propaganda
Discord ID: 359509262872870912
1,370 total messages. Viewing 250 per page.
Prev |
Page 5/6
| Next
them disinviting a few people does not nullify the views they hold
yes, of course he did
the mechanics of NatSoc and Marxist socialism are wildly different
hence why the former is actually useful in some specific circumstances
he's not alt-right, he doesn't claim to be alt-right, nobody in the alt-right thinks he's alt-right
yes
do you want me to find one of the video clips?
it's been reiterated endlessly, even I know that and I can't stand watching him
also, yay blue \o/
I still dont know your basis on the claim that Alt-right arent white nationalists Nothing
yes, _all_ of the leftists do, most of the cuckservatives do, and a fair number of the alt-light do
that's a lot of people
no
I'm saying that it doesn't make him a member of a group or an adherent of an ideology that he isn't
maybe people looking in form the outisde might be confused as they often are, but the alt-right has pretty consistently been about race-realism and nationalism from my experience
god damn it, ninja'd
ok, but his form is a weak version of the form of what I was describing, not the form you were describing
I wouldn't
because it's the largest group, and nobody in the alt-right is MAGA right now
the last of that died with the strike on Assad
Richard Spencer is pretty clearly a white nationalist as well, so if you think hes the leader then how is the alt-right not white nationalist?
in the only alt-right that isn't the fever dream of rabid leftists
I think dicky is a fed and a moderate one at that
No real time to explain as im going to sleep
no, what you think is the alt-right doesn't exist
dicky may well be a fed, but it still doesn't mean that this 0 population movement you imagine is a real thing
the reasoning you've prevented so far (if I'm not wrong) is:
1. he's got bad tactics, therefore the movement isn't white nationalist
2. a load of delusional lefties think that Trump boys are alt-right, so they are
the actual self-identified alt-right
no
I'm not alt-right
and even those who are don't take him as their leader
Im "hooked on this conversation" because you brought it up Nothing, thats how this entire conversation started, and now you cant even back up your intital claim. Where did you explain to me how theyre not white nationalists?
please do
ill wait
thats is fucing retarded
That does not make someone not a white nationalist, and richard spencer is not the ultimate authority in the alt right
are you fucking dense, Richard Spencer is not the ultimate authority in the alt right, and I dont know wether or not he supposts interracial relationships or not, or wether he supports homosexuality since I don't pay much attention to him (youd have to point me to where he says that), but that does not mean the alt right is not white nationalist
the alt right has no leader it's an alliance of far right groups
from Libcucks to esoteric Super-Fascists
Who says he's the leader other than the MSM?
I don't personally know anyone who considers him a leader. Everyone I know thinks he's controlled opposition.
@Nothing again, you're going with "he pursues a policy which is harmful to whites, therefore he cannot be pro-white". Will you accept the generalisation of this which means that anyone who pursues a policy which is harmful to the white race is necessarily not pro-white?
Who says he is the leader?
@Nothing being your nominal leader does not give him control over the people
that puts me one for one against ol' Dicky
Isn't that what I've just been doing in this conversation?
anywho, back to the point
you're refuting someone's aim with the results of their action, which is retarded
The Alternative Right, commonly known as the Alt-Right, is a set of far-right ideologies,ย groupsย and individuals whose core belief is that โwhite identityโ is under attack by multicultural forces using โpolitical correctnessโ and โsocial justiceโ to undermine white people and โtheirโ civilization.
Nearly every online resource says this. Just because alt right.com says he's the leader, doesn't mean he is
Hat about TWP? Van guard america
Are they not also altright?
I dont think the people who own a domain get to decide everything about a movement, and altright.com looks pretty white nationalist to me regardless
i dont know where youre going with this
That's a bit of a stretch
hes right
no, action and wrds are two different things
He's still bringing people towards white nationalism, you're still just killing a dog
@Nothing you're fucking retarded
the difference is that one you're doing knowingly and one you're doing out of ignorance
I say again: Hitler was anti-white because he failed
how is he doing that, the neocons are opposed to him, theyre not white nationalist or any kind of nationalists
and you could say his actions lead to that because of his failures in ww2
Does Matthew heimbach call Richard Spencer his leader?
But by the definition of alt right he's still considered alt right? Correct?
The only person moving the goal-posts is you, the basis of your entire argument is that one guy in the alt-right has some questionable opinions
Is he actually in favor of homosexuality and race-mixing, can I get a run-down?
Because he coined the term?
@Nothing No, Hitler was saying "Hey man, you know what would really save the white race? [Insert WW2 plans]."
Both objectively wrong.
There's a new term now, Uberwhites, and all white people are members and I'm their leader
which allows him to control the people how?
So, the movement doesn't stand for their common goals and defining features, it stands for how effective or not their leader is?
Pretty much everything I know about the alt-right comes from listneing to Fash the Nation and the Daily Shoah, am I doing it wrong?
So because one man speaks publically, he decides how the movement feels?
No, he may be swaying public opinion but it doesn't change the core of the group
The only thing I can find calling Richard Spencer the leader of the alt right is a HuffPo article
Is that where you're getting this?
Not at all, I'm trying to figure out where you are gathering he's the leader. Just because he owns the domain and coined the term.
@Orchid yes, you should get your info on the group from verified journos on twitter, not the most influential thought-leaders within the group
yes, he coined the contraction and was the first big public figure
he's the best known and the one they can associate that way
that's it
Kaeperick was outspoken against police brutality, easily the biggest impact any black had in getting people talking. So is he the leader of BLM?
Talcum x? How is he the leader? He's not as popular or big in the media as kaepernick so how could he be the leader
Was Charlottesville really a disaster? Seems like they successfully got their point across
the alt-right haven't effected any policy change yet
what they _have_ done is turn large numbers of people pro-white, which is more than any other contemporary US group
sure, they aren't the most effective group in the world, but they're the most effective group over there
Why do you think nobody took them seriously?
fucking reread my post, then kys
god damn this is retarded......
I honestly don't believe you're arguing in good faith right now
the alt right isnt performing literal magic, so their movement is garbage!!!!!1111
bad faith
Me: The alt-right isn't as effective as some groups, but it's the best contemporary group in its location
You: OH WELL IF THE ALT-RIGHT IS FUCKING PERFECT THEN WHY TRY ANYTHING ELSE?!
no, thats spot on
Alright i think this is enough from you Nothing, you are really paranoid and your arguments are downright retarded, I'm gonna have to let you go
yep
Lmfao
wew
Was interesting...
He's probably gonna have an aneurysm now, I genuinely couldn't understand his logic
I'm pretty sure that by the end of it he wasn't trying to reason about it
Spergs gonna sperg...
Lol
Ss educated in pagan occult
The man had a unique and novel vision, even for a man of the Reich, didn't he.. It's a shame things turned out the way that they did..
Good heavens did humanity miss the train..
I like that quote
It's Jared Taylor
Theyre the same thing
To put it simply, yes they are the same thing. ย Fascism and National Socialism were two ideologies used in Italy and Germany, ย those ideologies both have the same inner essence/soul but differ in some exterior features since Italy and Germany are two different nations/people's.
what we follow here on this forum is that same essence/soul that was behind National Socialism and Fascism. A lot of people get confused with this point because they are overly concerned with the outside appearance or features of Fascism or NS and associate themselves with that instead of pealing off the exterior ( ideology) and discovering the interior/essense ( the worldview). ย
We call ourย worldview Fascism but we could just as easily call it something else, a lot of people just refer to it as the truth. The important part is that both National Socialism and Fascism were ideologies that were used to make German and Italian society become more in harmony with nature/ the truths of the world. ย We here on Ironmarch also want our respective societies to be in perfect harmony with natural laws so we share the same worldview as the Fascists and Nazis of last century. ย The ideologies that we will use in the future will no doubt be different from NS and Italian Fascism, but the essense will be the same. ย Our goal(worldview) is the same but how we reach itย (an ideology) will have to be different depending on the conditions at hand.
National socialism and fascism are not the same thing. Look at Italy compared to Germany in WWII for instance Mussolini thought Hitler's ideas on race were ridiculous, and rejected the idea of nationalism.Under fascism the state is everything. Under national socialism your race is at the heart of everything
Yes there were similarities (namely wishing to improve their countries)but that does Not make them the same thing
It's like saying cats and dogs are the same thing because they're both animals or saying blacks and whites are the same because they may look different doesn't mean they don't both have souls man. Even understanding their policies should prove what you're saying as wrong. No offense, sir
Basically one of the biggest differences is that a fascist government can be multicultural. A national socialist system cannot. Not to mention under fascism the people collected are meant to serve the state which is at the head of everything (understand the fasces)
Also look at the roman republic(which was fascist) it was not remotely ns, and fell apart as they became more multicultural. There's tons of material on this subject but this is one of my favorites.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/stopbadscience.wordpress.com/2009/07/16/difference-between-national-socialism-and-fascism/amp/
Your thinking of them as ideologies and not of representations of an eternal truth
That's not an argument
You're making these into what you want them to be instead of seeing them for what they actually are
Watch plox
This is a total crock of bs lol
I'm sorry
Fascism has nothing to do with race
^
Just read the Doctrine of Fascism by Benito Mussolini
Everything else is basically made up
โ๐ป
Mussolini stated, "Fascism was born... out of a profound, perennial need of this our Aryan race".
That may be, but it's not part of Fascism generally.
Mussolini the creator of fascism declared it born out of aryan race
Your goal postinf
If fascism has nothing to do with race i want nothing to do with it
It actually wasn't born out of race
Systems which respect order in all forms are the only ones which are valuable
It may have been born out of the race, but that doesn't make it racial.
Mussolini actually adopted it as it was almost over
Order of spirit, order of state, order of race.
He just says Aryans need it, not that it's ABOUT Aryans
And traditionally fascism has nothing to do with race
Race is part of natural order
Your assuming authoritarianism = fascism, fascism is racial
Mussolini said so himself
If a system leaves out racialism then it leaves out a key component to natural order.
What?
In before more made up iron march swill
Not an argument
>inb4 more things that contradict me
Fascism isnt racist is such a kosher world view
^
Its sickening
Ok then what of the Romans?
The "natural order" is not necessarily something good in itself. It just needs to be taken into account when building a society. Otherwise it's a logical fallacy.
Following the natural order does not sound good to me in that regard.
Read the myth of the 20th century, rosenberg states the mixing of europeam blood caused the fall of the romans, also there was race laws in rome
And I've stated plenty of arguments. None of which you've even touched on. You just post more iron march bs that has no actual basis in reality or history
And I've read it
The history of fascism is racial, rome had racial hierarchy according to rosenberg
Correlation =/= Causation
In regards to the romans
So the founder of modern fascism declared it racial, its predecessor was racial, what more do you want
He didn't declare it racial from the statements you have given me
If he meant to do that, he could have said it more clearly
Mussolini was concerned with the low birth rates of theย white raceย in contrast to the African and Asian races. In 1928 he noted the high birth-rate of blacks in the United States, and that they had surpassed the population of whites in certain areas, such as Harlem in New York City. He described their greater racial consciousness in comparison with American whites as contributing to their growing strength.
You still haven't shown that it's part of fascism, only that it's part of Mussolinis thinking
Multiracial authoritarianism is communism lad
The only possible argument you could make is saying that ideologies evolve.
I think all of you are forgetting the basic fact that collectivism as a whole is cancer and that the Nazi's views on race were barely scientific and very misconceived.
^christcuck is am anti racist
I'd argue against Fascism as well as National Socialism.
where did i ever say i did not believe in different races?
Actually the nazis in the third Reich were leaps and bounds ahead of the rest of the world in the realm of science and eugenics
is the Nationalist Socialist "race realism" the only true one? kind of sounds like the "settled science" argument.
@Thomas Morrow thats why i said their views were very misconceived.
You can be a race realist without being a national socialist. I'm a national socialist because I believe it to be the best system
You also said they were barely scientific- which I contest
yes, with what methods and knowledge we have now in comparison to theirs they were very pseudoscientific.
In what way?
Mengele was a genius
they did what a good amount of modern day "scientists" do, they misconstrued data, came up with ridiculous terms and classifications, etc.
mengele was sadist retard.
You're mistaken, sir. Given time they'd be way ahead of where we are now.
They were able to discover more because there was less restrictions. You don't have to like him but he was a genius
yes, i think that is a possibility as well, the only problem here is that there are still idiots out there who believe in science from 70+ years ago and see it as "settled", they are unwilling to except any new scientific discoveries that have come since.
Sometimes the myth is greater than the actual
I'd agree to an extent. What way are you meaning in this context? @Belisarius
@chris#0919 dang, you sound just like the leftists.
Like the myth of christ (lol im joking lad)
Not myth as incorrect, myth as in occultism
@Thomas Morrow i mean in the sense that there has been a great deal of progress in the study of ethnicity, past migrations, peoples and time periods. we know a great deal more now than the german scientists of the 1930-40's did. refusing any other kind of science that comes after what the germans knew then is pretty foolish.
@chris#0919 changing the wording does not change the subject material. a myth is a lie, occultism is a lie.
I agree. How is that relevant to the conversation we were having beforehand?
aren't nationalist socialists for the One Truthโข ?
One truth?
eternal truth, whatever its called.
@Thomas Morrow it has to do with the conversation on facism and nationalist socialism, i mentioned that collectivism is cancer and the nazi's were flawed in their views on race.
I genuinely don't know what you're talking about. I agree with the program of the nsdap
And they were nationalists to the point of the race being the nation
I believe you may be misinformed
We were speaking of fascism not having anything to do with race
And I wouldn't say national socialism is collectivist.
You should take care of your own. Individualism is cancer
Or at least it isn't strictly collectivist
There's still private property etc
there was a literal conversation going on about both ideologies views on race, noone bothered to tell me i was wrong about collectivism being cancer so only the point about race has been talked about.
the government does not have to be the middleman for improvements to the everyday life of the people. the government does not have to be your babysitter, making sure you are fed, providing you with transportation or education. once you let a government start the process of collectivisation it won't stop, it will get more and more intrusive and burdening to everyone. it is completely unnecessary.
Have you ever read the program of the nsdap?
Because I believe you to be grossly misinformed
the 25 point one?
i'm not a natsoc historian.
Let me see what I can dig up for you, sir
I have a few pdfs somewhere
you keep on claiming to believe that i am "misinformed", what am i "misinformed" on?
that's not an argument.
Because I don't have time to break down the entire political system for you. I mean no offense and if you'd like I can give you material to read
i never asked you to.
i never said "the nationalist socialists are wrong on everything!"
Well I'd just about have to judging by your knowledge on the subject
what am i saying that proves me to be "uninformed"?
1,370 total messages. Viewing 250 per page.
Prev |
Page 5/6
| Next