Not all traditions are like this

But a number of them have a certain truth to it

Or like another one is that you should marry a virgin now we know that the more sexual partners a woman had before marriage the more likely she is to divorce

@Fighting Gold idk if I explained my views well

you did but theyre not what i was inquiring about

Ok

On the nationalism question:
-you can’t destroy nationalism because it is natural to be nationalistic because you need to support your own group over others to make sure your genes survive so in short it’s foolish to try to destroy nationalism because it can’t ever be destroyed
-the USSR tried to destroy nationalism of its member groups but they still got into a number of conflicts and funded and allied with a number of groups that were at war
-in the EU they are trying to destroy nationalism to prevent war but many of the member stated have been involved in conflicts while in the EU with a number getting involved with the middle eastern conflicts

Did that do a better job with the nationalist question

thats more like it

Ok good

but i disagree about the feasability of destroying nationalism, in germany for example 90 percent of votes are given to not nationalistic parties. you can largely dictate opinions to the populus

That’s just because Germany has been guilted and traumatized by the Second World War and also have been propagandize about their part of the war and I would also tie it in with dr Dutton and dr woodley’s theory of spiteful mutants who support things that aren’t ethnocentric

but isnt france very similar

theyre very progressive

blacks are just as french as the natives, etc

I’d say with France that’s were it’s more of the spiteful mutant idea comes in rather than straight up ww2 propaganda although they are also under propaganda as well. I mean Mao’s government in China made an attempt to destroy Chinese culture and identity and look at them now they are virtually a fascist state

if mao wanted to destroy chinese nationalism he used the wrong strategy.
Can you elaborate the spiteful mutant thing? are the french mutants?

War or empire is the natural state of man
It's true the nation state is kind of artificial but the natural thing isn't what we're doing right now

Traditions are usually based on underlying truths

Why ban sodomy? Because it has consequences someone wouldn't understand without germ theory and whatnot

The spiteful mutant theory is the theory that because humans have been under less Darwinian stress it has allowed people to exist who in the past would have died off

Not to mention they distinguish people from one another or tie them together

There could not be Pax Romana without Roman traditions, culture and peculiarities

So like for example because of modern medicine now less people died at birth in the past infant mortality would have been at about 50% but now it is very low at like 1% iirc and the general likelihood of dying before you get older was also higher thus those people were also weeded out of the population in the past people were more nationalist and religious whereas today because of the lack of Darwinian selection there is much more openness to foreign groups, more support for atheism or a lack of religion in general and thus many of the people who would have died if they were alive in the past are alive today and promote things that aren’t evolutionary beneficial

I hope I explained that well

There's still selection, just for r type behaviour

People who have a lot of children in a setting of abundance will become dominant over time

Questionis when we'll return to Malthusian conditions which are less forgiving

@Fighting Gold Globalism's aim is a global neo-liberal tyranny. That's worse than occasional wars. Besides, major wars like WWII are impossible now due to nuclear weapons. The trade off is worse. Also, I agree with Jonathan Bowden that multiculturalism has only moved the conflicts from being between nations to within nations. So interstate wars are less likely, but civil wars are far more likely.

Tradition is life affirming for people. It provides them with a higher meaning. The nation is part of that. It creates a more fulfilling life. Plus, tradition has proven a very effective way of running society. It might be motivated by something irrational, but it does yield empirically good results.

But most people that make these arguments are classic liberals of the Mill variety. They too have an irrational belief in a tradition of egalitarianism (as I described in my new video). It's just as religious as any other belief. The difference is that rather than truth, goodness, and beauty, liberalism creates nihilism, atomization, and ugliness.

I acknowledge that both liberalism and neo-reaction required irrational religiosity. The difference is that man's nature isn't liberal. Reactionary rule is more in line with the natural order and creates a more fulfilling life for people.

@Endeavour Appeal to tradition is often thrown in the category of a logical fallacy, or at least I’ve been told this in academia. Would explaining that tradition yields good results in the long run be a good way of advocating for it?

@ItzMidrex The question should be, does it work? If tradition works than it should be used. That's usually just a disingenuous way to discredit an argument without actually proving it wrong.

@Endeavour did you know that the link to your Bitchute in your video descriptions is broken? Goes here: ```https://www.bitchute.com/channel/ende/```

@Charlemagne Thanks. I'll fix it.

very vague question so people can brainstorm:
what's something the online dissident right needs that is completely new (i.e. not "more" of something that already exists)
or what are some problems that need to be solved

@Pseudo-Analysist I think I can say a couple things that are new that we need:
1 Elites: right now we don’t have any elites that don’t support us we need an or group of elites that can be used to fund our goals whatever those might be to help us with potential legal troubles and can be used to bring our talking points and ideas into the mainstream etc
2. We need PROPER activism: activism is something that the right doesn’t really do a lot of and this can be broken down into a number of things like protesting, writing an email to your congressman etc @clossington had a really good video come out recently that covered how the left has organized protests and activism organizations and the right specifically the dissident right doesn’t really have an equivalent and although I don’t like what the lefties stood for I can say at the very least their organizational skills and what they were able to accomplish was impressive we need that
3. STOP THE INFIGHTING: right now the right fights itself probably just as much it fights the left and there can be a few ways this can be accomplished: by establishing common goals, talking about points we agree on or perhaps focusing on short term goals that we can agree on etc. that’s not to say that the right shouldn’t have these conversations but the infighting is partially the reason why we have been losing the last 100 years or so

4. Art: we don’t really have that much of an artistic circle and we need that to bring out our ideas this can be music, movies, paintings/drawings etc. Art can be used to draw in a larger audience that might be susceptible to our ideas
5. Vetting: this one is much harder to set up and is more vague or harder to describe but we need a way to vet people that is coming into our movement too many times has this happened that people of poor character comes in gets traction and turns out that they have serious flaws (thinking about heimbach) that at the very least makes us look bad and at worse can lead to the demise of a movement especially if it’s a central figure

Just a couple points that came to me just now there are more but these I just thought of off the top of my head

Pseudo-Pilled introduced me to The Decentralized Left on his server @EYEFORKNOWLEDGE156

Cool

can we have a new rule to ban anything jreg related

I support this endeavor