/issuance of their own currency free of debt resurrected the german economy. And economy isn't 100% about the policies, confidence/morale of the people is HUGE when considering a functioning economy, and just imagine being a german citizen being bogged down by jewish international interests, when suddenly a government seizes power with nothing but the utmost love for its people and frees you from the shackles of the vampiric bankers…yeah, your morale would skyrocket. But the economy already began to sink before rearmament really kicked. Cradle to grave economics, the handout welfare states of socialism are simply unsustainable, policy would eventually override morale. Nazi germany would have to eventually separate from their name and tone down their socialistic economic policies.
The right wing cultural traditionalism/conservatism/pride was PERFECT though. Every single nation should strive to achieve such status as the third reich. Until that happens we will be stuck more or less in a limbo

You can have a nationalist state coupled with a free market economy. To be nationalist doesn't mean you have to be a socialist.
But that is a pipe dream that won't even be a realistic discussion until we have a white ethnostate of glory and brotherhood.

Who the fuck cares about that guy? The important thing was the pdf written by Chamberlain. It begins slow but it's only 48 pages so there is no excuse to not read it.

To be honest I was blown away by it and I don't think that you can understand NS without reading it because NS seems to be a bit contradictory on a rational level. But these apparent contradictions actually complement each other but it's hard to grasp (an artistic mind definitely helps).

If you take one thing away from this thread that is genuinely OC it's this little booklet.

Would homosexual couples have a place in National Socialism by becoming parents to orphans, thereby turning a potential degenerate into a productive member of NatSoc society? Assuming the homosexuals were normalized and carried the same values as a heterosexual couple would

No. Faggotry is degenerative to the mind. Diseases are spread at higher rates.

What IS (or should be) the role of women in a NS state?

In /polarchive/, one of the posts mentioned that National Socialism values women highly. i.e. Women are to raise and care for children, a job which is critical for present and future generations.

However, the post went on to say that women should be allowed to hold jobs, as long as their job did not interfere with the primary objective of taking care of the children. I'm in agreement with this statement, although personally, I think a woman should stay a housewife. Especially because trying to juggle work and family results in sacrifices being made in one or the other.

Should women be allowed to work? And should they then be allowed to vote? I know that instinctively, many of us will simply say "no" because we've seen what happens when we give women too much power. Would things be different with women in a National Socialist state?

Bump

NatSoc is a worldview and can work with various forms of government. GLR and the American Nazi Party didn't believe in using a dictatorship to restructure society as the Germans did (and Goebbles makes it a point to say the dictatorship would cease to be when the work is done and the National Socialist State is realised). Really, the dictatorship was necessary in Germany then to restructure the mess it was, but a proper system was being implemented before the kikes declared war for Germany saving Germans in Poland. Professional guild leaders would represent the people's interests through election based on profession, and these guilds would have power over the economic sphere of the Nation. All other governmental matters would work through the Senate, comprised of meritocratically chosen individuals, who elect their own replacements. The Chancellor would have supreme power, and he is elected by the Senate.
The way this system is held in check is by the principles of National Socialism itself, meritocracy being the primary philosophy.
That is the German System. Every county's National Socialist State would be different because every nation has different ethnic people in an ideal world. This is why it was so important to have the Germans in Poland, Austria, and Czech within the same nation, the German nation, where the German volk would work for Germany, and Germany would work for them.
America is a different place. Rockwell advocated winning political office, and not dictatorship, to change the system from within, while saving the ideals of the founding fathers. Trump is our last chance at this dream, but if he is stopped somehow, the only real alternatives left would be either race war or succession (thus, race war). There can be no NatSoc state that is ethnically diverse, but the mixing of the European people within America has created a brotherhood of whites, and we have yet to dream of our National Socialist State in these times. This is the same state every other country is in, with some exceptions, like the Nordic Resistance Movement, which has clear objectives. You're on Holla Forums, and so you're a part of this deliberation.
The important thing to note is that in principle NatSoc means meritocracy and the geographical separation of the races, so we can work for only our own, and our own Nation, which represents the heart of it's people.

I suggest you quit reading about those FBI-riddled groups and instead read Nazi-Sozi Questions and Answers by Joseph Goebbles. The answer to your question:

National Socialism views women as women and men as men, as Nature intended. Laws and restrictions would be different for each race, but as an amerifat, I hold the view that if a woman were to have a job, it would need to be a womanly job. A singer or pop idol is acceptable because she is feminine on stage, gives girls something to look up to, and inspires our men. Modelling fashion is another job I don't mind her having, or taking care of orphans, or nursing those without family to help. However, her primary job is as a mother and wife. Cooking for the family, cleaning for the home, caring for others, what her femininity pulls her to do, is what all culture comes from, and what all culture is for.
All the jobs I listed above have one thing in common that makes them feminine jobs: They preside over culture. All culture comes from the woman, and what men do for her.

Think back to the primordial civilizations that were either agricultural or hunters. The hunting civilizations would often worship a god representing the sun, sky, or eagle, a symbol of male vitality and eternal consciousness. As they hunted by daylight, this is no mystery. The agricultural civilizations would often worship a goddess representing the moon, earth, or snake, a symbol of feminine change, and birthing of life. As they studied the phases of the moon for their agriculture, this, too, is no mystery.
Now, the great nations were founded when the hunters found the agricultural people, and took military control of those people to defend them against other hunting tribes. This is known as a marriage of the gods, such as Uranus with Gaia and later Zeus with Hera. Symbolically, it's the Eagle eating the Snake, as the Sun rises from the night and destroys the moon. However, it is a new day, and the Eagle is never the same. In other words, the feminine aspect of the agricultural people gives the hunting people new meaning. The State is, therefore, a place in which a strong military protects the life-perpetuating and cultural force of their people, or the feminine aspect of their Nation which is why they ever became sedentary in the first place.

Now, I don't mean to say that women are natural creators, actually it's quite the opposite. What I do mean is that if they are to do anything professionally, it must be something cultural, and not within clerical or management duties. She must do what women do: smile, sing, dance, or care for others. She must show us what we are fighting for. But again, the most honorable thing for her is to do these things for her family. She is what binds the family, and thus the nation and national culture together. Your women are your race.
tl;dr let women be women and do womanly things while the men be men and do manly things.

True socialism can only work within an ethnostate. A welfare state has nothing todo with it.
He's preaching for his people to help themselves and each other. When there was starving homeless freezing to death on the mountains in the winter, all the state did was propagandize an event. Celebrities would go and give money/blankets/etc. for a few trinkets the homeless made, and that is the only place you could get them. They would show off the trinkets, inspiring others to do the same. So, in the end, the people helped their own while the homeless worked for their welfare.
THAT is True Socialism.

To understand some of the policy points of the NSDAP pamphlets by Gottfried Feder. Do note that he was at least somewhat fond of the Strasserite faction within the party.

That's no excuse for lack of eugenics.

...

Indeed -
HEIL HITLER

A couple of repubs here and there tried to push 'welfare-for-work' programs, and Finland has that 'livable income' thing, so maybe something like that.
Imagine the state (noncucked by then first of course) directly commissioning artists and musicians like they did for operas and chapels (US still kinda does this with music like all the weepy teary-arsed country written after ninerlevenz and stuff made specifically for military bands)
Or imagine going #FullRusskuh with literal paid shitposters and diggers. (though that would have to be low enough it weeds out punchclock types ala e-celebs, basically we go back to the 1700s idea of "civic service should be a civil service" instead of pumping out millionaire lawyers and lobbyists)
The problem with current US 'makework mcjobs' is they're either filling in as a pencilpusher or as they burger flippers in their cafeterias. There's nothing in between this tier and scienceomg research grants.
Tons of fucking crumbling roads and bridges that could use such 'sponsored fixes' though.
Also since you mention disabled and invalid, actually that would be a good argument for holding back automation. Keep them on as ticket takers and record filers and such. Then as they get bumped off replace with automation, so you have a smoother transition than DEM RAWBERTS R TAKIN' AUR JEERRRRBS
Pre-pozzed economist did a study that found more 'manpower' was wasted in seeking work and worrying about finances/applying and reapplying for aid programs than actually working for a decent chunk of the population (in that the bureaucracy, being staffed by quota'd retards instead of meritously selected retards, was causing more mental strains and stress than actually fucking working)
In other words, being "welfare queens" actually is their job because they spend so long waiting in lines and filling out paperwork and applications, pile on even more if they's got kids and/or are in ill health. That's a whole lot of nonsense and wasted energy on both sides that could've been spent elsewhere.

checkin' dese noice dubs that are kinda going along the same path as I wrote out after reading OP.
Even if it's something as stupid and simple as teaching some superstitious dumb-as-dirt hayseed like O Brother's Delmar how to fix playground equipment, the goal is welfare should be pushing you towards something, anything constructive.
Actually there's a funny and possibly unique problem to the US is that they have millions of "hoarders" who don't have the time nor health to clean shit up and sell it. You could put a lot of simpletons into productive enterprise working over those redneck barns full of old crap then finding buyers and mailing them out while at the same time cleaning and restoring and/or demolishing the buildings depending on what the owners wanted to do. Kinda like a flea market version of Amazon's used items market coupled with a cleaning service, minus the balls-out insane prices from people who forgot what the thing was really worth. It'd get a lot of "lost" relics and memorabilia freed up again for a couple generations. Most stuff like Overbid and half.com, see, they only deal in common everyday mass-produced items, you wouldn't go to these places to look at old coins or stamps or even music equipment from before the 70s. The hipsters that have flooded that sorta thing thanks to TV shows don't want to do any work, just throw trust-fund money at it and pay someone else to fix and clean these things. Doing it this way, after the end you've got a big multi-talented workforce that's just a little too "slow" to keep up with modern life but still saddled with a heap of useful skills. Well, now they've all found their preferred niches instead!
Just something I thought about watching all those old hillbillies complaining their children are worthless and don't care and will probably toss away their old vinyls.
basically, if there is some place nobody wants to do the job, then why not put the jobless on the job?
Anyway that's just one example but the same idea holds true for like the bridge situation, no one wants to work on it nor does anyone want to pay anyone to work on it, we'll just wait til it collapses and build a new one. Crony or pure capitalism, both can lead to this sort of impasse, but in NS the problem would be seen ahead of time and they'd pull together a small committee to handle it before it got that bad.
I recall Shröder had a sort of 'work voucher program' that tried to do this but idk what came of it after he left.

I couldn't stop laughing at this shit, especially imagining it with a heavy scouser accent. "Leebsheeet! Eeeyeent gon' to'rahait yer fifth! Ahnta teh bhagh yeh go!"
I don't have the appropriate images saved at the moment but I really want to edit the end to have Shrek come out yelling
WEHL YOU NAAHTTIE BASTAHDS STOP POLLUTIN' UP MAH SWAMP
goddammit where is that I need to alt that number up properly

^dis
not even the 'based' ones are viable. In the far distant past, yea, they worked because they had proper societal controls and weren't yet (((given free reign without moral consequence))) and basically got the 'straight mindset' "enforced"
Modern fags have never lived in this sort of society so they all can't be trusted, no matter how much the 'based' ones apply themselves. Starting in the late 1800s fags were found easily susceptible to (((their))) 'social reprogramming' and have not been trustworthy since. Even some commies like Engels were horrified by the ones in their time period.
Paedophilia became a fag community problem almost immediately after they started organising for "rights" marches
Really is just something wrong with their "wiring"

It takes a woman to lead a woman, and I think you could get them to remove their own right to vote, but the US would need a new Iron Anne first. Before Anne there was Phylis Schafly. Well, Anne's not getting any younger, but I certainly can't think of any conservative female that thinks similarly.