So if I decide to rant I can switch to phone.

Why Are We Fighting?
Before answering this central question, perhaps it’s worth saying at first who this ‘we’ is. Perhaps it’s ‘you’, despite the superficial labels identifying you with one of the various parties or sects that the present tragedy will not hesitate to sweep away? ‘You’ — despite the misunderstandings that divide us — who intuitively senses the mortal dangers threatening France and Europe? ‘You’ — coming from every horizon and having become conscious of the biological, ethical, political, and spiritual decline of European civilisation and the nations comprising it — who has joined the resistance?

In this respect — and also in defining who ‘we’ are — it’s necessary to repeat that agnostics, pagans, and authentic Catholic or Orthodox Christians must demote their secondary philosophical differences, carry out a return to the real, and learn how to align themselves against the common enemy, who everyone well knows.

-- it’s necessary that everyone does his duty and works in his place — devotes himself to constructing a body of fundamental values — against the common enemy — in a network of active,
supple, interdependent, and confederated resistance — present on every front, at the level of Europe — with the aim of concentrating all the energies of the combatants.

--Nothing is lost. It’s completely inappropriate to see ourselves, in the nostalgia of despair, as a rearguard, a last outpost, that struggles with panache for a lost cause. No, we have to see ourselves as the vanguard of the resistance, whose lucid spirit exudes a certain optimism. But let there be no illusion. Victory won’t be won through peaceful bourgeois reform or through the vaticinations of an aesthetic and ‘literary’ libertinism. We have to prepare ourselves for the coming tempest, to harden ourselves — for the sake of attacking, like a cobra, quickly and decisively, once the moment of opportunity strikes. In anticipating this moment, we need now to start arming ourselves — mentally and physically — we need to recruit, to proselytise, to educate, to organise in networks of solidarity and action. It’s simple: let’s model ourselves on our enemy.

@ThisIsChris

NIHILISM - A profound belief in the absence of all ‘meaning in life’: the annihilation of superior values; a cynical, dispirited tendency to despise the principles of action, even to believe that they no longer exist.

"Nihil" = "nothing" in Latin.

nothing-ism.

Nihilism (from the Latin nihil, ‘nothing’) characterises an era when everything has become equivalent, when all authentic sense of the sacred has gone, when the principal preoccupation is consumerism and immediate materialism. Vitalist values (related to the conservation of a line, the defence of a land, the communal spirit, concern for future generations, the perpetuation of traditions, aesthetics, etc.) collapse for the sake of a dissimulating ethic of false values (the humanitarian, anti-racist, democratic vulgate, pseudo-social or ecological discourses at odds with the facts, etc.). Nihilism is the direct offshoot of the bourgeois spirit — obsessional, egoistic, and calculating. The system’s dominant preoccupations, similarly, are short-term financial gain, the maximisation of profit, and the exclusion of every other consideration, even those of health.

http://www.businessinsider.com/millennials-saving-twice-as-much-as-baby-boomers-2017-10

@SamanthaM I think it may be a reflection on us growing up in the great recession and student debt and employment instability as well

@John O - tell her how to say it

ZEE ZEE

Zeeyezz

you mirin'?!?!

ORDER - Order is the basis of every creative civilisation, because it disciplines man’s anarchistic animal nature through its political and cultural harmonies.

Order is unacceptable if it’s not disciplinary, educative, selective — if it’s purely repressive in service to a frozen elite. Any notion of order needs, though, to be treated with caution, for it can be stimulating or enervating, a source of vigour or of sclerosis. There is no order without a project, without enthusiasm, without a movement. Order is not simply repressive (the American syndrome), but a form of support, an attraction, a disciplined constitution of a common ideal.

PEOPLE - An ethnic ensemble — biological, historical, cultural — with a territory, its fatherland, in which it is rooted.

‘The people’ — the very term is suspect to the cosmopolitan Left, which sees it as bordering on the politically incorrect — is not any statistical ‘population’; it’s an organic community embracing a transcendent body made up of ancestors, the living, and their heirs. Though marked with a certain spirituality, a people is diachronically rooted in the past and projects itself into the future — it’s submerged in biological and genetic matter, but at the same time it’s a historical, and spiritual, reality.

--It’s necessary to recall, especially for certain Christians, that a people’s attachment is incompatible with Christianity’s present cosmopolitanism. The claim, for example, that ‘I am closer to an African Catholic than I am to a non-Christian European’ is a universalistic claim that relegates a people’s nation to something of secondary significance. This is, indeed, the great drama of European Christianity, marked as it is by Pauline universalism. A Catholic attached to his people and conscious of the biological and cultural dangers threatening them might instead say, ‘I respect all the Christians of the world, but hic et nunc[201] I fight for my people above all, whatever their religion’.

--The main threat to the identity and existence of great peoples occurs, in contrast, through the conjunction of deculturation and the colonising invasion of alien peoples — which we’re presently experiencing. The Western globalist ‘system’ will never threaten strong peoples. Are Arabs, Chinese, or Indians threatened? On the contrary. It reinforces their identity and their desire to conquer, by provoking their reaction to it.

Yeah the Church tended up until recently just *spread* Christianity, not grab people and drag them back home with them.

I can't get voice going, but I just want to react to one concept in "why we fight", as follows: unite with the Russians to form a European Northern territory. If you look at a globe straight down on the north pole, you will see that if Europeans unite, we will control the arctic ocean and the last best human habitat on Earth.

@Deleted User close down discord, reopen, and get back into voice

do you know how to get into voice/

You could join our VC and just listen @Deleted User

Russian politicians with dual citizenship in Israel? <imagine-my-shock.jpg>

My name does not show up there

@Deleted User click on "General"

in the side bar

Are you on a computer or a phone?

PEOPLE, LONG-LIVING; SHORT-LIVING PEOPLE - A people that desires and knows how to preserve itself in history, ensure its biological line, and maintain the longevity of its civilisation.

This concept comes from the philosopher Raymond Ruyer.[207] The Arabs, Chinese, Jews, Indians, and others are typical examples of such long-living peoples. Numbed by Western civilisation, which they tragically created and which has turned against them, Europeans today no longer see themselves as a long-living people. For like short-living people, they are not concerned about their ancestors or their posterity — their lineage, cultural heritage, or future. They are devoted to the cult of the immediate present, in their pursuit of small individual pleasures and in the nervous preservation of their material acquisitions.

@John O - John O computer

Go under the Book of the Month tab, and just click on the tab that says General with the microphone icon

brain drain

^^

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPjzfGChGlE

PEOPLE, LONG-LIVING; SHORT-LIVING PEOPLE - A people that desires and knows how to preserve itself in history, ensure its biological line, and maintain the longevity of its civilisation.

This concept comes from the philosopher Raymond Ruyer.[207] The Arabs, Chinese, Jews, Indians, and others are typical examples of such long-living peoples. Numbed by Western civilisation, which they tragically created and which has turned against them, Europeans today no longer see themselves as a long-living people. For like short-living people, they are not concerned about their ancestors or their posterity — their lineage, cultural heritage, or future. They are devoted to the cult of the immediate present, in their pursuit of small individual pleasures and in the nervous preservation of their material acquisitions.

Small peoples are destroyed by their demographic, military, and technological disadvantages. Great peoples, on the other hand, who sink into the oblivion of time, die because of anaemia, of a lack of will — despite the apparent force of their actually fragile civilisation. This was the destiny of the Incas, the Aztecs, the Egyptians, and others. A long-living people is characterised by the following qualities: demographic vigour, collective ethnic consciousness, popular solidarity, and a common spiritual ideal. A long-living people possesses deep biological roots, a memory and common history, an idea of the divine and a project. This is everything that Western civilisation lacks, since it can’t even project itself five years into the future. All this is fit for reconstruction.

@John O Idid nothing happens

Close the tab and try again

Or try it on your phone

POPULISM - The position which defends the people’s interests before that of the political class — and advocates direct democracy.

This presently pejorative term must be made positive. The prevailing aversion to populism actually expresses a covert contempt for authentic democracy. Like its corollary antidemagoguery, anti-populism is a semantic ruse of politicians and bourgeois intellectuals — to deflect the people’s will, especially that of the modest social strata, reputedly dangerous, because they are the most nationalist.

The cosmopolitan bourgeoisie, whether of Left or Right, that presently holds power attacks ‘populism’ because it rejects direct democracy and because it’s convinced that the people is ‘politically incorrect’. On the subject of immigration, the death penalty, school discipline, fiscal policies — on numerous other subjects — it’s well known that the people’s deepest wishes (as evident in referendums and elsewhere) never, despite the incessant media propaganda, correspond to those of the government. It’s logical, then, that those who have confiscated the ‘popular will’ tend to associate populism with despotism.

PREFERENCE, EUROPEAN; NATIONAL PREFERENCE, ALIEN PREFERENCE - A political notion inherited from Greek democracy, which accords superior rights to the City’s natives — to ‘citizens’.

It’s an idea of good sense — practiced by all peoples on Earth, except by sick Western societies (France particularly) — the idea that citizens in their own country ought to have an advantage of rights over foreign residents. What else could the notion of ‘citizenship’ — which the Left evokes in every realm, but whose principles it thoughtlessly violates — possibly mean?

--The refusal of national preference inevitably culminates in foreign preference: another sign that egalitarian ideology has become crazy, that it has inverted the egalitarian principle to favour the superiority of aliens. Foreign preference is a collective pathology, imposed by the reigning elites, though it won’t last. Such an abnormal situation can only lead — and this will be for the better — to an extremely grave crisis. Social harmony and peace are possible only with the Aristotelian principle of ‘every City its own privilege’.

PRESENTISM - Cult of the present, of the moment, of fashion — a cult distinct to Western society — forgetful of the past and indifferent to the future.

Presentism is a form of blindness — it’s the behaviour of ‘those whose eyes are on the ground, not the sky, not on what’s before or behind them’ — in the expression of the Breton painter and identitarian Yann-Ber Tillenon.

The long-term is never taken into account. Future generations don’t count, the notion of lineage, like that of foresight, is absent. Only the ‘present generation’ counts. But when a fashion ceases to be fashionable, ‘its look’, as Olivier Carré[211] says, ‘becomes tacky’.

--Presentism fosters contempt for the survival of one’s people. It’s a consequence of a narcissistic individualism and the bourgeois spirit. It’s become a way of refusing a common future and a common past, memory and foresight, enrootment and collective ambition, identity and continuity.