@TMatthews I agree. I'm not trying to larp. I only cited all of the ends of the "dissident right" (lol we are truly diverse) to demonstrate that I DON'T CARE about ideology

I totally agree with the whole appealing to civnats thing, but, hypothetically, if I had to chose a way to run a country, civic nationalism is useless

@Jacob Civic Nationalism is a much better social regime than what we are currently exposed to.

Well that's not true. I have opinions. I guess what I mean is I'm not interested in ideological purity. Which means, yes, I can work with MAGA

Is it? It just delays us becoming a minority by like 5 years. The end result is the same.

I rejected basic tenets of leftist ideology in part because of Ben Shapiro. I rejected the systematic white supremacy stuff and gender queer bs

Civic nationalism is not a viable solution, but there are civnats that literally want to deport 30 million people. Strategically finding common ground with them is good politics

Well, it's also worth pointing out that civnats are on a spectrum

You can plug a hole with cement or chewing gum. Just get the hole plugged.

If you don't have cement, get to chewing.

"End immigration" civic nationalism is useful, "I love legal immigration" civic nationalism is literally the same end result as liberalism

us = cement, civnats = chewing gum, GOP = fishnet

A lot of civnats know deep down that we are right. We just have to break the stranglehold that the moral paradigm of "racism" holds over them

Mass importation of Asians actually makes the average white an underclass quicker than mass mestizo. Of course the problem is now we have both happening.

@Jacob, Civnats literally want to physically round up 11 million human beings and build a several thousand mile long wall at our Mexican border. - If you don't see a CivNat regime as a massive improvement to our current political order you are blind

IQ nationalism isn't real nationalism

@Asatru Artist - MD Problem is, a lot of the time civnats don't want to fix the hole

again. it's not the ideal - its a step in the right direction.

"Big Brain nibbas only" -Civnats

I won't counter signal MAGA. Murdoch is right, MAGA is the sleeping giant.

Dumb but powerful.

@Wood-Ape - OK/MN sure. it's up to us to awaken and harness it!

I am looking forward to buying a MAGA hat. Should I get classic red or camo?

Which is better O P T I C S ?

We didn't get in this mess overnight and we won't get out of it overnight. Just as the left didn't go straight from JFK to what it is today, we are going to have to make incremental progress. Getting civnats like Trump in power is a step in the right direction for the first time in many years

@Wood-Ape - OK/MN do they still have vaporwave pink?

red will trigger more people...

@TMatthews Yeah I see eye to eye with you there.

Of course I am from one of two fully red states. And the only hat-shaped one.

@Wood-Ape - OK/MN My state flipped the entire election, chud.

The truth is that we do want to MAGA. We just realize exactly what that means

Where you at?

@Deleted User Thank you for your service. Hold the line.

o7

To be honest, no, I don't see it as a massive improvement, because illegals are a very small factor in the equation for when we become a minority. Do I see it as a small improvement? In some cases.

I'd go as far to say that civic nationalism can be a destructive force at times, because it creates a false sense of security. "lol we stopped illegal immigration we can get complacent now while legal immigrants replace us"

I'm not arguing that we should be edgelords and alienate civnats, I'm arguing that we should try to move them to our side rather than just become them.

Amish gang rise up

I love the Amish

I'm a bit biased on this since I've had a lot of bad experiences with civnats, including Proud Boys literally collaborating with Antifa to dox me

@Jacob whoa, that's bonkers!

Ya, I'm not making that up, and I'm willing to elaborate if needed

I believe you.

@Jacob Nobody here is arguing that we should become civnats. If, however, gaining real power and influence within institutions like the GOP requires it, we should pretend to be on an individual level though perhaps

White Taqiyya

You know what I mean.

MAGA in the streets, something else in the sheets

I would rather not become what I despise...

I'm OK with a strategic alliance with civnats for now, but of course don't just capitulate to them, actively try to bring them to our side

@TMatthews A lot of people in this movement do argue that we should promote civic nationalism instead of identitarianism, and just kinda sit around and wait for civic nationalism to win out, and *then* promote identitarianism. We've had former IE members like this.

former...

I don't know, could still be some

I.E. has the hard-earned privilege and responsibility of being the least-weird far-right group

Look, I just think the whole "civnats are 80% there" talk is really dangerous

Based laundry.

@Freiheit - CA Is that a flag, fren?

Yeh

@Jacob STOP BEING AN IDEOLOGUE, bro. **IDEOLOGUES ALWAYS LOSE** <- if you take anything to heart that I say tonight, take that with you.

Ideologues. Always. Lose.

The greatest political thinkers and strategists of all time worked within their political paradigm to achieve actual goals.

MAGA/Civnat is implicitly Identitarian - very obviously so - why else would the globalist elites be so afraid of it.

@Jacob I don't agree with that model. That's part of why I opposed renaming IE something more American in a debate here before. What I mean is more that, for example, I'm an officer in my college republicans and couldn't have gotten there if I revealed my power level

We shouldn't get complacent and think that civic nationalism will accomplish absolutely anything. The truth is, they're maybe 20% there at best, and they're destructive at worst. We should appeal to them, pretend to be them at times, but never assume they will accomplish anything alone.

It's up to us to corral and harness that energy into something EXPLICITLY identitarian 10-15 years down the line

@TMatthews Ya I agree that we should hide our power levels at times

@Deleted User You make a valuable point. The radical / 'extreme' leaders of the past harnessed the spirit of their people *at their time*, and then slowly channeled it in directions.

We should still talk to civnats at places like CPAC and push our ideals. We can help them in mainstream politics AND grow identitarianism simultaneously

@Deleted User What do you consider being an ideologue?

@Jacob Civic nationalism, instated TOMORROW. Would result in 11+ MILLION less central americans in our country with the snap of a finger.

and then we press for more.

Right, which is why I'd still vote for Trump given the choice

I guess the big issue is the dynamic of negotiation itself. We're told to ask for more than we'll get. We ask for civ nat, get even less. If we ask for identitarianism, could we get civNat?

Friendly reminder that Trump attacked Cruz very successfully in the primaries for expanding H1b. The average Republican wants less legal immigration

The problem is, if we wait until later to press for more, these ideas will just be forgotten by that point. That's why we need to promote more *now*.

It is such a delicate balance. How to open the Window without breaking it open or shutting it

Promoting now lays a groundwork for hopefully going mainstream in the metaphorical tomorrow

When communists were marching through institutions, they still had groups pressing for communism while they were creating front groups

We should have front groups, but we should still be pressing for actual identitarianism

@Jacob

@Jacob That's another reason a decentralized "broader movement" is good. I.E. is "good cop,"

those completely unwilling to compromise (short term) are those who are completely unwilling to win.

I'm obviously willing to compromise since I'm willing to vote for Republicans and all that. I just don't support the idea of pushing for civic nationalism in place of pushing for identitarianism.

I haven't seen any uncompromising positions here. Just understandable anxiety.

I would say that being uncompromisingly compromising is a little like being an idealogue, too.

I would never say something like "don't vote for this guy he's not radical enough" or whatever

The existence of our people is non-negotiable. Perhaps that makes me an ideologue. I am willing to work with people who don't quite get it though. This is too important to throw away potential allies

Jus' sayin'.

if you think 50% + of all Americans are going to be awoken to, or inspired by some completely obscure ideology coined by some french dude in the 1970's you're insane.

There's no reason to fight over this. You don't NEED to take a hard position until you can DO something with it.

We don't need to convert 50% of Americans, though.

@Deleted User You don't have to call it "identitarianism", you just argue specific positions

If we target political and financial elites, and sway enough of them, we win.

I think a lot of this is out of our hands because the left can't control itself. Even if Soros were by some strange chance to overcome his tribal instincts and realize that the left has pushed too far, his rabid pets wouldn't stand down. The modern left is composed of the ultimate ideologues and they will only double down, thus radicalizing normies. We simply have to be ready to present an attractable alternative to them.

We need power to exploit opportunity. Growing the organization is obviously what we all should focus on

@Wood-Ape - OK/MN Mate, nobody is fighting. Rigorous debate is the path to growth so long as it doesn't get personal.

I want MORE of this manner of conversation.

I've had much more success being explicit than pretending to be a civnat. People appreciate the honesty. Liberals can see through the whole civnat shtick anyway.

If our job is to 1. grow, 2. develop our members, 3. support eachother and network, and 4. awaken as many people to white-well-being as possible. I think I.E. does that well as is. We just need more people and money, and well do those things more and better.

Yeah, compromise should be a strategy, not a philosophy.

yep

Just hit the nail that I was beating around all night

Ha ha! Glad to be of service.

I like the rigorous debate. I haven't seen too much of that in here.

Rules to IE debate:
1. Argue in good faith
2. Don't get personal
3. Don't get butthurt