Message from @HAM
Discord ID: 604102033045454880
The infirm
**HAM** is typing...
I'm just curious to know why Sargon thinks we needed to go back onto the continent after our withdrawal? During WW2.
It's not like the Germans were suing for peace or anything. Oh wait.
Well to be honest with how Sargon's been going lately I honestly don't know what he'd even say.
Like his constant appeals to tradition lately and his defence of Eton elite being the rightful rulers of England bollocks to liberalism and proper representation.
Right wing populism is one helluva drug
He bought into the 19th century historiography of Glorious Britain
syncretic populism when
the entire 19th century is, for the Euro Empires of the time, the birth of History as a discipline
and it was born almost entirely as a propaganda too, explicitly so
he whole narrative of Britain as this unique beacon of Liberty comes from that
This destiny to lead the way in the field of personal freedom and whatnot. It's a powerful story
And I remember when he 1st started to buy into it
only went further and further down that road, and even at the beginning he was rather chauvinistic about it
understandably so, because his opposition wishes to degrade any English identity as much as possible
but I think he might be playing into their hands a bit
I think that he should have went nationalist but not chauvinist. As a strategy that is. Politically I think both are gay options.
but that is another story
I agree. He plays far to much into the Britain has been for freedom for a really really long time guys while we castrate homosexuals for winning the war
Land of the free (ultra puritans who's national religion was an attempt by the monarchy to gain ultimate moral authority over its citizenry as well as political)
(The castration of gays always just fucking confused me as a Pollack... To us this is such an outlandish idea... Like, gay bad, ok... But mutilation far worse so... Wtf? And why do you even care that much?! It's such a niche issue that rarely ever comes up to begin with... S'not like they suck dick in public...)
You know how the Russian Empire punished gays? It called them pansies behind their backs. Fucking ultra-authoritarian, the Tsar is above morality Russian Empire.
I've probably said it before in here but Sargon also said something rather silly in regards to the "battle" of cable street. That he would of been on the side opposing the British Union of Fascist.
Of course a charitable interpretation would be that he means he'd be on the side opposing the fascist.
However if we're to take this statement for what it is, Sargon is saying that he'd of allied himself with the violent rioting communist and I believe mostly foreign Jews in this case against the police. You know pouring human waste on them, throwing marbles under their horses (I.e trying to cripple them). In opposition to the fascist who instead turned around and had a peaceful March in the other direction.
Not looking good is it.
Especially when you've got the WW1 veteran campaigning for peace not war (in the form of Oswald Mosley) vs the WW1 general who sent tens of thousands of men to their death in a failed military campaign. And then wanting into war that cost hundreds of thousands of British deaths.
(Winston Churchill if you hadn't caught on)
Then of course if I'm to just compare the moral fortitude of Churchill vs Mosley just a little more.
Take the issue of India.
Mosley who held great sympathies to the suffering of the Indian colonies, decrying the crimes of sweatshop labour endorsed by globalist capitalism.
Churchill on the other hand compared Indians to rabbits when they were starving to death in the millions from a famine because he'd diverted food away for the war effort.
it's funny too
ethiopia as an italian colony prospered as it had never before while the brits left bangladesh to starve
of course, i'm not going to pretend the acquisition of fascist italy's colonial territories wasn't accompanied by a fair amount of brutality
but i find this interesting
brandon
incorrect
semitic peoples period show some relations to early europeans
as do early egyptians
not surprising
Well what colonies weren't?
It's simply a fact of life. Shit was shit.
That's why although it's highly convenient to do so I'm not terribly interested in the beating over the heads of commies with the various deaths caused by their socialist comrades.
Just address what's fundamentally true.
Putting lots of people who are different from one another always leads to conflict and conquest.
Hierarchy exists and is inevitably a part of human nature.
Violence is part of human nature.
So called Social constructs are naturally determined.
Despite being 13% of the population
Etc
That's enough justification for me to reject socialism and globalism without all the yeah but those chinky and Russian bastards killed a lotta people.
Well first
its primarily a meme
but the issue is the fundamental point is that at a certain point one can determine the logical end state of ideologies
as well as the repeated issues baked into the political application of it
If every single time it results in totalitarian governments , famine or lack of productivity
etc
at a certain point it becomes a valid critque against it and not just something you can wave your hand and say "well we promise we will do it right this time. Trust us ;))))
what you're getting at isn't true though
eastern bloc had higher levels of food security on average than capitalist countries at a similar level of development and developed at roughly the same rate
"totalitarianism" is probably an apt descriptor for marxism-leninism though
not so much socialism as a whole