[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / abdl / animu / builders / cafechan / tingles / vg / vichan / wmafsex ]

/pol/ - Politically Incorrect

Politics, news, happenings, current events
Winner of the 68rd Attention-Hungry Games
/d/ - Home of Headswap and Detachable Girl Threads

January 2019 - 8chan Transparency Report
Email
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Oekaki
Show oekaki applet
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, swf, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


<The 8chan Global Rule>
[ The Gentleperson's Guide to Forum Spies | Global Volunteers | Dost Test | FAQ ]

File: 603ffac79dce1b5⋯.jpg (1.25 MB, 1667x7346, 1667:7346, Infographic_LogicalFallaci….jpg)

File: 50bf29c8e2df829⋯.jpg (1.26 MB, 1667x6728, 1667:6728, Infographic_LogicalFallaci….jpg)

File: 616ef7d6f606101⋯.jpg (1.54 MB, 1667x8340, 1667:8340, Infographic_LogicalFallaci….jpg)

680a33  No.12683547

Long-Term Planning General #1

As part of an effort to bring order to chaos and ultimately triumph over this decline in society, this thread will be dedicated to long-term plans and efforts to improve board culture towards those ends. It's no secret that since the election, /pol/ has become more chaotic both on fullchan and halfchan. This chaos has distracted oldfag anons and it is a disservice to newfags who lurk the boards learning the culture. Basic rules of this general should be:

Present your case or refute another anon's case using logic. This board has seriously devolved in this regard. Anons rely upon group approval instead of logic to support their arguments. Basically, if you must resort to name-calling and innuendo, you automatically lose the argument as far as this general is concerned.

Infographics, OC, and new memes are welcomed. The memes and infographics have slowed down. Thus it is prudent to encourage their development.

Attempt good-faith participation and extend a hand to other anons. This board is extremely distrustful and paranoid, and it is a fact that paranoid and distrustful people can be as easily manipulated as overly trusting individuals. Therefore I propose the rule that anons give the benefit of the doubt to each other in this general, until bad faith is indicated. Standard OPSEC applies, of course, but since this is the internet, it can't hurt to give out a little trust on an imageboard.

Absolutely no calls for violence. Besides the fact that it's illegal, it's almost always leftists and government who incite violence in our ranks.

Long-Term Plan Suggestions

To get the ball rolling, here are some suggestions, which may be expanded upon. Please include your own.

Rebuild trust among anons. Since the election, anons have been mercilessly hamstrung by media observers, thinktanks, and behind-doors dealing of silicon valley tycoons. This has fed into paranoia of anons, and has caused us to attack each other and ultimately fragment our ability to act collectively. I strongly suggest rebuilding a coalition among all the rightwing, conservative, nationalist, traditionalist, and perhaps even centrist forces on the internet. Simply put, investing all our energy into one ideology and faction is like putting all our eggs into a single basket. Perhaps an easier-to-understand metaphor is that it is like, in strategy-game terms, investing all your resources into a single type of soldier; that means, the enemy can simply invest in a single counter-strategy and win.

Set a clear agenda. The biggest problem right now is that out of chaos, there is no real agenda to move towards victory. We have anti-porn threads, pizzagate threads, immigration threads, random scandal of the week threads, and so on. There needs to be a clear hierarchy of priorities. For example, preserving our race, culture, and traditions seem to be the primary goal here. Thus, all other topics should be subordinate to that basic directive.

Rethink ideological priorities. Going back to the previous two ideas, rhetoric which focuses on sowing distrust among anons and fragmenting our ability to work together should be refrained from and ignored. For example, nearly every thread on this board has someone calling another person a faggot, kike, or cuck. That is not productive. First off, it is an ad-hominem, seeking group approval to bolster your position instead of relying upon logical strength. Secondly, it does nothing to benefit the discussion being had. If you don't know how to argue logically, you shouldn't be on here. Similarly, all the anti-porn threads read like something that is way, way down the line of priorities. Focusing on porn isn't going to bring our race back, bring the west back from the cliff.

113059  No.12683666

>larp thread trying to hide that this board is a white genocide operation


d5e2a7  No.12683762

>>12683666

>sliding constructive discussion


23abf0  No.12683845

>>12683547

>Basically, if you must resort to name-calling and innuendo, you automatically lose the argument as far as this general is concerned.

This is the hurtbox. You're going to be called names, and honestly it should be encouraged to toughen the hide and as a shit test as the names typically used such as "prefix-cuck" encompasses a particular mindset in a targeted group's beliefs which more often than not are correct. Of course, criticisms should not solely be only name calling, but being called a name should not automatically discount someone faggot

>Infographics, OC, and new memes are welcomed. The memes and infographics have slowed down. Thus it is prudent to encourage their development.

Agreed, as long as they're not huge walls of text or MS Paint tier

>Attempt good-faith participation and extend a hand to other anons. This board is extremely distrustful and paranoid, and it is a fact that paranoid and distrustful people can be as easily manipulated as overly trusting individuals. Therefore I propose the rule that anons give the benefit of the doubt to each other in this general, until bad faith is indicated. Standard OPSEC applies, of course, but since this is the internet, it can't hurt to give out a little trust on an imageboard.

I agree, not everyone who disagrees with someone is a kike or shill. Shills, particularly hostile anons, or retards tend to out themselves in discussion by their own admission or through the language they use, and if they pass that threshold THEN they can be rightly attacked.

>This has fed into paranoia of anons, and has caused us to attack each other and ultimately fragment our ability to act collectively. I strongly suggest rebuilding a coalition among all the rightwing, conservative, nationalist, traditionalist, and perhaps even centrist forces on the internet. Simply put, investing all our energy into one ideology and faction is like putting all our eggs into a single basket. Perhaps an easier-to-understand metaphor is that it is like, in strategy-game terms, investing all your resources into a single type of soldier; that means, the enemy can simply invest in a single counter-strategy and win.

Most of those are already in league with each other save for the more "lite" elements. But there is a reason some of those groups are outcast, whether through their subversive watering down of essential /pol/ truths, outright hostility, or low quality of their viewpoints.


51af1c  No.12683984

>>12683666

satan gets it


680a33  No.12683996

>>12683845

>This is the hurtbox

You clearly fail to understand that namecalling doesn't make a valid argument. It doesn't matter what your justifications are, namecalling doesn't make something true. It's just that simple. If you can't argue using reason based on logic, then you fail to logically support your beliefs.

>Shills, particularly hostile anons

It's better to take the approach that it doesn't matter who's a shill on here, so long as the argument an anon makes is evaluated on its logic, the merit based upon logic will ultimately rule out disinformation and false ideas. Bad faith is an important distinction because it rules out spammers, and people undermining this process.

>But there is a reason some of those groups are outcast, whether through their subversive watering down of essential /pol/ truths, outright hostility, or low quality of their viewpoints

/pol/ "truth" is arrived at by an echo chamber of anons who are paranoid and attack each other for not conforming to axiomatic assumptions. In other words, it is very likely not truth by any logically derived means, because the methods to obtain it were sloppy. This basic observation alone should remind us that a coalition of rightwing factions is necessary to show us our shortcomings and mistakes in reasoning. People conforming to a viewpoint is the worst way to arrive at the truth.


7a64fa  No.12684085

Invidious embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>>12683996

Namecalling is the single most effective tool against any retarded, ideologically fanatic opposition. I'd like to remind you that Goebbels himself was furious at the moniker "nazi" and how they got portrayed in Allied media.

It's also why what Trump did (before he became full on le 4d chess) by getting accused of being various things and mocked mercilessly and just either dismissed or embraced the mockery in a way that always benefited him, as well as purposefully calling his competitors Lyin' this and Crooked that.


680a33  No.12684107

>>12684085

Namecalling does not determine truth. You seem to have a fundamental lack of comprehension here.


65e8ab  No.12684153

>muh fallacies

All of those are valid strategies for getting your way in various situations, and only kikes want to hold us to the standard of being perfectly correct, and transparent all the time.


65e8ab  No.12684166

>>12683996

>You clearly fail to understand that namecalling doesn't make a valid argument

That's not the point of namecalling, you fucking idiot.


3f496e  No.12684194

>>12683845

>This is the hurtbox. You're going to be called names, and honestly it should be encouraged to toughen the hide and as a shit test

It's just tiresome and pointless.

>(opinion)

>K-KIKE

>How am I a kike?

>FUCKING KIKE NIGGER UUHGUHHOHTRIU=Å%¤&RY&9 54y0+54

Yeah just fuck off.


680a33  No.12684383

>>12684153

Logic exists to bring us closer to truth. If you find that you cannot get to a place without resorting to deception, fallacies, and what might be called arguing like a lawyer, then you are not concerned with truth and simply want momentary power.

>>12684166

People who can't argue without resorting to namecalling usually have a thin skin and require the namecalling to conceal it. They use namecalling to invoke a herd behavior, and rely upon the protection of the herd because an examination of their beliefs reveals what they are.


65e8ab  No.12684421

>>12684383

>not concerned with truth

Exactly. I just want to win.

>namecalling to invoke a herd behavior, and rely upon the protection of the herd

A very effective method used by people who win, you fucking kike.


122200  No.12684453

>>12684421

Win what?


65e8ab  No.12684499

File: c6de35e285cca72⋯.png (19.09 KB, 615x105, 41:7, Hitler on lying.png)

File: f69186870b3bb05⋯.png (23.5 KB, 648x140, 162:35, Hitler's intent.png)

>>12684453

Everything.

Truth is of personal value only, and you don't owe it to anyone. If you're not saying whatever is most effective to gain power then you are not competitive. That's why honest politicians don't exist.


122200  No.12684523

>>12684499

Ok, and by being dishonest here, you've gained what? What have you won here by lying?


65e8ab  No.12684547

>>12684523

Where did I put lying and dishonesty as a value? I said to say whatever is most effective, and so did Hitler.


4fee96  No.12684572

>>12683547

That is a most exquisite board etiquette you have managed to summarise, indeed.


4fee96  No.12684582

>>12684153

>kikes want to keep us from chaotic, irrational and emotional posting and want to try and force us into making rational, empirically sound statements.

Do you honestly believe this yourself? Or am I talking to a bot?


fc2ae9  No.12684606

File: 34f62cdd31e1d0e⋯.jpg (75.48 KB, 720x720, 1:1, 34f62cdd31e1d0eb758ed2d20f….jpg)

File: baece52b108906d⋯.jpg (33.52 KB, 1080x979, 1080:979, 6135146.jpg)

File: 0acf2efe8154cda⋯.jpg (70.69 KB, 850x400, 17:8, eb670b61c3a7ae3409c3f0bc16….jpg)

File: a8544580f89f3a6⋯.jpeg (34.56 KB, 500x367, 500:367, humor-meme-nB9WBbIUQrJObI….jpeg)

>>12684547

This guy is a shill, probably a "WORDISM" faggot retard also because as this Anon says

>>12684523

In reply to faggots comment here

>>12684499

And then you get the reply

>>12684547

As you can see, according to this retard, it doesn't matter how the objective order of events played out but what you "name" the events after. So in this faggots reality there is no reality.


65e8ab  No.12684623

>>12684582

Do you honestly believe most people give a shit about rationality? Even most people here? They want to have their feelings validated, or be given new strong emotions, whether they be angry or happy. A very select few autists care about rational, empirical soundness. Hitler didn't rile crowds by being empirically sound (regardless of whether he was), he did so with grandiosity, and charisma. Goebbels declared that he would shut lying jewish mouths. That's emotional appeal, not "muh reason and logic".


65e8ab  No.12684644

>>12684606

>that post referencing

Jesus christ what a mess. You wanna take a second go at making your point so worth trying decipher? I get that you're trying to say I value lying over truth, but that's about what I expect an illiterate with a fucked up post like this to think.


2f19b1  No.12684677

>>12683547

You may have noticed by now that this thread was DOA, only barely kept alive by you and one other anon who, together, account for 10 out of the 20 posts so far. Here's why:

>If you don't know how to argue logically, you shouldn't be on here.

You also may have noticed the distinct lack of natsocs calling everyone a kike and a jew every other post, and that's on a good day because it's usually every post. That's because that's all they know how to do and, therefore, want nothing to do with your thread since you basically told every natsoc on this board to gtfo. Still, I am surprised that they haven't flocked in to turn a sincere attempt at a thread into a nazi dumpster fire filled to the brim with Hitler memes, swastikas, and hardy sieg heils.

This thread will never succeed. It will remain on life support until you tire of sustaining it and decide to stop replying so that it may sink to the bottom of the catalog where it belongs. Sorry to sound like a dick about it, but just giving it to you straight.

Also, sage.


0d1e9e  No.12684680

Posts like those ITT are why this board is a far shittier place than it probably has ever been, barring the roach era. No discussion, no worthwhile, thoughtful effort put in, just mini Hitler spouting off how he's going to reform the whole world and if anyone tries to discuss concrete ideas with him, well, they just aren't as committed and don't deserve to be in his presence. 8 still has far superior threads to 4 and watch how I'll get shat on for even mentioning halfchan but the schizoanons, mini hitlers, PURE ARYAN WARRIORS, and outright shills have all ruined board quality and culture. Any given thread derails within about 5 posts. It's not worth my time to make threads here at all anymore.


65e8ab  No.12684692

>>12684677

>>12684680

>waaaaah! people aren't how I wish they were!

>I'm leaving!

Logic and reason fags are so butthurt by reality they just run away. Fucking hilarious.


06a088  No.12684701

File: 0bcfb6e7046a7d3⋯.jpg (25.38 KB, 384x568, 48:71, Dwy3GFOWsAEc0Z9.jpg)


2480bf  No.12684709

What to do with nonwhites?


2480bf  No.12685164

Sad


c160a4  No.12685209

File: 9946cebdfc896ed⋯.jpg (80.75 KB, 682x677, 682:677, yeet.jpg)

>>12684153

The idea of "logical fallacy" is pure enlightenment garbage. Irrationalism gang. YEET


dd3a83  No.12685282

File: 4e5a26fc4d194b1⋯.png (433.08 KB, 600x562, 300:281, 0ce.png)

File: 6f7289ff2e63dda⋯.jpg (56.74 KB, 620x641, 620:641, bananas.jpg)

Chaos is our friend you goon.


c160a4  No.12685297

>>12685282

maximum chaos will ensure our victory


f4efa6  No.12685298

>>12684383

Getting there, close but no cigar. You have ideas that aren't necessarily horrible, you just don't know how to do high level formatting to make your shit readable. Plus, and this has been mentioned a few times already, you're not emotionally engaging. I'm not going to train you on propaganda right now, but doo keep working on it.

>>12683845

You had me at hurtbox FAGGOT.


7b870d  No.12685448

So the best plan you faggots can come up with to save the white race is to jerk each other off arguing about who is better at arguing? Fucking pathetic. You want a priority to focus on?

FOCUS ALL EFFORTS ON USURY

Nothing else matters as much right now, and it just so happens to be the easiest and least controversial subject to red pill normalfags on. Even AIDS faggots and commies can grasp this and want to fight against it for our benefit. I've explained it to literal fucking 8-years-olds in front of their liberal teachers without any problems, and I have the social skills and charisma of a bar of soap. What the fuck are your excuses? Oh yeah, you want to circle jerk about how smart and tough you are on your containment board you call a "hurt box" so you can feel special instead of ever actually doing anything. None of you will ammount to shit if you keep up this mentality. You're all a fucking disgrace to the white race and should be ashamed.


c160a4  No.12685479

File: ab326f3e9c8246b⋯.gif (197.33 KB, 528x402, 88:67, spurdo spree.gif)

>>12685448

>Getting baided into shouting at retards on the CIA's Mongolian throat singing rehearsal assembly register

Don't get baided.

International finance and corporations should be a focus, but, as you say, any old retard knows to hate bankers and corporations, there are things that only an intellectual elite are capable of tackling, so why waste excessive time on low-hanging fruit?

The esoterics of white genocide and the NWO in general need more awareness – most people, including (supposedly intelligent) nationalists, don't even understand the true nature of Abrahamism and how deep the conspiracy runs. We're still at the point where dumb faggots still think that 300 years of liberal masonic-enlightenment values, or 700 years of christianity, are the defining factors of tens of thousands of years of Aryan history despite the fact that neither are Aryan in origin.


c160a4  No.12685495

File: 672961a493e4d75⋯.jpg (69.84 KB, 952x960, 119:120, anime fbi.jpg)

>>12683547

>Absolutely no calls for violence. Besides the fact that it's illegal, it's almost always leftists and government who incite violence in our ranks.

Didn't realize that OP was a fucking retard.


7b870d  No.12685650

>>12685479

You mean how Christianity is the slave's religion, Judaism is the master's, and Islam the golem's? How they are all part of a larger, semetic, occult agenda with the goal of realizing one possible end to a left hand path? That the left hand path and the right hand path are not what people think? That the Aryan path understood bit only this, but the racial soul, the hierarchy of nature, and what it means to live in harmony with nature?

More importantly do you think the common man can grasp all of this in our lifetime? Before shit really hits the fan? Of course not. Do you think anyone can hold any real power without the support of common man? For now, they aren't ready for much more than usury. It's something they can understand, and awareness of it always produces results. Milk for the babes, meat for the strong men. We need to make the masses into strong men before they will be capable of absorbing and understanding the full truth. What follows the collapse of usury is what creates strong men.


dd3a83  No.12685829

>>12685495

There's a difference between planning for and understanding violence, and publicly calling for violence to total strangers online.

The first is rational, the second is effeminate attention seeking by people that are lightning rods for feds.


680a33  No.12685931

>>12684421

>I just want to win.

Win what, exactly? Power? Then what will you do with an ideology and movement built upon falsehoods and reinforced with lies? Nothing productive. You will be swept away like all others in history who discarded truth in favor of personal power.

>A very effective method used by people who win, you fucking kike.

This is how the left argues. You have made no argument.

>>12684499

>Truth is of personal value only, and you don't owe it to anyone

Truth is of value to society. It is universally important, because a society cannot function effectively in the dark.

>>12684547

You advocate for dishonesty. You somehow think it helps you to win, when in reality it only breaks down social trust and leads to anarchy.

>>12684623

>Do you honestly believe most people give a shit about rationality?

Do you want to live like third-world ooga-boogas or do you want to live in a civilized society? It is very easy to drag society down to their level, the war we are fighting is to preserve this elevated society from descending to that level of anarchy.

>>12684677

>Sorry to sound like a dick about it, but just giving it to you straight.

That is merely your perception. There are some anons on here who read this post, some who reply. This post is for those intelligent and motivated anons who want to remoralize and help this board's culture.

>>12684709

It's simple really. Those nonwhites with a working culture tend to harmonize with us and aren't much of a drag on our society. The nonwhites who ARE a drag have broken cultures facilitated by politics and ideology. Thus, the answer is to undermine those politicians and political parties which keep them disordered, and to spread ideology to those races so that they can heal their cultures from within. If all races have success, then conflict evaporates, and from that point a constructive dialogue can proceed on what to do next.

>>12685298

This isn't meant to be emotionally manipulative. It is meant to be constructed. It is a sad individual who wants to be emotionally manipulated into doing something productive.

>>12685448

There are many sad people on this board who are really just lonely people with no power in their lives, clinging to totalitarianism to compensate for it. However, some can be reached, and should be reminded that there are ways to make this board better.


c7ef55  No.12686166

>>12683547

The way u laid this out really shows who the shills are op. Good work hopefully this can foster discussion


dbdfdd  No.12686173

Fuck off woman.


4a0787  No.12686226

>>12683666

Get behind me satan this is a good post. Too much fragmented shit talking on this board has gotten tiresome. We need to chill the fuck out for a moment and regroup, not just shitpost and shit all over each other


c1d979  No.12686234

>>12686226

t. leftypol

You cant "regroup" an anonymous board with vague rules you Jew shill fuck redditor


65e8ab  No.12686318

>>12685931

The difference between me and you (aside from you being a kike) is I advocate for whites using all tools available to them, while you demand principles and standards be upheld because "lying is always wrong and will lead to destruction", a bunch of horseshit meant to paralyze people and keep them from doing what needs doing any way it can be done. Fuck yourself.


4a0787  No.12686337

>>12686234

Why not? Simply shifting board culture a bit to something slightly more constructive and less snarky doesn't sound like some impossible feat. I don't think that sounds too jewy or shilly. It's exactly that kind of negative knee jerk reaction we're talking about. Obviously there's going to be heated and passionate discussions on /pol/ but constantly attacking each other and accusing each other of being the enemy doesn't help anything. Believe me when I say seeing us infighting is exactly what jews and leftists want. Besides, this is /pol/, everyone here should know pointless bickering with no problem resolutions is for women and niggers :^)


5a1cd7  No.12686347

File: 83e528dbfdab1e0⋯.jpg (288.35 KB, 1400x1536, 175:192, Salami.jpg)

>>12683547

>I strongly suggest rebuilding a coalition among all the rightwing, conservative, nationalist, traditionalist, and perhaps even centrist forces on the internet. Simply put, investing all our energy into one ideology and faction is like putting all our eggs into a single basket.

Finally, someone who gets this. I cannot believe that so many anons are unaware of the damage done by pushing away possible supporters on any pretence. We KNOW ((they))) want us to do this and yet fall for it anyway.

>>12685931

>Win what, exactly? Power?

Yes. "Make the enemy live up to his own rulebook" is an Alinsky tactic FOR A REASON - make the other side tie themselves up (in our case, in our own values of truth and honor) while you can work underhanded. This is why the judeo-left morphs from promoting tranny rights one minute to Islam the next without blinking. It's not rocket science. And you want only the highest appeals to reason, backed with impeccable credentials, to be offered in rebuttal? "War is deception" - Sun Tzu.

>>12685931

>It is a sad individual who wants to be emotionally manipulated into doing something productive.

Define the value of anything (love, family, nation, race) without recourse to emotion.

>>12685931

>clinging to totalitarianism to compensate for it. However, some can be reached, and should be reminded that there are ways to make this board better.

You surely jest. "Just go watch some tv my bros, chill, maybe take life less seriously. Forget that you are being targeted for genocide lol"


d7049d  No.12686359

A gun show is coming near my town next weekend. Should I buy a shotgun or should I buy 1000 rounds for my AR. 400 doll hairs expendable cash. I'm leaning towards the 1000 rounds (about 300 dollars), but I want to complete the trifecta of having a shotgun, rifle and pistol.


680a33  No.12686391

>>12686318

You continue to talk like a leftist, calling people names to try and motivate others to support you. You rely upon herd mentality, which means you are intrinsically weak and powerless. You expose yourself through your actions and lack of good faith.

>>12686347

>Yes. "Make the enemy live up to his own rulebook" is an Alinsky tactic FOR A REASON

This thread general is about coming to truth through reasoned, logical debate. If you want to go out among the enemy and fight them, that is something else entirely. If your intent is to spread deception among the board, then you should be aware that all movements founded upon a bedrock of lies eventually dissolve away. Truth creates permanence.

>Define the value of anything (love, family, nation, race) without recourse to emotion.

This is a categorical error. Logic is meant to find truth. Those concepts you described are based on the subjective. What are you not understanding about the premise of this thread general? If you want to propose an action or way to benefit the board's culture, then use logic. Right now you are advocating for using Saul Alinsky's rules for radicals against us. Do you not see that?

>You surely jest.

People who lack control of their lives will seek out ways to compensate. Opining for a totalitarian dictatorship of one way of accomplishing this. What do you think happens when that dictator takes power? He's not going to wipe out all the dark-skinned people. He's probably going to wipe you out for being weak. The west got this way because white people are fundamentally weak and make bad decisions for cultural, historical, and possibly genetic reasons. No other race on earth commits suicide as effectively as white people do. What then, is the solution? Become stronger, and learn from those mistakes.


c160a4  No.12686409

File: 588c0c24a431afa⋯.jpg (110.09 KB, 764x448, 191:112, honor the bowl.jpg)

>>12685829

>doing is different to advising

Wow we've got a genius over here.

>The first is rational

Another "muh rationality" faggot. Where do you retards keep coming from?

>the second is effeminate attention seeking

<Thinking that social shaming works on /pol/

>by people that are lightning rods for feds.

<Only a pig would say that violence is good, by the way did I mention that 5 words earlier I said that violence was good?

Where's your rationality gone?

>>12685650

>More importantly do you think the common man can grasp all of this in our lifetime?

Giving a shit about normalfags–aka NPCs aka lemmings–is your first mistake.

>We need to make the masses into strong men

Not gonna happen as long as the system exists to wipe their ass.

>For now, they aren't ready for much more than usury.

The masses care more about mass migration, thus white genocide, than they do about usury. If you want to pander to the stupidity of the masses then at least focus on White genocide.


5a1cd7  No.12686413

>>12686391

>Right now you are advocating for using Saul Alinsky's rules for radicals against us.

I am stating that you scorn emotion, and that this is wrong and harmful to the cause since every action taken with commitment stems from emotion.

>>12686391

>The west got this way because white people are fundamentally weak

This statement is demonstrably untrue, simply addressing the era after WW2 it took almost 3 generations of saturation bombing from media, entertainment, church, academia, politicians, and still whites are in no way subdued, in fact our very first steps to reject the post WW2 dream are causing so much horror that every tactic available is being wheeled out against them.


65e8ab  No.12686417

>>12686391

>You rely upon herd mentality, which means you are intrinsically weak and powerless.

The herd is where the power comes from, dingleshit. You are nothing alone. But of course what really matters is being perfectly consistent, and rigidly accurate with every appeal to logic and reason, so you'll die a happy man.

>using Saul Alinsky's rules for radicals against us.

>us

There's no fucking "us" here. On an anonymous forum like this everyone is an opponent. There is no single identity, thus no unity, thus no standard you can safely apply to the whole board. That's the same as saying one should treat niggers the same as whites. Fuck yourself some more, idiot.


7a64fa  No.12686526

>>12684107

You're right on that one, but the truth never won any election. Okay, maybe ONE election, and you know the one. But statistically speaking, you need to know how to tear a new one into your opposition's fat, stupid bottom, and how to stop them from doing the same to you. Killing, attacking or boycotting someone doesn't destroy their fanbase. Provoking your opposition constantly into making mistakes is what kills ideologies. The Reich knew this and never let their own people suffer the humiliation, but other movements weren't so lucky.

It doesn't matter if you're lying, the truth will only win over people who are willing to listen to it. If you want a moral victory and to end up a martyr for your own cause, I fully respect you, but this doesn't win us any points with the general populace - in fact I daresay that the ignorant, smelly, stubborn and naive general populace is more important to us than to our current opponents. Don't change their perspective, just make sure that our opponents get lambasted mercilessly.


bd0a16  No.12686836

ITT anons so blackpilled and seething with hatred that they write poetic essays on the merits of rudeness, essentially arguing the tired strategy "we must become kikes." Anons sperging out because other anons don't want to be as mean as them. D&C be damned! If you anons truly put winning at all costs, you could put aside calling your brothers names to unite and win. As if calling kikes, feds and shills names is an important and effective tactic. All you're left with is using name calling to shut retards down. To quickly end their arguments. But everyone knows that calling a retard names will only get him riled up, because he is a retard. It's as if these anons don't realize that if all us "real white regular ol' anons" started being kind to each other, following rules by sticking to the topic as best as possible and focusing on truth it would be significantly easier to spot kikes, shills, and feds trying to derail, D&C, and spew disinfo. It is almost as if these are the very things that set us apart from "them."


0c629e  No.12686863

>>12686409

I want that flag.


bd0a16  No.12686873

>>12686836

To continue, I'm sure many of the "truth oriented anons" ITT would agree that using a no holds barred strategy to win against our oppressors is perfectly fine. However, it is not a successful strategy to use for communication on an anonymous board because it wastes resources.

All we're doing on pol is transferring information to each other's brains. Lying and calling names is not efficient for information transfer. It ties up resources and this is why bots, shills, kikes and feds do it. Seeking and spreading truth on an information board available to anyone with an internet connection should be the highest goal. The only trickery that should be used is stuff to throw off bots, scaring off obvious outsiders (shitskins and leftists), and ignoring retards completely so they grow bored and seek lower hanging fruit elsewhere. Anything less is stooping to the lowest common denominator.


000000  No.12686881

>Absolutely no calls for violence.

Some of you anons are alright… don't go to CNN Headquarters today.


c42077  No.12686889

>>12683547

Frankly, the only way we can get our philosophy into the general sphere is through optics. We cannot go out and reveal our full power level in a full-blown 1488 parade. We need to redpill the populous slowly and overtime. None of us were redpilled in a day, I remember the sickness and aversion I felt when researching Fascism for the first time. We need to gradually expose people to the truth, and that can be achieved through a trickle of information that paves the path to the redpill, or we can play into NPC indoctrination by sewing the seeds of ethno nationalism to get blacks away from Whites cuz whitey evil.

I'm not sure how to go about it, but we need to do something about our optics.


680a33  No.12687137

>>12686413

I scorn emotion as a tool for determining truth, particularly in this thread.

As to white people, I believe a distinction should be made between Americans and Europeans. A number of European nations have demonstrated weakness, such as the Nordic nations, Britain, and Germany. Americans resist, but much of our trouble comes from a weak mindset of self-hatred. This latest generation shows how far self-hatred can go.

>>12686417

YOU are nothing alone, apparently. I am quite confident in my singular ability. Then again, I'm not a leftist, and you argue very much in favor of their psychological foundations.

>>12686526

I'm talking about truth as applied to this thread. We are discussing (or should be) long-term planning and deceiving each other would run counter to that.

>>12686873

This is basically what I was saying.

>>12686889

This is very important. By discarding optics, /pol/ played into the left's hands and became the boogeyman they wanted.


2480bf  No.12688197

>>12685931

>It's simple really. Those nonwhites with a working culture tend to harmonize with us and aren't much of a drag on our society.

>…and to spread ideology to those races so that they can heal their cultures from within. If all races have success, then conflict evaporates, and from that point a constructive dialogue can proceed on what to do next.

Go on… So far you're still too vague


5f3d45  No.12688850

This thread promotes healthy ideological discussion and logic based arguments! It deserves to be higher up on the catalog to increase posting quality – something I'm sure I, and many others, are guilty of for infringing upon with our frequent/infrequent shitposting at the expense of those we ridicule. It may be a simpler read and conveys a quick message easier, but honestly, debates shouldn't have to devolve into shit-posting/ad-hominem arguments, this just sows the seeds of discord and chaos, and aids the shills.

And if you are truly black-pilled, go to the self improvement threads, because no doubt your demoralized dogshit will be difficult to differentiate from a standard shill's, and bring down board quality with ease.


2480bf  No.12688878

>>12688850

The biggest issue seems to not having a consistent rhetoric to address issues other curbing the influence of the Jews. We all get that, but how do we get to a world full of ethnostates. At least we all agree to wanting that, right?


2480bf  No.12688891

>>12688197

Although what I quoted here, could easily be misinterpretation as civic nationalism… Which is why elaboration is required.


2480bf  No.12689478

Obviously we need everyone going back to their homelands, but especially nonwhites.

Why is it so dead in here. Is OP the only one that can think?


5bf188  No.12689540

>>12683547

too long, didn't read. I don't long term plan because I want to die every day anyway.


dad817  No.12689542

File: 3d710319668c1f3⋯.png (255.5 KB, 1500x755, 300:151, Kai King 7.1.png)

>>12683547

>Set a clear agenda.

The end goal is the billion year Space Reich, and it will be glorious, brothers.


65e8ab  No.12689571

>>12687137

>I am quite confident in my singular ability.

To what, stand alone against unified groups? Then you're an idiot. Of course I already knew that.

>leftist

I thought namecalling was against your ideology. Sounds like someone besides me is trying to rally the crowd to their side. What happened to your confidence to stand alone?

"Muh left/right" isn't a fucking argument anyway. It's a false dichotomy perpetuated by jews who want to be able to drop anything they don't want whites doing under the category of "left" or "right", dependent on the persuasion of the person they're dealing with. I don't give a fuck about that. All I care about is what works. That's the third position. Understanding the laws of reality, and working within them; not wishing they were different because because I want them to be, is what characterizes the people who win in this world.

>>12689542

>space reich

But, don't you understand? We can't have that, because that would be collectivist, and therefore, leftist, and therefore wrong. Only individuals are valid. /sarcasm

OP is either a kike, or a retard lolberg.


2480bf  No.12689635

>>12689542

but how


65e8ab  No.12689644

File: 9415c79a8a8ac41⋯.jpg (7.45 KB, 265x190, 53:38, db23f42ee799bbf2f2f815bf1b….jpg)

>>12689635

Obviously by trying to attain perfect empiricism in argumentation. Never propagandize, because that's leftist, and wrong, like nazis.


2480bf  No.12689732

>>12689644

Haha very funny but if OP is so completely wrong according to you then what is right? Pretty sure there's some sort of misunderstanding here but I'm too lazy to read carefully right now, but maybe he actually is a civic nationalist and I spooked him and he'll never post again. Who knows


2480bf  No.12689737

>>12689571

>lolberg

I'm not sure if I'm still libertarian. Once you remove civic nationalism from libertarianism you just end up with national socialism it seems.


65e8ab  No.12689769

>>12689732

>completely wrong

About what? He's right that namecalling isn't an argument, but he's wrong that it has no positive use towards one's goals.

>>12689737

I was an Anarcho-Capitalist for 2 years, till I realized there are racial groups in the world with no interest in my ideals. That's when it became obvious that one should pick a side and do whatever it takes to achieve victory over the opposition, who is doing the same thing.


dd3a83  No.12689849

File: e806bae23e31d27⋯.jpg (28.97 KB, 500x618, 250:309, pipe.jpg)

>>12686409

Look how cool I am mom.

I'm posting edgy pictures, online !


2480bf  No.12689873

>>12689769

>it has no positive use towards one's goals

Personally sure. But this thread is about rhetoric, and obviously your general rhetoric shouldn't be for violence except for niggardly behavior and such


65e8ab  No.12689896

>>12689873

>obviously your general rhetoric shouldn't be for violence

That's not a true statement, as evidenced by the very next word being "except". This is why principles of civility are fucking stupid. Use what works. Genghis Kahn would tell the occupants of cities that if they did not surrender he'd kill everyone. It was very effective.


2480bf  No.12689932

>>12689896

Being evil is effective.

However having exceptions to not being violent except with animals is civility, and also effective.


2480bf  No.12689940

>>12689896

>says "That's not a true statement"

>references only half the fucking statement.

I'm not sure why you are even being tolerated because it's actually obvious that you are a shill or completely retarded.

Of course, I just realized that the reason no one is really calling you out is because the point of this thread was to bring some reform and make the general rhetoric of this board a little more healthy.

And that was supposed to be have done that by reassessing what the generally agreed ideology happens to be or really is.

Niggers and kikes like you are why we have a breakdown in civility in the first place.

After being shown to be illogical, we don't need consensus to say you're a fucking retard. I'll say it myself, because it's self evident.


65e8ab  No.12689958

>>12689932

>being evil

What's evil about Genghis Kahn securing power for his people? "Evil" does not have a single, universally agreed upon definition, tinker tot. Grow up.

>>12689940

Maybe you should be more accurate with your language. Instead of saying "obviously such and such is true" only to immediately qualify it as untrue, you stop and sort out your thoughts, fuckin idiot.


2480bf  No.12689967

>>12689958

How about stop being autistic


65e8ab  No.12689972

>>12689967

Butthurt faggot lolberg.


2480bf  No.12689973

Ugh even an actual autist would be able to understand.

EIther this guy is completely beyond retarded or some extreme kike doing whatever they can to undermine any actual progress, which this thread is clearly capable of, as this anon pointed out.

>>12688850


2480bf  No.12689979

>>12689972

You literally have no argument.

Violence (and violent rhetoric) is bad except in the case of dealing with animals and those that do not listen, and other obvious common sense scenarios

Conquering a nation and raping all their women is bad. Why are you even bringing up Genghis Kahn? Go suck muzzie dick elsewhere.


65e8ab  No.12689982

>>12689972

>retarded or some extreme kike

Hey, watch it with the name calling!


65e8ab  No.12689991

>>12689979

>violence is bad

Why?

>Conquering a nation and raping all their women is bad?

Why? Are you fucking 5 years old?

>Genghis was a muslim

Jesus christ, you moron…


2480bf  No.12689994

>>12689991

>Rape is good

And you expect anyone to take you seriously? Blow your brains out you fucking kike


65e8ab  No.12690008

>>12689994

You're not being intellectually honest if you can't imagine a scenario where rape is beneficial. Morality is baby talk for idiot libertarians.

>Blow your brains out you fucking kike

You see, OP, when some is sure of themselves, or they can't use logic and reason, they will rally the crowd in attempt to get their way. He even expressed a wish to have me banned for my arguments. Your ideas are shit, OP.


2480bf  No.12690019

>>12690008

>a scenario where rape is beneficial

Why would you think such kikery would b allowed here?


65e8ab  No.12690024

>>12690019

It is allowed here. I've asked you legitimate questions, and your response has been to throw a tantrum. Cry more faggot.


2480bf  No.12690027

>>12690024

You dirty cunt, really think I'm going to ask you to explain how rape is beneficial? A true master of Bolshevism you must be.


65e8ab  No.12690032

>>12690027

>really think I'm going to ask you

I thought nothing of the sort. You're really going off the deep end now. You must be seeing red if you can't respond coherently.


2480bf  No.12690036

>>12690032

Well your argument is that rape is good in some scenarios. I asked how you expect to be taken seriously. That's a legitimate question.

What was your legitimate question? I don't recall any.


65e8ab  No.12690045

>>12690036

>What was your legitimate question?

What am I, your dancing monkey? Scroll up, fucktard.

>I don't recall any

Maybe you should take a break, and come back when you think straight.


2480bf  No.12690053

>>12690045

So you accept you have no argument? I said legitimate. If you think anything you said was legitimate, feel free to try again.


65e8ab  No.12690058

>>12690053

Anti-sage. You must not have any faith in the value you're bringing to this discussion if you won't bump the thread.


2480bf  No.12690061

>>12690058

No, my sages are when I don't believe I'm contributing anything relevant to the thread.

So you accept you have no argument? Good.


f796bd  No.12690064

>>12690036

>doesn't know that the answer is right in front of him. He can't get laid any other way.


2480bf  No.12690072

>>12690064

I have a girlfriend thank you very much. Anyways, since you are still posting without any argument you're basically shitposting and spamming


2480bf  No.12690074

What we need to understand is how constructive dialogue works.

We want to approach mutual agreement in some way, and that can only be accomplished with mutual understanding.

Those that refuse dialogue must be removed from society.

Those in the world that kill others and do other nefarious things; they can almost even get away with it for some time if they engage in some dialogue.

But those that refuse dialogue, they are the problem.

And especially those that refuse dialogue, and also happen to be murderers, well we gotta bomb those motherfuckers.

That's why we bomb terrorists. See, I never said all violence is bad!


65e8ab  No.12690086

>>12690064

Zing. But, seriously, that's a legitimate answer for some people. In genghis Khan's case it served many purposes: troop morale, strengthening his threats against the enemy, and probably many more.

>>12690072

He was talking about me, you dumbass.


2480bf  No.12690092

>>12690064

Oh my mistake. If you didn't hop IPs, or something, then what's the answer. Other than that I'm getting trolled?

>He can't get laid any other way

Oh shit. These are incels I'm dealing with. Incels are devoid of logic. Sorry I forgot


1a8c3c  No.12690098

>>12683547

> it's almost always leftists and government who incite violence in our ranks

>Rethink ideological priorities

Leftist spotted.

You will all be killed.


2480bf  No.12690102

>>12690086

>Zing. But, seriously, that's a legitimate answer for some people.

No it's not you fucking idiot. There is no such thing as incels, unless you're in some sharia country or something. In today's day and age, you can basically import Russians and impregnate then for 5 years when they get their citizenship and leave.

As far as history goes, it depends on the context of any particular event but as far as determining rhetoric for today and moving forwards, history wouldn't be relevant; at least not in this regard with respect to figuring out if rape is ever okay. Not in today's world; it's never okay.


2480bf  No.12690115

Not about to do a full analysis, but this 2480bf fellow only seems to be interested in subverting discussion.

Sorry dozens of replies shit up the thread, but here's a summary

I challenge the notion that one can personally believe violence is okay but having the rhetoric of violence is always bad.

This fellow devolved the argument into violence is okay, rape is okay, etc… What the fuck?


65e8ab  No.12690117

>>12690102

So you went from rape is wrong (without a rational argument as to why, which is a good propaganda tactic, kudos) to rape is wrong only in certain contexts (ooo, now you're on my side, bad optics, man). Keep moving the goalposts, faggot.Eventually you'll have nowhere to run.


2480bf  No.12690118

I mean 65e8ab fellow. Lmao.


65e8ab  No.12690121

>>12690115

>but this 2480bf fellow only seems to be interested in subverting discussion.

I agree with this.


2480bf  No.12690125

>>12690117

I said rape is wrong. Then I clarified that rape is wrong in today's world. I didn't move any goalposts. But that's all you've been doing evidently


65e8ab  No.12690135

>>12690125

>I said rape is wrong. Then I clarified that rape is wrong in today's world.

Those are not the same thing. "Today's world" is a specific context. You are completely braindead, and it is funny to me.


2480bf  No.12690137

>>12690125

And I'm pretty sure rape is always wrong, forever. But I'm open to some possibility that in some specific context that I can't think of that maybe some rape that happened would be okay, because maybe it wasn't actually rape, etc

Like I said we are talking about rhetoric in today's world. What the fuck are you talking about again? Other than derailing the thread?


2480bf  No.12690141

>>12690135

The entire context of this thread is in today's world. Ironic that you accuse me of being braindead


2480bf  No.12690145

>>12690121

Do you really? What is the topic of the discussion that you want to have? What is it that you want to even talk about, that you think I'm subverting?

We already shit up the thread, just keep responding and making yourself look retarded. It's a free world.


65e8ab  No.12690148

>>12690137

>rape is okay when it isn't rape

So then you're back to rape is wrong, and all that tapdancing you did was for nothing.

>>12690141

But I don't agree that rape is objectively wrong in all cases, even today. Try to keep up, dingus.


2480bf  No.12690149

>>12690148

> I don't agree that rape is objectively wrong in all cases, even today.

It is though.


65e8ab  No.12690154


2480bf  No.12690160

>>12690154

Purposefully violating another's free will is bad.


2480bf  No.12690162

>>12690154

Now your turn. Why would rape ever be good?


2480bf  No.12690169

There's a ton of reasons you can pick for why rape is bad. Most people don't bother to question it sure, but there's basically an infinite amount of coherent logical philosophies that reach the conclusion that rape is bad.

Tell me about some philosophies that conclude that rape is good? Other than Judaism, Satanism, Atheism, etc?


65e8ab  No.12690176

>>12690160

Pfff. The NAP is faggot shit. Taken to its logical extreme you can't even create people because they can't consent to their being born.

>>12690162

Already gave 2 examples.

>>12690169

>muh philosophies

Nature doesn't care about rape. Good and bad are concepts with differing meanings from one person to the next. You can't universalize it. Context is always the deciding factor.


2480bf  No.12690180

>>12690176

>Already gave 2 examples.

You gave zero legitimate examples. I've already invalidated you at every turn. If you think I haven't, then feel free to try again.

>>12690176

>Good and bad are concepts with differing meanings from one person to the next.

Congratulations, you just described Judaism, Satanism, Atheism, etc…


2480bf  No.12690186

>>12690176

>Taken to its logical extreme you can't even create people because they can't consent to their being born.

Um yes you can. Spirits/entities choose to incarnate into the physical realm on the condition that they forget everything the moment they incarnate effectively betting on your ability in being able to come back to the realization of what your life's purpose was

What the fuck is 'NAP' by the way?


2480bf  No.12690190

"Non-aggression principle"

Oh, sounds stupid. Threats of aggression are pretty useful and not immoral.

Once you have provided disclaimer, it's only natural to follow through on your threat of aggression.

How else do you get rid of Jews or anyone that won't stop subversion? Self defense doesn't work. Kikes never fight their own battles and always get someone else to do it.

Self defense only works on the puppets, but (threats of) aggression can work in cutting the strings.


2480bf  No.12690192

Countering my own sage because this is actually totally relevant

>>12690190


65e8ab  No.12690194

>>12690180

And here, again, OP, is there can be no peace on this board. This retard and myself are mutually agreed upon enemies. He categorizes me as someone that should be stifled (even though he's supposedly against the violation of another's free will), and so I classify him as an obstacle to imposing my will upon the world.

>>12690186

>Spirits/entities

Pic related.

>I'm not sure if I'm libertarian

>What the fuck is 'NAP' by the way?

You're not.

>>12690190

>Threats of aggression are pretty useful and not immoral.

>Purposefully violating another's free will is bad.

Pick one, brainlet.


2480bf  No.12690210

>>12690194

How do threats of aggression purposefully violate another's free will? They have the choice to accept or reject my threat. There is an opportunity for dialogue and deescalation.

There is a chance if there is a willingness.

>And here, again, OP, is there can be no peace on this board. This retard and myself are mutually agreed upon enemies. He categorizes me as someone that should be stifled

I never said you should be 'stifled' '''in fact I am the one repeatedly encouraging dialogue***

>imposing my will upon the world.

Sure, as long as you don't violate other's will.


23abf0  No.12690213

>>12684194

>>12683996

You both didn't seem to read the other part of my statement:

>Of course, criticisms should not solely be only name calling, but being called a name should not automatically discount someone

Just saying kike or shill doesn't get you anywhere, but saying those words doesn't automatically discount you if you use it in a critique towards a poster.


65e8ab  No.12690222

>>12690210

>They have the choice to accept or reject my threat.

And no threat would be carried out? So you're a paper tiger. Useless. Prepare to be steamrolled by those who do carry out their threats. Or destroyed by people who call your bluff.

>I never said you should be 'stifled'

>I'm not sure why you are even being tolerated

>Blow your brains out you fucking kike

Liar.

>Impose will without violating another's will

That's literally the NAP you called stupid a minute ago. You are a remarkable idiot. Bravo.


168bf9  No.12690226

>>12683666

Demonic trips of disinformation.


2480bf  No.12690242

>>12690213

I'm demonstrating a case for when name calling is okay, in dealing with this fellow chronic shitposter my apologies, I have a lot of experience in aggressive debating and just go on auto pilot

When someone is self evidently acting fallaciously or just devoid form logic, then that's when you call them out on their bullshit. At this point you are entitled to employ any sort of sensational bombastic rhetoric to get your point across, not for the sake of the person who you are talking to but for the lurkers. It's also for the small chance that the other person, if they were an honest person, might realize that something they did cause distress in someone else and that they should assess what they are doing, to say the least.

There's no room for some sort of consensus and banishment, especially since we are anonymous.

Making shills and retards explode in their own idiocy to expose themselves is more effective, and fun! Sometimes it takes, a really long time. The disease of liberalism (Judaism, Satanism, Atheism, etc…) has perseverance on it's side, along with subversive fear tactics of disinformation. Not much else.

>>12690222

Stop being retarded. I said 'How do threats of aggression purposefully violate another's free will? They have the choice to accept or reject my threat. There is an opportunity for dialogue and deescalation.'

If they accept my threat, as in heed my warning and disclaimer you absolute asspie retard, you really need to improive your reading comprehension. being able to understand what others say requires you to think about what you read, not me elaborating every fucking sentence while holding your hand. fucking brainlet

they will back down and perhaps attenpt dialogue.

If they reject my threat, and think it is a bluff, then I will follow through with my threat and there WILL be violence. And it will have happened through everyone's consensus. Another's arrogance is their implicit consensus to basically do whatever I want, within reason and depending on the context of course..

Oh and this has nothing to do with NAP. Obviously.

Name calling isn't stifling lmfao. That's me calling you out on your bullshit. I'm still here encouraging dialogue aren't I? I can't say the same about you.


2480bf  No.12690270

>>12690242

>their implicit consensus

*their implicit consent

I need to sleep


65e8ab  No.12690280

>>12690242

>I said 'How do threats of aggression purposefully violate another's free will? They have the choice to accept or reject my threat.

From the point of view of the recipient of your threat, do you think the threat is moral or immoral? The only reason they'd comply is because they think you're willing to carry out what you define as immoral. Is it moral, in your opinion to intentionally benefit from immoral acts you don't actually commit?

Also, is threatening a child the same as threatening an adult? Children rely on their parents to survive, so a threat from the parents to, say, abandon the child, is a life or death scenario. Are threats of this nature moral?

>If they reject my threat, and think it is a bluff, then I will follow through with my threat and there WILL be violence.

So, you'd just carry out the violence anyway, ignoring that you think it immoral? This is some jeeeewy rationalization of anti-social behavior, man. Giving some a choice between following your will or theirs, and then attacking when they follow theirs does not absolve you of the act! Absolutely astounding.

>Name calling isn't stifling

No, you never stifled me, and that wasn't my accusation, you olympic pilpuler. I showed that you 'want'' me stifled, which is in conflict with being against the obstruction of another's free will. This is so much fun.


168bf9  No.12690281

>>12686359

If you live in a neighborhood, go for the shotgun. If you live in a rural area, $300/1000 rounds?

I thought I was getting a bargain at $440 a few years ago. I've seen standard military-surplus XM193F go for over .50/rnd.

If it ever hits 15 cents, I'm buying ammo like it's gold @ 600. Sell 50,000 rounds for a $14,500 profit when the next liberal becomes POTUS.

Shit, buy as much as you can and let's meme AOC for POTUS in 2020. Fuck it. Talk about acceleration. When her policies drive the price up to $5 bucks per bullet… I make $250,000.


2480bf  No.12690297

>>12690280

Listen you godamnged brainlet, I'll explain very carefully. I said 'Threats of aggression are pretty useful and not immoral.'

Let me remind you on what we are talking about in terms of what is 'immoral'

As I said, 'Purposefully violating another's free will is bad,' immoral. That is why generally speaking, violence is immoral.

But threatening violence is not immoral, and if someone calls your bluff, then in their arrogance they are consenting to your violence.

Threatening makes sense when the recipient has an understanding. It is a part of dialogue, and as I said, the first thing one must ensure is to have mutual understanding. Once there is mutual understanding, threats of aggression can be used to move towards mutual agreement. Otherwise, one should try to agree to disagree (but sometimes that is not an option, but it can always potentially become an option, through more dialogue).

So talking to a child is okay if you can ensure there is mutual understanding (while some argue that children are not capable of fully understanding actions and consequences and etc etc)

Keep trying to poke holes in what I say, this is fine. It doesn't do you any credit though. Even a fallacious subverter can be useful.

>So, you'd just carry out the violence anyway, ignoring that you think it immoral? This is some jeeeewy rationalization of anti-social behavior, man. Giving some a choice between following your will or theirs, and then attacking when they follow theirs does not absolve you of the act! Absolutely astounding.

Why do you think it would be immoral? At that point there is no violation of anyone's free will. If an appropriate disclaimer (the threat) is made, then one has the free will to respond as they see fit, as they would in any situation where their free will is not being violated.

>No, you never stifled me, and that wasn't my accusation, you olympic pilpuler. I showed that you 'want'' me stifled,

Nice job moving the goalposts. Okay, so how did you 'show' me that I want you stifled? I don't want you stifled because time and time again I encourage dialogue. Keep trying honey, you're retarded attempts at being coherent are almost cute.


65e8ab  No.12690303

>>12690297

>But threatening violence is not immoral, and if someone calls your bluff, then in their arrogance they are consenting to your violence.

Absolute kikery, holy fuck! This is beautiful. You just told me that it's morally neutral to threaten someone with violence to get them to do what you want, and then carry the violence out when they don't comply, all because they had the option to obey. That is fantastic. I love you.


2480bf  No.12690311

>>12690303

>all because they had the option to obey

No. All because they have the option for further dialogue.

They are within their right to respond with their own threat of aggression, one more aggressive than my threat.

And then this can escalate until someone bluffs or there is violence, or maybe a deal is made, perhaps through some dialogue, etc.

Welcome to diplomacy. Brainlets need not apply.


d7049d  No.12690315

>>12690281

The thing is I have a M&P9 shield and a standard as fuck AR-15 with 3 mags a piece always ready but I do live in a neighborhood. Might end up grabbing a 1000 .223 for the cheap and pick up a poorfag shotgun. Though you do have a good idea of buying a ton of 5.56 in case prices skyrocket or I'm limited of how much I can get at a time, but I don't live in a cucked state (Stand your ground and castle laws are in my state so I'm blasting any nigger or anyone else that comes into my house)


2480bf  No.12690316

I mean when you have a planet full of Ethnostates, how do you think they will interact with each other?

Though Globalist treaties? Or though Bilateral relations? And if a party is not willing for Bilateral relations, then whoever has more might can attempt unilateral action through aggressive and threatening rhetoric, as I just described the mechanism.


680a33  No.12690317

>>12688197

Okay, it sounds like you want an example. Take the blacks as a textbook case of a race transformed into a caricature of itself by ideology and political corruption destroying a race's culture. Blacks are a prideful people, and care about face. Therefore, a good route would be to find conservative or rightwing blacks out there (Hoteps for example) and start a dialogue with them, try to explain your ideology in a way which would benefit their race through independence and inner strength. Appeal to their pride and need to save face, and remind them of how low their race has sunk recently (and they would probably agree if you were sympathetic). Basically, you have to listen to what they need to be independent, and give them the tools (ideology, ways of seeing the world) and then facilitate their ability to network with other like-minded blacks. Then their reach grows, and other blacks start to follow them. They start to fix their problems, and in several decades you would start to see the nigger problem decline as blacks start to take care of their own affairs. Given half a century to a hundred years, blacks would not be so much of a thorn in our sides anymore.

At THAT point, it becomes possible to talk about the future of both of our races.

This is how we constructively eliminate threats to our race. Going around beating each other can calling each other niggers and crackers doesn't really work. It doesn't get to the root of the problem. It also has the advantage of defusing the left's incitement of blacks towards our genocide.

>>12689478

That may come to pass. Unfortunately, we are in no situation where it can happen in the near future. We have been maneuvered into a position which makes us inextricably tied to other races, for the purposes of inciting conflict. This is why ethnic nationalism is premature. It may become viable in the future, but it isn't tactically sound presently. Right now we need to spread the message of nationalism itself as a positive, erode the stigma of it. Polarizing the discussion into ethnic versus civic nationalism only causes this greater objective to fail.

>>12689571

>To what, stand alone against unified groups?

I've done it all my life and succeeded. Because I am strong-willed and do not back down. I am not a weakling who needs a mob behind me.

>I thought namecalling was against your ideology.

I carefully worded it in a way to avoid namecalling. It was also intended to see how you would respond to it. You have failed that test by behaving as I thought you would. You are handicapped by leftist psychology. You need to accept help in that regard.

>>12689732

If you believe civic nationalism is wrong, that's fine. You should explain and defend your position logically. That's all I demand of this thread. My position is that you shouldn't polarize nationalism, because that's how it fails.

>>12689769

My position is that namecalling has to positive use towards finding the truth. Truth is part of the purpose of this thread, specifically refining ideology and arguments.

>>12690194

And yet you are on a board which allows dialogue. So talk to him and work out your differences logically, or ignore each other and let others have fruitful conversation. This really isn't difficult.


2480bf  No.12690321

>>12690317

Welcome back. I was worried you won't come back

>You should explain and defend your position logically.

Dude civic nationalism leads to race mixing. Do you want niggers and muzzies fucking little white girls

Oh and I'm really tired, will respond seriously later, or sooner.


2480bf  No.12690322

>>12690194

>Pic related.

BTW I wanna see that pic


65e8ab  No.12690328

>>12690311

>respond with their own threat of aggression

That has no relevance to the scenario we were discussing, my man. Here's where it started:

>>12690190

>Threats of aggression are pretty useful and not immoral.

A threat of aggression initiated by you is the topic of discussion. I'm not here to tell you what is moral or immoral, but I know that sentence doesn't jive with:

>Purposefully violating another's free will is bad.

Especially when you're willing to carry out the threat. That's just straight being violent and obstructing another's free will. You do need to go to sleep.


65e8ab  No.12690331

>>12690322

>the joke

>you


680a33  No.12690336

>>12690321

>Dude civic nationalism leads to race mixing. Do you want niggers and muzzies fucking little white girls

Races tend to self-segregate unless they are being engineered outside of that nature. Your concern, therefore, would lie with the people employed at these organizations which engineer us to act against our long-term interests.

I also made a case to you: Polarization of nationalism only serves to undermine its ability to spread into public awareness. It is a hindrance. By making this about civic nationalism versus ethnic nationalism, you inhibit the ability of nationalism to succeed.


2480bf  No.12690351

>>12690317

>That may come to pass. Unfortunately, we are in no situation where it can happen in the near future.

Why not. Give it a try? I'm not even white myself. But I tell my parents almost every day to go back to our country and improve it and such. I'm opposed to civic nationalism but I remain in the west. Therefore, I accept being a second class citizen and vow to leave, but not before I take every other nonwhite with me

Everyone should naturally want an ethnostate for their own race. White supremacy, is okay, just as any race supremacy. Taking pride in your own race and ethnicity and wanting a homeland for your people should be within everyone's right.

This does leave the question of Israel and America. Europe is the land of white people, with ethnostate for certain sets of genetics or whatever. But shouldn't America be an ethnostate for natives? History aside, Amreica I would say is the exception to the rule. It can be some sort of Quasi-Ethnostate, subtly supporting the cultivation of white civilization through ideals and legislation (surely only smart white folk would be willing to live in such a country) with the premise of liberty. Perhaps America can be a springboard of liberty cultivation for other ethnostates around the world.

America is a minor issue. The greater issue is, should Jews be allowed their own country? Yes perhaps, but not on Palestinian land of course…

Oh yea, that leaves the mutts with no identity. If they aren't even pure enough to even come close to identifying with another ethnicity, nor can they develop their own particular ethonostate for their mix, if they really are that completely miscegenated, then maybe some areas can be reserved for them, like Commiefornia. Or they can be second class citizens.


2480bf  No.12690353

>>12690331

Well you got me there. Good one


17335c  No.12690354

>>12686318

>Doesn't care about his people

>Doesn't care about building a quality civilisation

>Thinks all accomplishments of the West are kiked - meaning Whites didn't build anything.

>Just wants to kill niggers

You know, as useful as you psychopaths are going to be on ropeday, the first people going into the oven is after the Jews is you. Eugenics is as important as racial purity - arguably more so. White trash, skinhead cretins are getting a bullet along with the traitors - because in reality, that's what you are. Now go read Siege some more like a good stormfag OK?


17335c  No.12690360

>>12690354

Meant for this fuckstick cartoonazi here:

>>12686409


65e8ab  No.12690383

>>12690317

>Polarizing the discussion into ethnic versus civic nationalism only causes this greater objective to fail.

So, you want "the big tent". Fuck off. That is a movement with no identity. Easy to subvert, and totally aimless.

>I am not a weakling who needs a mob behind me.

Watch it with that catty name calling, faggot. You're literally here trying to get people to think your way, and saying you don't care about having a collective. Pull your head your of your ass.

>You are handicapped by leftist psychology

Who are you trying to convince? It's not me, you know I have no respect for you and your idiotic statements. Obviously you want the crowd. If you even reply to me you know it's to get other people on board with you. Fucking hypocrite.

>namecalling has no positive use towards finding the truth.

Bullshit. If I agitate someone I disagree with into being inconsistent with their own statements, then I have helped to discredit the retard saying untrue things. Irrefutable. KYS.

>let others have fruitful conversation.

In other words, "shut up". Fuck you. I like what I'm saying. I think your conversation is shit, you /liberty/fag cuckold.


2480bf  No.12690386

>>12690328

>Especially when you're willing to carry out the threat. That's just straight being violent and obstructing another's free will. You do need to go to sleep.

How is this a violation of free will? I have repeated, over and over again, that if they do understand the threat/disclaimer, then they also have the free will to act.

PERHAPS you can say they have limited free will but that is not a violation of free will, at least not like rape. Someone who has zero control over a situation has absolutely had their free will violated, entirely.

But If you are responding you a threat/disclaimer, then you have some room to make decisions. You have free will. And as I said, you can respond with your own threat

This mechanism I'm describing explains pretty much all interactions between any interaction between people or entities like countries.

A prisoner can respond with the hunger strike, the threat of their own death. And the prison can respond with the thread of forced feeding and other such things.

Israel gives disclaimer to Syria regarding Iranian presence. Russia threatens back, bluffing until it was no longer a bluff, sending the S-300 missile systems. And the kvetching responding to earlier threats to deliver those missiles is basically Israel acting within their free will to attempt dialogue.

It's a tried and tested concept, it's how reality works regardless of whether you understand it or not.


2480bf  No.12690391

>>12690351

To reinterate, we want the mutts to just identify with humanity in general. They are the ones allowed to have 'individual sovereignty'

I mean we all do, but we have some responsibility to where we came from, thankfully. Responsibility gives meaning to life

Hopeful in the future, even mutts can come from strong cultures and traditions.

But for know, I think teaching them about liberty is their only hope. Lolbergs for the absolute mutts? What else do they have?


65e8ab  No.12690393

>>12690386

>do what I want

<no

>*smack*

That's what you're trying to pass off as allowing free will.


2480bf  No.12690395

>>12690336

>I also made a case to you: Polarization of nationalism only serves to undermine its ability to spread into public awareness. It is a hindrance. By making this about civic nationalism versus ethnic nationalism, you inhibit the ability of nationalism to succeed.

I disagree. I believe everyone has a reason to subscribe to nationalism… except mutts. Which is why I'm focusing on them


2480bf  No.12690400

>>12690393

More like

>'I do what I want or I will smack you'

<no I accept being smacked

>smack

Alternatively

>'I do what I want or I will smack you'

<If you do that you will accept that you are immoral and that means I can remove you from my soceity

>smack. removed from society

>actually I changed my mind, I won't smack you. Let's find a moral solution!

Or

>'I do what I want or I will smack you'

<Please don't hurt me, I'll suck your dick instead CUCKOLDRY

>no smack. gimmy succy


2480bf  No.12690402

I mean use your brain and find your own solution to the problem.

You still have free will, that's the fucking point


2480bf  No.12690405

This explains feminism being a shit test as well.

Just a threat, a bluff.


65e8ab  No.12690408

>>12690400

>'I do what I want or I will smack you'

<no I accept being smacked

>smack

That's the same thing! You are the aggressor in this scenario. It's the same the following:

>Have sex with me or I'll rape you

<no this is somehow consent to you…

>*rape*

My god, you are fucked up.


2480bf  No.12690409

And now my brain is accidentally realizing that threats of rape in response to feminism…. nah

Well I won't lie, this is a slippery slope. But it's just how the world works. A moral way for the natural world to allow might is right. At least free will isn't being violated…


2480bf  No.12690411

>>12690408

It is consent. Being a fucking brainlet is consent basically.

Instead of saying no, you pull out a gun and say

<try to rape me and you WILL get shot


65e8ab  No.12690412

>>12690409

>At least free will isn't being violated…

Keep telling yourself that, you psychopath.


2480bf  No.12690415

>>12690412

I provided the logic. You can say it's been limited (but as you said, simply being born in this realm is a limitation of Free will, and one consents to this limitation as a condition of their incarnation)

But it is not an absolute denial of free will. THAT would be immoral.

Limitation of free will is not immoral, it's the law of the jungle.

We humans have the capacity for dialogue, that gives us that much more room within our illusion of control.

I don't see how you refuted anything I've said


2480bf  No.12690418

>>12690411

>It is consent. Being a fucking brainlet is consent basically.

Well I'm being facetious here, obviously.

As I said, it's only okay if there is mutual understanding as the disclaimer/threat is made.

Without mutual understanding, even any limitation of free will is immoral, though I haven't thought about the understanding part that much.


65e8ab  No.12690420

>>12690415

>Purposefully violating another's free will is bad.

>Limitation of free will is not immoral

You are a drooling retard on the verge of raping someone because they consented to rape in your mind. Fucking lunatic.


2480bf  No.12690425

>>12690420

Sorry you can't understand the difference between Zero, 100%, and partial free will.

I've held your hand and tried explaining this very thing for a while know. Maybe if you actually wanted dialogue and not subversion we could have resolved our differences in understanding much much earlier.

>>12690336

Anyways yeah. I see where you are coming from; the rhetoric of National Socialism is violently opposed to CIvic Nationalism. There's no room for reconciliation here.

However, I do believe that having a peaceful rhetoric within the framework of National Socialism i possible


2480bf  No.12690433

Again I apologize. Me and the other chronic shit poster, 102 posts in this thread out of 160. Fucking embarrassing. I don't blame anyone for filtering both of us. Not sure if the discussion was fruitful, but I tried to continue the dialogue until an agreement was reached or until we agreed to disagree. That is what any honest person would do, attempt dialogue with whoever is willing… Or appears to be willing.

This civility is such a big weakness; really opens one up to subversion. But the highest standard of morality is surely worth striving for…


2480bf  No.12690440

>>12690420

>You are a drooling retard on the verge of raping someone because they consented to rape in your mind. Fucking lunatic.

That's the cost I get for entertaining you. Need I recall that you basically forced me to debate on whether rape is okay or not. I'm very impressed with your skills of kikery and subversion, really.


680a33  No.12690445

>>12690351

>Why not. Give it a try?

America erased the option for ethnic nationalism after it signed the Immigration Act of 1965.

Europe erased that option after it formed the United Nations, EU, and decided to "atone" for the "genocide" of Jews after world war 2.

In other words, the west has prevented that path from remaining viable for itself. Therefore, all that remains is nationalism, and the hope that people inspired to build their country up will either assimilate into it, or move back to their homelands.

>Oh yea, that leaves the mutts with no identity. If they aren't even pure enough to even come close to identifying with another ethnicity, nor can they develop their own particular ethonostate for their mix, if they really are that completely miscegenated, then maybe some areas can be reserved for them, like Commiefornia. Or they can be second class citizens.

You basically articulated a fundamental reason that ethnic nationalism is a dead end presently.

>>12690383

>So, you want "the big tent". …Easy to subvert, and totally aimless.

I already suggested this my first post: don't put all your eggs in one basket. Have multiple baskets with eggs. That's how you win. Your position is to adopt an ideology which alienates you from most of your allies in other races who share some common goals, and sets you against the rest as an existential threat. From the outset you choose a position which cannot win, and then you wonder why you are losing the war.

So try a different strategy. Big tent. More eggs, more baskets.

>You're literally here trying to get people to think your way

That is how a vain person thinks. I don't operate that way. I instead act for myself, and if my ideas are good, others may choose to act on them.

>Who are you trying to convince?

You missed the mark here. I am telling you that you have revealed your flaws to me.

> If I agitate someone I disagree with into being inconsistent

Logic doesn't work that way.

>In other words, "shut up"

If you lack self-control, I can see how you might take it this way.

>>12690395

You are thus polarizing it. Do you not see how causing infighting on an idea hinders the spread of its fundamental message?

>>12690425

I disagree. For starters I would argue that nationalism of any sort is born from the country it originates in and must remain localized to that culture. Thus, National Socialism must remain German and thus in Germany. Therefore it's a question of what American nationalism might look like and how we can invent something unique to our culture and history which ultimately enriches our people and pushes us towards greatness.


2480bf  No.12690486

File: 5cddcd263658725⋯.png (460.59 KB, 500x499, 500:499, ClipboardImage.png)

>>12690445

Okay I'll entertain you. If ethnic nationalism is no good (or too hard to implement), then why is civic nationalism good? It simply is not an option to me, as bad as communism or anything else.

>Races tend to self-segregate unless they are being engineered outside of that nature.

<Your concern, therefore, would lie with the people employed at these organizations which engineer us to act against our long-term interests.

YES, that is indeed the concern. Pretty much EVERYTHING is prone to subversion, and therefore not an option. As we have seen historically, anything prone to subversion WILL be subverted.

Ethnic nationalism is the one thing that is IMMUNE to subversion on the very face of it!!

If you say it is too difficult to implement or a dead end, then I say countering the subversion

Me engaging with the other shitposter, trying to attempt civility in the face of subversion lead to my mind thinking about if rape is ever good.

Give these kikes an inch and they will take a mile. That's the first thing we all need to learn.

>I disagree. For starters I would argue that nationalism of any sort is born from the country it originates in and must remain localized to that culture. Thus, National Socialism must remain German and thus in Germany. Therefore it's a question of what American nationalism might look like and how we can invent something unique to our culture and history which ultimately enriches our people and pushes us towards greatness.

I don't know man, sounds like a slippery slope.

>invent something unique to our culture and history which ultimately enriches our people and pushes us towards greatness.

Good luck finding (inventing?!?) enrichment that isn't (((enrichment)))) pic related. Each ethnicity has many cultures tied to it, but I'd be hardpressed to find any culture that isn't tied to ethnicity Some say even the culture of Turkey, and the Kurds for that matter, is fake because it's not tied to any real ethnicity Call it polarizing, but others will call it purging.

If Ethnic nationalism is not feasible, then what is? I acknowledge that it is, polarizing. But anything that works, tends to be. Philosophical truths tend to be very polarizing, especially when you have people diseased by liberalism and say things like. What's wrong with polarization anyways? Those that are arrogant cannot be help. The rest can be convinced; I don't see why not.

>>12690176

>Good and bad are concepts with differing meanings from one person to the next. You can't universalize it. Context is always the deciding factor.

It's one thing to say something is subjective, it's another thing to say that it has zero meaning until there is context. There are universal ideals, and it's through these ideals of good and bad that specific actions are judged. Yes specific actions are debatable for their morality, but generalizations and abstractions, ideals actually tend to be easier to place on the spectrum of good and evil. Yes there are negative ideals like hedonism that kikes actually believe in, but always paradoxically in the backdrop of some universally subjectivist view that denies any objective truth.


2480bf  No.12690498

>>12690486

Whoops didn't finish perhaps the most important sentence.

>If you say it is too difficult to implement or a dead end, then I say countering the subversion

If you say Ethnic nationalism it too difficult to implement or a dead end, then I say countering the potential subversion that comes at the risk of civic nationalism is much more difficult and beyond feasible.


2480bf  No.12690568

>>12690317

>Okay, it sounds like you want an example. Take the blacks as a textbook case of a race transformed into a caricature of itself by ideology and political corruption destroying a race's culture. Blacks are a prideful people, and care about face. Therefore, a good route would be to find conservative or rightwing blacks out there (Hoteps for example) and start a dialogue with them, try to explain your ideology in a way which would benefit their race through independence and inner strength. Appeal to their pride and need to save face, and remind them of how low their race has sunk recently (and they would probably agree if you were sympathetic). Basically, you have to listen to what they need to be independent, and give them the tools (ideology, ways of seeing the world) and then facilitate their ability to network with other like-minded blacks. Then their reach grows, and other blacks start to follow them. They start to fix their problems, and in several decades you would start to see the nigger problem decline as blacks start to take care of their own affairs. Given half a century to a hundred years, blacks would not be so much of a thorn in our sides anymore.

>At THAT point, it becomes possible to talk about the future of both of our races.

>This is how we constructively eliminate threats to our race. Going around beating each other can calling each other niggers and crackers doesn't really work. It doesn't get to the root of the problem. It also has the advantage of defusing the left's incitement of blacks towards our genocide.

Interesting exploration of these mechanisms of culture. I can accept this without resorting to civic nationalism.

I said earlier, 'I'm not sure if I'm still libertarian. Once you remove civic nationalism from libertarianism you just end up with national socialism it seems.'

I'm open to a sort of National Libertarianism. A free market within a border, but the rest of the world is fair game to fuck with, economically speaking. Call it Protectionism, Isolationism, Mercantilism, etc.

This is only for the USA, and Canada (which is unrecognizable from the original Aryan nation Sir John A. Macdonald had envisioned, even going so far as to declare the Asiatic principles of the Chinese an absolute threat to the culture of the Ayans). Every other country should have no problems with Ethnic Nationalism.

I don't see why any country would have a problem actually. The mutts can go to Vancouver, Toronto, Atlanta, California, etc.

The rest of the land will be dedicated to cities and colonies based on ethnicity. There's 50 states with some level of sovereignty, remember?

The mutts can be allowed in (or rather, allowed out of their containment cities) only if they support the notion of ethno states, regardless of the fact that they can't contribute genetically (although any mutt can become any race within a few generations of purifying. And hey, maybe the genetic diversity will provide more healthy genes. The potential is higher, and the risk should go down once there are stronger ratios for one or two ethnicities)Because face it, mutts are more likely to be genetically defective and less likely to receive compatible organs. Their existence is unhealthy and bad for any society. Facts.

But if they can't really contribute their genetics in a beneficial way (perhaps they can volunteer to some eugenics program where their children will be 50% mutt and 50% pure, then their kids will be 25% mutt and 75% pure and so on and so on), they can still always contribute economically, ideologically, academically, etc. Every individual has the right to their pursuit of happiness, that's what liberty is about right?


680a33  No.12690615

>>12690486

You seem to be trapped in a loop. You keep forcing a polarized civic nationalism/ethnic nationalism false dichotomy. All we know is that ethnic nationalism is a dead end because the west erased that option. Thus we have only nationalism left.

> then why is civic nationalism good? It simply is not an option to me, as bad as communism or anything else

This is because you are polarized. You did not think this through logically and are reacting emotionally. Pull yourself back and ponder this objectively.

Nationalism promotes the nation, and a nation is broadly defined as a territory of peoples with a shared culture, heritage, or history. Nationalism allows the interests of the people to be put first. Putting the interests of the people first is a major step in correcting the disease plaguing the west. What follows from that is ideological, which may be further defined.

Communism, by the way, seeks to abolish national borders.

>As we have seen historically, anything prone to subversion WILL be subverted.

This is a "perfect solution" fallacy. There are no perfect solutions. Black and white thinking of this type never solves real-world problems because the real world is full of complex systems and it is too computationally intensive (read: geometric growth) to work out a scenario with no losses.

>Ethnic nationalism is the one thing that is IMMUNE to subversion on the very face of it!!

Ethnic nationalism is not a possible option. It is promoted on these boards because it is the only option which cannot work. To put it bluntly, it is the path taken by your predecessors in the '80s and '90s, who failed, and it is the path which has been analyzed by government intelligence.

>If you say it is too difficult to implement or a dead end, then I say countering the subversion

The left has beat you to this 80 years ago. Again, dead end. Pick another road, or fail as your predecessors did.

>I don't know man, sounds like a slippery slope.

I like slippery slopes. They lead to innovative ideas.

>Give these kikes an inch and they will take a mile.

Take a mile of what, though? You argued on a board. Nothing was wasted here by arguing with that person, except time. Thus, you could always simply ignore him if that was a concern.

>but I'd be hardpressed to find any culture that isn't tied to ethnicity

Throughout history many empires have risen and fallen. Many cultures and ethnic groups grew and fell. We have plenty of time to evolve better cultures, the only issue is the direction we take.

>If Ethnic nationalism is not feasible, then what is?

>What's wrong with polarization anyways?

Nationalism. Nation first. Basic idea.

You polarize it by making it about an argument between two sides. Thus you take an already popular idea and split it in half, and lose the war. You see?

>>12690498

> I say countering the potential subversion that comes at the risk of civic nationalism is much more difficult and beyond feasible

You continue to make this a false dichotomy. Can you not see that error? There is simply nationalism. Ignore the split into two polar ideas.


2480bf  No.12690620

The biggest issue seems to not having a consistent rhetoric to address issues other curbing the influence of (((them)))

For the sake of civility, let's pretend to not be antisemitic.

<We have been maneuvered into a position which makes us inextricably tied to other races, for the purposes of inciting conflict.

And how were we maneuvered? Whatever forces this maybe, (even being so naive as to say it's all a coincidence due to the emergence of technology or whatever, can fit into a rhetoric of civility) we need to develop a rhetoric of self respect and responsibility. Slowly, or quickly, we introduce greater and greater responsibility going hand in hand with identity…

But to what end? Maybe we can all even agree that we need a stepping stone in between the present and the end goal of a planet filled with Ethno states and nothing else.

We basically even have the means to the end, the end being our stepping stone. But what shall it be?


2480bf  No.12690665

As a Sidenote, for those confused. The difference between Liberals and Libertarians is Equality. Libertarians believe only in Liberty, while Liberals believe in Liberty and Equality.

Equality only makes sense when you deny the objective notions of good and evil and say everything is subjective and the only good is (((equality))). Equal rights, opportunities, responsibilities, what? Well it's entirely bullshit and this breakdown/subversion of logic is how (((their))) agenda is pushed.

1/2

>>12690615

>we have only nationalism left

What does that word even mean? That's the problem to me.

>Nationalism promotes the nation, and a nation is broadly defined as a territory of peoples with a shared culture, heritage, or history. Nationalism allows the interests of the people to be put first. Putting the interests of the people first is a major step in correcting the disease plaguing the west. What follows from that is ideological, which may be further defined.

But I say, 'Each ethnicity has many cultures tied to it, but I'd be hardpressed to find any culture that isn't tied to ethnicity'

I say it's not an option because it's open to subversion.

>Communism, by the way, seeks to abolish national borders.

Oh I had the notion that all the resources are equally distributed, within a nation. I can even imagine a perfect world (very debatable of course) with capitalistic and communistic nations existing and trading in harmony, as long as they are Nationalistic and not Globalist.

The only problem of course, is being prone to subversion.

>This is a "perfect solution" fallacy. There are no perfect solutions. Black and white thinking of this type never solves real-world problems because the real world is full of complex systems and it is too computationally intensive (read: geometric growth) to work out a scenario with no losses.

You'd have to invalidate the notion that Ethnic Nationalism is perfect. I don't even see the argument for why you don't think it's feasible, other than the fact that it's "polarizing"

What's wrong with polarization anyways? You cannot assimilate the arrogant. Remove them from society, Good riddance. They will come back when they realize dying of hunger is no fun.

>Ethnic nationalism is not a possible option. It is promoted on these boards because it is the only option which cannot work. To put it bluntly, it is the path taken by your predecessors in the '80s and '90s, who failed, and it is the path which has been analyzed by government intelligence.

>The left has beat you to this 80 years ago. Again, dead end. Pick another road, or fail as your predecessors did.

Your going to have to elaborate if you want anyone to take that seriously. I don't even recommend taking that route at all though. Leftists are brainlets, and can easily be defeated. We can take over the whole world in a day if we can just settle on a decent ideology. It's fucking easy,

>your predecessors

I'm not even white. Don't get me started on how much I hate the country I was born in. Regardless.

>Take a mile of what, though? You argued on a board. Nothing was wasted here by arguing with that person, except time. Thus, you could always simply ignore him if that was a concern.

Um what. It's all a war of attrition with (((them))) and my mental state after this attrition was the consequence. Time and bodily resources. TIme is a huge thing. You think your thread is very special? I've ignored threads like this so many times; I have visions of think tanks and opening schools. I don't have time for this shit. But YOU, the OP, seemed very sincere and genuine in a LONG TERM PLAN. This, THIS is something that I can contribute to minimally (70 shit posts later…) and have maximum benefit. Your motives are sincere, so I shall impart you with my wisdom.

>Thus, you could always simply ignore him if that was a concern.

That's the other thing. I was simply practicing some civility, as you and this thread seems to encourage. It then turned into a proof of concept for when you should stop the civility. In ANY OTHER THREAD I would have ignored him. I did it for you anon.


2480bf  No.12690666

2/2

We agree that Ethnic nationalism is polarizing. We agree that polarization should be avoided, if possible. I don't see how polarization can be avoided and thus see Ethnic Nationalism to be the only goal.

In fact you even seem to agree that the end goal should be Ethnic Nationalism, once the populace at least accepts the notion of Nationalism (which I myself have a hard time doing. Too vague. And how can you define culture without ethnicity? You even say

>Putting the interests of the people first is a major step in correcting the disease plaguing the west.

The people? What people? There are ethnicities. Nothing else ties people together, other than the fact that we are all human (who fucking cares, except liberals, also libertarians!).

I'm simply having trouble with the notion of culture being devoid from ethnicity. Unless you mean religion, that would make sense. A culture devoid of religion, or lacking alignment to any ethnicity, is not a culture. Maybe some traditions and customs can come about, but why would anyone identify with them?

>>Throughout history many empires have risen and fallen. Many cultures and ethnic groups grew and fell. We have plenty of time to evolve better cultures, the only issue is the direction we take.

This does not help me understand your notion of culture being distinct from ethnicity (or religion, the only exception I can think of. Any convincing philosophy is basically a religion, so maybe a Perennial Philosophy based on National Libertarianism is a good direction)

>There is simply nationalism

What's that? Might as well say there is simply humans.

Which is something to go with actually. Perhaps you can say every Nation has a unique perspective on what it means to be human. Well something a little more loose than that, or we'll think citizens of other countries aren't even human.


2480bf  No.12690673

What I'm saying is Nationalism on it's own is too vague. That's why I say it's a distillery slope.

There is no stigma to curb regarding Nationalism until something more real is put into focus.

Nationalism is not an ideology unto itself, though you can have Nationalistic ideologies like Civic Nationalism, and National Socialism.

>African Alt-right Banal Blind Bourgeois Business Civic Communist Conservative Constitutional patriotism Corporate Cultural Cyber- Ecological Economic Ethnic Expansionist Integral Left-wing Liberal Mystic National-anarchist National Bolshevik National syndicalist Nazism Neo- New Pan- Plurinationalist Post- Racial Arab Black Korean White Religious Christian Hindu Resource Romantic Technological Territorial Transnationalism Ultranationalism

Those are some Nationalistic ideologies, according to wikipedia. So let's figure out the best one now, haha.


65e8ab  No.12690675

>>12690445

For a guy who wants rational discussion, you sure do feign ignorance, and weasel your way out of admitting when you're wrong a lot. A true politician. Keep up the civnat garbage and I'm sure you'll go far.

>>12690665

>In ANY OTHER THREAD I would have ignored him.

I doubt that, you incorrigible faggot.


c160a4  No.12692041

File: 12e94d6fa7eba16⋯.jpg (837.73 KB, 1920x1080, 16:9, william pierce on george l….jpg)

>>12689849

>optics cucking

>posting GLR, ultimate optics disregarder

You shills aren't too smart.

>>12690354

>using stormfag as slur

>using nazi as slur

>disparaging SIEGE

>can't even reply correctly

This board isn't a place for alt kike vermin like you. Go back to cuckchan or whatever shitty TRSodomite infected shit hole you crawled out of. You'll be cowering in the dirt shitting your panties when the time comes for action.


c160a4  No.12692050

File: 2b8fe365bdd5869⋯.jpg (76.93 KB, 481x314, 481:314, civic nationalism is globa….jpg)

>>12690673

>Nationalism is not an ideology unto itself, though you can have Nationalistic ideologies like Civic Nationalism

"Civic" nationalism doesn't exist you etymologically crippled nigger. Do you even know what the word "nation" means?

>So let's figure out the best one now

/pol/ has National Socialism long established as the superior nationalist philosophy. NS should be used as the base for any direction Aryans head in the future.


c160a4  No.12692054

>>12692050

>/pol/ has National Socialism long established as the superior nationalist philosophy.

/pol/ has long established National Socialism as the superior nationalist philosophy.*


680a33  No.12703101

>>12690620

>For the sake of civility, let's pretend to not be antisemitic.

The danger with abandoning civility in general and becoming, say, antisemitic, is that it acts as a mental shortcut for explaining things. What happens is that, rather than explain your reasoning logically to arrive at a conclusion which may be productive, people get lazy and simply blame jews or whatever, and no solution is ever really reached. Thus it's good to exrcise those muscles in your mind to become more perceptive and overall more of a threat to those in power who are screwing us over.

>And how were we maneuvered?

Europeans became arrogant after conquering much of the world, developing science. They allowed the idea of surplus to lead to decadence and forgot the importance of struggle. They became greedy and imported foreigners for cheap labor, and conned themselves into believing that unlimited greed was a good thing. There's always the expression, "you get the Jews you deserve" which in this case means, European hubris, detachment from reality, and greed paved the way for making enormous social mistakes.

>But what shall it be?

We have a counterculture to the left fomenting, and the only existential danger to it is ourselves. Attacking it from within. Remaining unified, supportive of each other's factions which are banding together to fight the left, is the strongest we can get. Polarizing ourselves over what amounts to meaningless minutiae is a gift to the left. This board has constantly attacked the right, the new counterculture, almost as much as the left. It really makes you think. The counterculture is the stepping stone.

>>12690665

>What does that word even mean?

Nationalism is nation-first, united by a people with a common heritage, culture, or history. Polarizing that definition is counterproductive, because it only makes the pool of nationalists smaller, and reason for polarization is power. Someone wants to be powerful, the leader, so they are weakening the base.

>But I say, 'Each ethnicity has many cultures tied to it, but I'd be hardpressed to find any culture that isn't tied to ethnicity'

Historically, Hellenism is an example of a culture not tied to an ethnicity. Presently, American culture mimics that as well. Peoples all over want to emulate American culture traditions, and this has been a vector for globalism.

>I say it's not an option because it's open to subversion.

Everything is open to subversion, so you must let go of that idea. It's counterproductive because you end up with no answers.

>You'd have to invalidate the notion that Ethnic Nationalism is perfect.

Become a biologist, and you will see that ethnic nationalism is imperfect because cultures are like animals in that they evolve over time and fragment from each other. America started as a very homogeneous nation, then a hundred years later it had a west coast, east coast, north and south. There is your answer. A world of ethnic nationalists would continue to fragment into tribes fighting each other for supremacy.

>What's wrong with polarization anyways?

Tea Party

Occupy Wall Street

GamerGate

Black Lives Matter

Yellow Vest Movement

Every movement polarized against itself fails. Polarization is a gift to opposition.


680a33  No.12703102

>>12690666

>Your going to have to elaborate

The immigration act of 1965 made it impossible for this nation to ever become an ethnostate. Americans choose against that path half a century ago. Once we allowed immigrants to pour in, we factionalized and tribalized the country into something which can never unify again to the point of ethnic nationalism. That's why it is a dead idea.

>I'm not even white.

The ideology of this board reached you, and yet in an ethnic nationalist view you couldn't ally yourself with the others, you are an opposing side to them. If you simply embraced nationalism, then you could work together with other nationalists and achieve a goal.

>Um what. It's all a war of attrition with (((them))) and my mental state after this attrition was the consequence.

I suppose my view was that, being a board, we can choose to reply or not, choose to read or not. It's not like a march or demonstration in public where you get forced to put up with nonsense.

>In ANY OTHER THREAD I would have ignored him. I did it for you anon.

I think I understand you. Would it be better to modify the rules so that we encourage each other to ignore anons who seem to be acting in bad faith?

>And how can you define culture without ethnicity?

You have to look to prior historical examples. Hellenism is a great example, and American culture, as I already stated.

>Unless you mean religion, that would make sense

Bingo. In old societies, ancient civilizations, religion was the unifier for many different ethnicities and allowed for a shared culture to develop. We live in a secular society now, so perhaps this is where the difficulty lies, what makes it impossible to see now.

>>12690675

>For a guy who wants rational discussion, you sure do feign ignorance, and weasel your way out of admitting when you're wrong a lot. A true politician. Keep up the civnat garbage and I'm sure you'll go far.

Lots of personal attacks and bad faith. Question: was anything gained from attacking me? Nope. Just a waste of time.


ce7cd6  No.12703185

>>12684547

This guy gets it.

>>12689478

>Why is it so dead in here

Shareblue is off for MLK day.

Instead of everyone arguing over what methods are best, why don't you all start showing your best memes and methods and let it sort itself out.


680a33  No.12703405

>>12703185

We did that in the leadup to the election, but chaos is still chaos and after the election this board has been degrading rapidly in quality. My intent is to try and refocus, by persuading fellow anons of certain suggestions.


55fda3  No.12703432

>>12683666

>being against white genocide is literally white genocide

dude no wayyyy *hits bong again*


55fda3  No.12703433

>>12683996

Confirmed for too autistic to understand the point of name calling or filtering people who argue in bad faith.


305948  No.12703446

File: e721ed63aa5aa3f⋯.jpg (42.44 KB, 600x447, 200:149, 421566_110052819134743_182….jpg)

OP is a boomer who doesnt understand the culture of this board.

There is a lot of shitposting mixed with serious discussion here. Shills and leftists who browse through the autism of /pol/ eventually swallow the redpill and become one of us. The state of this board is okay, minus the Trump loving faggots.

It was a better board in 2014 tho.


3be3b6  No.12703465

>>12683547

>calls for violence are illegal

newfag


2480bf  No.12714872

>>12703102

>The ideology of this board reached you, and yet in an ethnic nationalist view you couldn't ally yourself with the others, you are an opposing side to them. If you simply embraced nationalism, then you could work together with other nationalists and achieve a goal.

>yet in an ethnic nationalist view you couldn't ally yourself with the others,

Wrong. First of all I haven't yet tried to ally myself. It would be very easy. It's my own people that are the problem. Everyone has a problem, but themselves being the problem means a very different thing for each different people. Very complicated but maybe irrelevant. I'm not sure if allying ourselves is a priority as of yet. But the time is coming soon, just around the corner.

And I would say striving for ethnic nationalism is less polarizing than just Nationalism. At least there's an agreed goal that the ethnicity should be segregated. Otherwise it all seems so arbitrary. Although now maybe we are both slowly seeing what would be the answer to this.

>Nationalism is nation-first, united by a people with a common heritage, culture, or history

>Historically, Hellenism is an example of a culture not tied to an ethnicity. Presently, American culture mimics that as well. Peoples all over want to emulate American culture traditions, and this has been a vector for globalism.

>Bingo. In old societies, ancient civilizations, religion was the unifier for many different ethnicities and allowed for a shared culture to develop. We live in a secular society now, so perhaps this is where the difficulty lies, what makes it impossible to see now.

Interesting. I for one love Neoplatonism, and find that notions of liberty originate from those Hellenistic Societies. We all know Greeks invented Democracy, but there's a lot more there.

So some philosophy akin to a religion but secular is something that can bring a people together.

Anyways if this thread is still going then that's great news. There's many important things that need to be discussed; perhaps in time the necessary conversations will happen. I'm saging because I didn't get to say what I want to say, hopefully later I will bump properly. Especially that notion that we would continue to fragment into tribes. What we need is something that brings a people together. You can have different cultures, regions, traditions, etc being brought together with ethnicity. I mean it's always going to be something relatively arbitrary that is going to bring us together, ethnicity seems like the least arbitrary thing.

>I think I understand you. Would it be better to modify the rules so that we encourage each other to ignore anons who seem to be acting in bad faith?

Well there is the genetic fallacy, where appealing to authority and ad hominem attacks are generally fallacious.

An idea presented should be judged on it's merits. HOWEVER, if someone presents idea after idea, and disregards the (attempted) invalidations of their previous ideas, then that could perhaps be used as a threshold to judge wether one is acting in good faith or not. A simple rule to resolve this would be, one MUST acknowledge the faults of what one has already previously has said. And in fact, even after acknowledging, after many faults, one must acknowledge that they should ask questions and try to learn instead of brute forcing debates on arbitrary claims and moving the goal posts over and over.

Either way, one should be contributing on this effort to collaborate towards a greater (mutual) understanding

Basically, if someone who's is self evidently wrong isn't begging for forgiveness over being at fault so many times, they should shut the fuck up and lurk or expect to get filtered. Maybe I'm too harsh… But there's a certain level of maturity required to be involved in that collaboration of understanding. I try to give the benefit of the doubt, and I wait until people prove themselves to be immature (with no potential to change, that's the harder part to prove), but it seems most people generally aren't acting in good faith. Kikes, shills, or just brianwashed folk. Who knows.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / abdl / animu / builders / cafechan / tingles / vg / vichan / wmafsex ]