No.165505[Reply]
passing thought:
i find it notable how burgers and their propaganda arms / associates have gear-shifted to stating that "judeo-christian" values created the west, and not "anglo-franco" values that was the previously established and agreed core set of beliefs.
now people here obviously are gonna point out / already have pointed out the "judeo" part and how it's shifted it's own definition and placed itself before the christian part, but i don't think as many people here appreciate that the "-christian" part is still equally as supplantive and false, and is the same kind of wordplay that motivates traitors to hold the gates open as long as it's a christian, or that the bible is any kind of guide on how to build a civilisation (which if you look at most of the christian world, it clearly is not). it also doubles up as benefiting mutts, since there's no longer a distinct ethnic (or even racial) element to the beliefs; as if liberian judeo-christian-ness would achieve the same as the states did if it was given a fair shake. it's also got a tertiary unique sting, in that it specifically excludes other aspects of euro ethnic culture which have been tried and failed, such as italian, spanish or germanic values (sorry nazdups, but it amounted to nothing and failed every time it was tried, harsh truth cold fact) (and spain, you created latin america, you know what you did wrong)
just a thought. it's all quite mongrelised and subversive really.
45 posts and 25 image replies omitted. Click reply to view. No.165904
>>165902I remember having to read his book about the holobunga but I can't remember a damn thing about it
No.165906
>165702
brown
No.167172
>>165677>You would need to find a common agreed upon set of rules to have any sort of social cohesionThat's what I advocate.
I just don't know if coming up with a more fleshed-out ideology or worldview is feasible at a society-wide level. A system of linked intentional communities and groups of communities would at least be a step away from the atomization we're dealing with now and create a starting point for gaining social and political power. Coordinating different networks and building alliances might be the best we can do.
>>165702>I have noticed that a lot of anons here seem to dislike traditional truly right-wing states with proper aristocracies and Kings, know that this is the default and proper state of society when not subverted, also know that it took several thousand years for the Jews to subvert traditional Europe, they conquered America founded on enlightenment values in less than 30 years.I disagree with hereditary monarchies and caste systems that aren't based on race. If I have to be ruled over, I want aristocracy in the sense of rule by the best and am not big on rigid hierarchies. The problem is that even people who obtain positions of power based on merit can end up corrupting natural aristocracies, and then you're back to square one. There also needs to be a genuine emphasis on merit and higher aspirations, since empty populism just leads to lowest-common-denominator slopulism. There's a difference between standing up for the average Joe and venerating him like a god.
>>165902I'm something of a centrist myself. Feds hate it when people don't box themselves into easily pigeonholed ideologies where they can be more easily targeted for "deradicalization" efforts.
https://www.dni.gov/files/NCTC/documents/jcat/firstresponderstoolbox/141S_-_First_Responders_Toolbox_-_Mixing_Ideologies_Requires_Multipronged_Terrorism_Prevention_Efforts.pdf No.167248
>>167172>I disagree with hereditary monarchies and caste systems that aren't based on race.I agree, you should never allow an out group to be a part of your aristocracy let alone the state. It's the best of the people for the people.