I think he died in a war camp or something.

Imagine idolising past political dormsZ

Forms.*

so are you just attacking my character now

You started it. And now I'll state my 3 pet peeves:

1) The biological view, which makes man no longer a spiritual being with a will, but rather the result of some electro-chemical processes. And everything associated with this absurd evolutionary, purely materialist way of thinking.

2) Returning to polytheism, firstly by looking to return to forms of the past, misunderstanding tradition not as some nostalgia trip, but rather something which is rather handed down to us. And more importantly, failing to recognise that this polytheism itself was a decadence of an earlier monotheistic affirmation. Polytheism is a metaphysical absurdity, when the essential unity of the cosmos is realised.

3) Those who see decadence in all, past and present. And how instead of recognising the common origin of European peoples, instead propose a plurality of unrelated peoples.

National Socialists expose themselves as anti-Traditional, whilst pretending to "Save" the West.

So how was Yalls day

Classical Fascists and I would have a lot more to agree upon, sadly I feel, today's Fascists don't know a damn thing about their primary thinker Gentile.

But even the Fascists had aspects which were anti-traditional. I don't glorify shells. I see them for what they are. Tools to manifest a certain purpose - that is the reintegration of man into his primordial state.

Also...

You act as if human beings are determinate, like animals. When in reality we possess both Being and Non-Being. Man not only has a nature, but also possess the potential to be something greater. Whilst many may follow opinions of the wider society like yourself, some of us are not passive observers being dragged around by the throws of Reality. Rather we become conscious actors constructing reality at our will.

The vast majority of men, like yourself it would appear, would come to believe in anything.

1)
The worldview that is based on our biology, that is the factual way that we are, is objectively true. Just like the mechanical worldview of a saw tells you it should be used to cut wood, so does the biological worldview tell us that humans should be Nationalist and Socialist. While the reality is the electro-chemical process, the outcome is our very real emotions and natural ethics which derrive from our biology. Spiritualism is also a part of this, where materialism is obviously not a part of human behavior beyond short-sighted meaningless pleasure.

2)
I am against theism of all kinds, and so was Hitler. I do not believe that there is factually any higher power than nature itself, who is powerful and omnipotent in itself, but unlike a deity, also real and evident wherever you are. That does not mean i am a liberal nihilistic atheist, it just means i realize the reality of my world, and from that fundament i can accurately chose what aspects of this world to value and respect, that being nature. Google Deep Ecology.

3)
I am not nostalgic for the past, that is not why i am a traditionalist. I think it is human, natural, and healthy for the individual and collective to do as your forefathers did and show them honor. It gives community a tighter bond of higher trust, and it shows that what you do now will be valued once you are gone. Idk what you mean by common origin and plurality, so i don't even know whether this was an answer to your point.

ok

Thanks for summarising. Essentially it is a secular ideology. Easily debunked when one understands that spirit is prior to matter. Still you are most honest than some of the other "National Socialists" who pretend to find in it some esotericism that even Hitler would have deplored.

I am nationalist in so far as it pertains to national solidarity and the return to hierarchical and authoritative order. But I still affirm the principle of imperium, which recognises the common origin we share as Indo-Europeans, sharing the same traditional legacy. That includes the Danes.

And I reject socialism, which sees evil in social institutions. Rather, the evil lies within man and the need to be reborn.

So should I be an African Polythiest?
just asking

I see

Revolutionary models are noted for their negation of hierarchy. By refuting traditional principles, one comes to a democratic, egalitarian, levelling. Quite frankly National Socialism is a revolutionary model with too many reactionary elements. It deplores the race-mixing which it regards as degenerate, but it still belongs to the revolutionary discourse, and having mixtures of both traditional and anti-traditional make the manifest power within National Socialism weaken than that of Liberalism and Communism. @Deleted User

Weaker*

This is why I would ban libertarians, capitalists, National Socialists from the Right Cafe. Anyone who fails to acknowledge spirit before matter.

I think that the Germans in the 30s were far too Liberal with their policies.

hitler wasnt really atheist tbh he was more just anti clerical and anti christian
he still held some spiritual beliefs

although if youre trying to claim that hitler was a devout pagan or occultist then youre also wrong tbh

I'm saying the fact that he allegedly genocided people and also was anti christian was pretty bad

oh

I'm just saying that he wasn't really very esoteric

@Alric the Bretwalda you would have to prove that spirit is prior to matter, or above nature. In my eyes, humans are a creation of nature, and so i look to nature for how to create my society, while you believe we are the creation of a God, and so you look to that God for how to create your society. I am just very convinced that God is in fact not real, and the definite highest power in the universe is the laws of the universe itself.
If what you are trying to say is that National Socialism does not have hierarchy because it doesn't have God, then i hope i just explained to you why that is not the case. Our hierarchy just lies in nature and not the paranormal.
If you are saying that National Socialism is non-hierarchical because it is revolutionary, and revolutionary ideologies are commonly without hierarchy, then that is just poor equivalence. It's like saying bricks are small, a wall is made of bricks, therefore the wall is small. Revolutionary ideologies tend to be against hierarchy or without hierarchy because they tend to be left-wing and in favor of social and/or economic equality. National Socialism is revolutionary against that mentality, hence why Fascism has so far only existed in societies that were exceedingly progressive to communistic. It's true that National Socialism wants social equality, but it is absolutely in favor of hierarchies. The strong must dominate, the weak preach equality.

From National Socialism - The Biological Worldview
"In all events, the present tendencies of disintegration in all fields of society cannot fail to make people insecure and unhappy. Only in a real. harmonious community consisting of people with the same cultural, historical. and biological background and with the same spiritual aspirations for the future can the individual find the peace of mind and the inner security that it needs. Only here can the human being feel that it is a natural part of a greater whole. of something that is mightier than the individual itself and which will continue to exist when the individual is no more. just as it has existed before the individual was born. Only in such a national community of fate does man find the eternal life he has always sought. In our children and our people we will live forever but that is the only share of eternity we have. Without that we might as well never have lived!

If, on the other hand, man must seek his identity and his goal in life outside the national community, this community has lost its meaning and will inevitably fall apart like a marriage where the partners have nothing but the address in common.
This is a fundamental Nationalist viewpoint.

However, loyalty within a group must be reciprocal. It is not only the citizen who must be loyal to society -it is also society that must be loyal to the citizen. Loyalty thus presupposes just social conditions and an economic system where nobody is exploited and where everybody does all he can for the common good to sustain the order that safeguards the common values, guarantees the life and happiness of its citizens, and gives each individual his share of the people's eternal life.
This is a fundamental Socialist viewpoint.

Nationalism without Socialism is absurd - and the other way round: Socialism without a clearly defined community has no meaning."

^^this is also why i believe Socialism is a part of Nationalism, and why you cannot be a Nationalist without being a Socialist

@Deleted User You are spiritually weak. I see no point in arguing with you. You would simply reinterpret all my proofs. You are a monkey and I have no interest in carrying this farce any further.

But I know that you believe in some Nietzschean psychopathic "might is right" delinquency with absolutely no legitimacy.

it's might makes right, not might is right

Okay, Thomas Carlyle. Anything else?

yeah, i don't think turning your nose towards the sky and pretend like the guy responding reasonably to your critiques of him is making a 'farce'

what makes might right?