Discord ID: 146138044041396224
9,660 total messages. Viewing 100 per page.
Page 1/97 | Next
I think the main breaking points for me was Ben explaining to me concisely why racial equality was bullshit - told me about how blacks have different comfort levels hence why they never advance at all. "They're inferior, yep." - I felt reality crash down for a few weeks.
Likewise with Parrott, I never really had an issue with minorities intrinsically, I guess northern NJ isn't that bad in that regard. It's the anti-white garbage all around and what is happening to Europe.
I'm not really a hateful person, but seeing the powers that be ethnically cleanse Europeans from their homelands gets my blood boiling.
That and antifa & far leftist psychologies disturb me.
What I meant specifically is it's not in my nature to be disdainful towards a minority/non-white just for the sake of itself.
At the end of the fucking day? Let's say HBD was disproven, I.E. race realism whatever...none of my political views would change.
Yeah I forgot to mention, somewhat of an Afrikanerphile here, and reading about the genocide against whites there pushed me over the edge. I felt so much rage.
Mainly through an Afrikaner-American friend I got into the subject
Yeah Gypos are nearly politically correct to hate
They're so consistently their negative stereotype it's impossible for the left to lie about them to any large extent
I always felt they're the way they are because the Hindu caste system worked as a form of weird eugenics. The predominant theory is that they're a bunch of untouchables kicked out of India. They're basically an ethnic group made entirely out of the most garbage people of a society.
ah yeah, there's also the cultural problems in addition
But their shitty racial defectiveness may have created such a culture in the first place
...I'm curious at what point did Gypos become Christian...?
Were they converted at some point when they entered Europe?
There's blurry regional varieties that all interpret it differently in India - for example some people say all the Gods are aspects of one God making it technically some form of monotheism.
but they usually leave India for that reason LOL
In addition. most people who intellectualize say baseline shit and even the shit they do say that makes sense is going to be strawmanned. I mean look at that one vid of Jared Taylor giving a lecture in 2012 at a university. He says totally innocuous basic-bitch shit about freedom of association and 90% of the people who get up to talk to him strawman and say irrelevent feel-good cringeworthy plattitudes
I mean who really does a good job of deconstructing...uh FringeElements is pretty smart.
and even then, the main reason that doesn't matter
is only a very small percentage of the population is smart enough to get what he's saying, and anyone relevant to tell that to that could theoretically understand it is someone with a vested interest in ignoring nuance anyway to push their leftist agenda.
90% of the population is those people you see interviewed at protests who can't explain why they're there. This transcends political allegiances.
Also to add on to leftist intellectuals you can't convince, many at some point flat out admit the issue isn't that they "know" their enemies are wrong empirically, they don't really care. They think it is something to be smashed to prevent genocide or whatever, so they don't care if nationalism is logical
To be fair KU, the culture of the USA is very different than say Finland. My understanding is Finland isn't that cucked, especially compared to the rest of Scandinavia. It's like in that halfway point. I think Denmark is the only other one that's sorta alright.
The social culture of the USA immediately dehumanizes you with zero nuance if you're labeled a Nazi
In Finland do they do the thing of labeling anyone with nationalist views Nazis blanketly? Like what views, regardless of labelling, would be controversial in Finland is my question?
There's this line you see, as time goes on, and a society becomes more "PC", the views that are lumped in the all-encompassing term Nazi - which means a person who is a white "racist" functionally by the media and normies - becomes broader.
Like for example in some places they may delineate between being a nationalist and a mindless bigot, in the USA there isn't any delineation unless it is civic
the mainstream in the USA has zero frame of reference to understanding ethnic or racial nationalism from white people that isn't "uhh cus they don't want to be around brown people?"
because it's been so thusly purged out of us over the past few decades
It's actually understandable considering what I just said that average normies assume anyone labeled a white nationalist hates anyone who isn't white
They have no frame of reference towards any other reason for it
I suppose it got to this point in the USA primarily because this place not being an ethnic homeland of Europeans made it easy, the ties aren't as strong per say. That and we've detached the constitution from the mentality of the founders. It's essentially reiterpreted. I mean really they were white supremacists.
yeeeaaah because at the time white supremacy was such a given norm pointing it out is like announcing you're against pedophilia. Everyone assumes someone is. It's like an unspoken truth.
Breivik's initial image and views were functionally European nationalist anyway. He said in his initial manifesto that Europe should say like 90% white or w/e
The fact he eventually went full Nazi in prison is mostly an image change, it's rhetoric and symbols
Breivik just hyperfocused on Islam initially
It exists because Islam is the most prominent mass immigrant group that causes problems.
Well what I am saying about Breivik is regardless of what symbolism or labels he chose to use, the guy was basically on board with keeping Europe mostly white from day fucking one, he flat out said so in his manifesto.
And he's decently socially conservative from the manifesto too, supports nuclear families, against normalizing homosexuality - though I don't think he was for cracking down on anyone for just being gay.
If I recall he had a lot against feminism in there
Yeah the whole point of any political movement is to get the 90% of generic people who can't think much to side with you. That's what I was talking about regarding intellectualizing even when it is intelligent - for that to matter in the long run depends on basically changing the opinions on establishment intellectuals because those are the only people who could theoretically understand what you are saying and sway things - they won't though, they have a vested biased interest in fighting everything you stand for.
Maybe in an ironic fashion, the polarization over Trump's election actually is shifting the Overton window.
It's all dependent on how much nuance is allowed for a label or a set of views.
USA affords none for us, as I stated before, but that may be changing.
It's real and has merit but it debatably doesn't matter
I was just defining it broadly by what is socially acceptable to talk about at least without being blanket-banned from the media/most people
maybe normies are a good frame of reference to use
You're defining it more specifically, I'm not
The main thing I noted is the guy tries to play the moderate card (which never works anyway) and isn't even consistent with it
The guy is intelligent enough to know that the normies/media aren't going to afford any ironic nuance to someone using the term lugenpresse
yeah it's a bit tongue in cheek but...he knows they won't afford such nuance
So it's an inconsistent, disingenuous image.
This is a totally politically neutral criticism mind you.
To be fair though, he isn't wrong that lots of Nazis hate him. He's been railed on for his moderate stance on homosexuality. He's against LGBT culture and gay marriage and so forth though.
But yeah he doesn't know how to look dignified.
9,660 total messages. Viewing 100 per page.
Page 1/97 | Next