Right Wing Discussion Thread XV: A New Hoppe

[Torrocca]

Libertarian Democratic Socialism, famalam. Enjoy the fruits of socially owning the means of production with none of the horrors of Stalinist or Maoist repressions! :3

Ehh, I don't mind petty capitalism and private ownership. So no thanks, I think I prefer my union of small business owners, worker cooperatives and smallholder farmers.

... You could just do a form of left-wing Syndicalism, then.

[FelrikTheDeleted]

This but unironically. The American lifestyle in general could use a change to be less focused on rampant materialism and hedonism.

So, your fiscal policy could be described as “every man a serf”?

[Jack Thomas Lang]

So a vaguely corporatist and/or syndicalist economic policy, then? I mean, it fits well with the aforementioned distributism.

Not really corporatist, and can't comment on syndicalism.

The aim of distributism is to ensure that land, trade and industry is owned by many private owners, instead of the few. Encourages self-reliance and pride in your work.

[The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord]

So a vaguely corporatist and/or syndicalist economic policy, then? I mean, it fits well with the aforementioned distributism.

Not really corporatist, and can't comment on syndicalism.

The aim of distributism is to ensure that land, trade and industry is owned by many private owners, instead of the few. Encourages self-reliance and pride in your work.

I mean, there’s overlap between corporatist (not to be confused with the colloquialism corporatocracy, which is better described as plutocracy or kleptocracy), distributist, and syndicalist thought.

[Northern Davincia]

It is a bit late to turn back the clock on some of those trends.

I sure hope it is not too late. If we want to avoid a literal dystopia, we have no choice but to try and fight against such things.

I suspect many will follow the example of the Amish and separate themselves into a moral society.

[Jack Thomas Lang]

I mean, there’s overlap between corporatist (not to be confused with the colloquialism corporatocracy, which is better described as plutocracy or kleptocracy), distributist, and syndicalist thought.

Corporatism, particularly fascist corporatism, involves the control of the economy by industry-specific corporations. While distributist guilds echo that role to a degree, the ultimate emphasis is on small private farms/tradesmen/businesses, whereas in fascism corporations helped centralise the economy. As I've said before, I'm not too knowledgeable of syndicalism left or right.

[Reploid Productions]

Standby, brief trawl in progress.

First, let's get the easy ones outta the way.

Pinkos are always a threat to an agreeable and virtuous social order.

I think this was meant to be sarcastic, but it's not obvious enough whether it's tongue-in-cheek sarcasm or legit "communists are a threat to society" trolling. Given your track record, I'll let this off with just an Ominous Looming and a reminder that sarcasm does not convey well via text and to be more mindful of your wording.

Were you always such obnoxious asshole.

No. Stop that. Shame on you. You have been around plenty long enough to know better ways to express your frustration than to basically go "You are an obnoxious asshole." *** FelrikTheDeleted, WARNED for flaming. ***

We should make that 100% tbh

In what world is basically saying "Black poverty was at 40%? Nah, that's too low, make all black people poor!" NOT supposed to be trolling and incendiary? Although I suspect that may not have been what you actually intended, your choice of quote and lack of sufficient clarification in your post make it read as though you are saying all black people should live in poverty, and that's pretty flat out trolling. *** Washington Resistance Army, WARNED for trolling. ***

And on to the messy ones.

(Image)

Imagine being American and talking about culture

Of course an American nationalist wouldn't understand why someone might actually be proud of their homeland, though.

More existent than American culture.

Such typical American behaviour.

If you missed it, the implication is that America is hell.

says the libertarian Catholic whose anti-feminism is presumably motivated by his inability to get a gf

Are you an amoral capitalistic materialist?

Your country is shit.

One would have hoped that the deletion of Munkchester a few days ago might have finally been a sufficient smack upside the head with a clue-by-four to get you to correct your own conduct. Given there has been zero improvement in your behavior and that you're merrily carrying on in the same exact manner that cost you your other nation, I am not optimistic about your long-term prospects on this site. Honestly, I was torn between issuing you a second deletion plus two week forumban, or just the two week forumban given your dogged insistence on trolling Americans and flaming/flamebaiting those who you disagree with. Between the above listed posts and identical flavored trolling in the CDT, *** Munkcestrian Republic, two-week ban for trolling/flaming/flamebaiting. ***

Feminists and communists go hand-in-hand, tbh.

Wow, a trolling two-fer that "all feminists are communists" AND "all communists are feminists" clearly meant in the most incendiary manner possible, don't see that every day. And you've had four warnings and three bans since late February. Clearly those warnings and bans have failed to impress upon you that this site has rules that you are obligated to follow and that the manner in which you have been debating here is at odds with those rules. Hopefully a stronger smack will impress upon you the need to self-regulate your conduct.

*** Yusseria, DEAT for trolling given history. ***


~Evil Forum Empress Rep Prod the Ninja Mod
~She who wields the Banhammer; master of the mighty moderation no-dachi Kiritateru Teikoku

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

That wasn't even their argument though?

Silly me, I forgot that art has no intrinsic meaning to it, and that ND posting a painting of a stereotypical 1950s white family where the men are emphasized the most in response to a post calling America hell to say that it wasn't hell in the 1950s has no underlying meanings whatsoever! The only "implication" was that Americans were happy at that time.

Fam, not everyone who likes the 50s likes it because of the racism.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Standby, brief trawl in progress.

First, let's get the easy ones outta the way.

Pinkos are always a threat to an agreeable and virtuous social order.

I think this was meant to be sarcastic, but it's not obvious enough whether it's tongue-in-cheek sarcasm or legit "communists are a threat to society" trolling. Given your track record, I'll let this off with just an Ominous Looming and a reminder that sarcasm does not convey well via text and to be more mindful of your wording.

Were you always such obnoxious asshole.

No. Stop that. Shame on you. You have been around plenty long enough to know better ways to express your frustration than to basically go "You are an obnoxious asshole." *** FelrikTheDeleted, WARNED for flaming. ***

We should make that 100% tbh

In what world is basically saying "Black poverty was at 40%? Nah, that's too low, make all black people poor!" NOT supposed to be trolling and incendiary? Although I suspect that may not have been what you actually intended, your choice of quote and lack of sufficient clarification in your post make it read as though you are saying all black people should live in poverty, and that's pretty flat out trolling. *** Washington Resistance Army, WARNED for trolling. ***

And on to the messy ones.

(Image)

Imagine being American and talking about culture

Of course an American nationalist wouldn't understand why someone might actually be proud of their homeland, though.

More existent than American culture.

Such typical American behaviour.

If you missed it, the implication is that America is hell.

says the libertarian Catholic whose anti-feminism is presumably motivated by his inability to get a gf

Are you an amoral capitalistic materialist?

Your country is shit.

One would have hoped that the deletion of Munkchester a few days ago might have finally been a sufficient smack upside the head with a clue-by-four to get you to correct your own conduct. Given there has been zero improvement in your behavior and that you're merrily carrying on in the same exact manner that cost you your other nation, I am not optimistic about your long-term prospects on this site. Honestly, I was torn between issuing you a second deletion plus two week forumban, or just the two week forumban given your dogged insistence on trolling Americans and flaming/flamebaiting those who you disagree with. Between the above listed posts and identical flavored trolling in the CDT, *** Munkcestrian Republic, two-week ban for trolling/flaming/flamebaiting. ***

Feminists and communists go hand-in-hand, tbh.

Wow, a trolling two-fer that "all feminists are communists" AND "all communists are feminists" clearly meant in the most incendiary manner possible, don't see that every day. And you've had four warnings and three bans since late February. Clearly those warnings and bans have failed to impress upon you that this site has rules that you are obligated to follow and that the manner in which you have been debating here is at odds with those rules. Hopefully a stronger smack will impress upon you the need to self-regulate your conduct.

*** Yusseria, DEAT for trolling given history. ***


~Evil Forum Empress Rep Prod the Ninja Mod
~She who wields the Banhammer; master of the mighty moderation no-dachi Kiritateru Teikoku

I do not intend to be rude, but I think that claiming there's a correlation between feminism and communism, true or not, isn't a reason to go DEAT someone, regardless of post history.

[Kowani]

Silly me, I forgot that art has no intrinsic meaning to it, and that ND posting a painting of a stereotypical 1950s white family where the men are emphasized the most in response to a post calling America hell to say that it wasn't hell in the 1950s has no underlying meanings whatsoever! The only "implication" was that Americans were happy at that time.

Fam, not everyone who likes the 50s likes it because of the racism.

They just have to ignore the racism, sexism, paranoia and conformity. Much better.

[Torrocca]

Silly me, I forgot that art has no intrinsic meaning to it, and that ND posting a painting of a stereotypical 1950s white family where the men are emphasized the most in response to a post calling America hell to say that it wasn't hell in the 1950s has no underlying meanings whatsoever! The only "implication" was that Americans were happy at that time.

Fam, not everyone who likes the 50s likes it because of the racism.

Looking at the 1950s with selectively-rose-tinted glasses because of a single painting of a white nuclear family being happy, with a clear and obvious emphasis placed on the men themselves, however, does present a good deal of underlying tones. You can't separate the good from the bad for an entire era if you're trying to specifically present that era as something such as a time when America wasn't hell. At best, ND's post is willfully ignorant and at worst it's quite literally deviously supportive of the sufferings almost everyone in America had to endure through racism, sexism, and hate based on religious beliefs or ideological views so that the average white men could live well.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Fam, not everyone who likes the 50s likes it because of the racism.

They just have to ignore the racism, sexism, paranoia and conformity. Much better.

Yeah, to idolize the 50s you do have to sweep a lot under the rug, but Torra was jumping to conclusions a bit.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Fam, not everyone who likes the 50s likes it because of the racism.

Looking at the 1950s with selectively-rose-tinted glasses because of a single painting of a white nuclear family being happy, with a clear and obvious emphasis placed on the men themselves, however, does present a good deal of underlying tones. You can't separate the good from the bad for an entire era if you're trying to specifically present that era as something such as a time when America wasn't hell. At best, ND's post is willfully ignorant and at worst it's quite literally deviously supportive of the sufferings almost everyone in America had to endure through racism, sexism, and hate based on religious beliefs or ideological views so that the average white men could live well.

I won't deny, the 50s were oppressive times for a lot of people, but simply posting a picture of the 50s doesn't mean you're okay with the oppression. And I didn't notice the male emphasis.

[Torrocca]

Looking at the 1950s with selectively-rose-tinted glasses because of a single painting of a white nuclear family being happy, with a clear and obvious emphasis placed on the men themselves, however, does present a good deal of underlying tones. You can't separate the good from the bad for an entire era if you're trying to specifically present that era as something such as a time when America wasn't hell. At best, ND's post is willfully ignorant and at worst it's quite literally deviously supportive of the sufferings almost everyone in America had to endure through racism, sexism, and hate based on religious beliefs or ideological views so that the average white men could live well.

I won't deny, the 50s were oppressive times for a lot of people, but simply posting a picture of the 50s doesn't mean you're okay with the oppression. And I didn't notice the male emphasis.

I just noticed it was edited.

The original was in here, caught by this post:

I'm secretly a clone of Paul Ryan.

Our decline started right around the time we let feminists diminish the importance of the nuclear family and idolize single mothers.

Family is the basis of everything.

All the same, the whole implication of ND's post revolves around this idyllic representation of the 1950s, and to present that, he only bothers to show an image that idealizes white nuclear families and literally nothing else. It ignores literally everything else to present this image that things were okay because white people had it good.

[Jack Thomas Lang]

Pinkos are always a threat to an agreeable and virtuous social order.

I think this was meant to be sarcastic, but it's not obvious enough whether it's tongue-in-cheek sarcasm or legit "communists are a threat to society" trolling. Given your track record, I'll let this off with just an Ominous Looming and a reminder that sarcasm does not convey well via text and to be more mindful of your wording.

Where can I raise issues with moderation, because this is a ridiculous overreach.

[Washington Resistance Army]

I think this was meant to be sarcastic, but it's not obvious enough whether it's tongue-in-cheek sarcasm or legit "communists are a threat to society" trolling. Given your track record, I'll let this off with just an Ominous Looming and a reminder that sarcasm does not convey well via text and to be more mindful of your wording.

Where can I raise issues with moderation, because this is a ridiculous overreach.

Over in moderation, though they don't accept third party appeals or anything.

I wouldn't really bother though, most of the mods have a pretty open bias and if you don't fall on their side you're shit outta luck.

[Jack Thomas Lang]

Over in moderation, though they don't accept third party appeals or anything.

I wouldn't really bother though, most of the mods have a pretty open bias and if you don't fall on their side you're shit outta luck.

It's not really an appeal, just to complain at the incredibly obvious bias which depicts statements that communists threaten virtuous social order as "trolling". For the one thing, I doubt they'd be so discerning on similar statements about fascism, and for another, it is completely true. Communists want to overturn the current social order, and most things that are virtuous are religious or traditional and we know what communists think of that!

[Washington Resistance Army]

Over in moderation, though they don't accept third party appeals or anything.

I wouldn't really bother though, most of the mods have a pretty open bias and if you don't fall on their side you're shit outta luck.

It's not really an appeal, just to complain at the incredibly obvious bias which depicts statements that communists threaten virtuous social order as "trolling". For the one thing, I doubt they'd be so discerning on similar statements about fascism, and for another, it is completely true. Communists want to overturn the current social order, and most things that are virtuous are religious or traditional and we know what communists think of that!

Oh you're free to try and I'd probably back you up but moderation went way downhill quality wise right around 2015 and I doubt you'd make much headway.

[Napkizemlja]

Where can I raise issues with moderation, because this is a ridiculous overreach.

Over in moderation, though they don't accept third party appeals or anything.

I wouldn't really bother though, most of the mods have a pretty open bias and if you don't fall on their side you're shit outta luck.

^This.

It's not even worth taking the piss out of anymore.

[Conserative Morality]

Over in moderation, though they don't accept third party appeals or anything.

I wouldn't really bother though, most of the mods have a pretty open bias and if you don't fall on their side you're shit outta luck.

It's not really an appeal, just to complain at the incredibly obvious bias which depicts statements that communists threaten virtuous social order as "trolling". For the one thing, I doubt they'd be so discerning on similar statements about fascism, and for another, it is completely true. Communists want to overturn the current social order, and most things that are virtuous are religious or traditional and we know what communists think of that!

Dunno about that, I got a warn for saying Nazis were bad before. Moderation is pretty scattershot; I don't think it has the consistency for a coherent bias.

[Napkizemlja]

I guess you want America to be the world police after all.

You're acting like this is some innovative discovery when CM has always been a proudly self-professed Americaboo.

And the 350 million people currently living there go…where, exactly?

IIRC Mrs. Nap is a Native American so we know which side his bread is buttered on.

There is no Mrs. Nap anymore.

[Napkizemlja]

Tbh we should sanction America for the conquest of the indigenous American tribes until they give all the land back (which would act as compensation for all the treaties broken and numerous other abuses).

And the 350 million people currently living there go…where, exactly?

Depends on each tribe and how they feel.

[Jack Thomas Lang]

Dunno about that, I got a warn for saying Nazis were bad before. Moderation is pretty scattershot; I don't think it has the consistency for a coherent bias.

What exactly did you say?

[Napkizemlja]

Jack, you'd be debating with a section of this site that just warned someone over stating their belief that communists destabilize society but saw nothing wrong with another poster linking to an article about how to properly fuck your slave(s). Even with posters who have survived rape chiming in about how fucked up and distressing it was/is. That is the level of absurdity you would be dealing with.

[Conserative Morality]

What exactly did you say?

Some guy said Nazis were going to rise up all across Europe and create a tidal wave, and I said in response I was game for WW2 2 Electric Boogaloo. When someone asked if I meant violence, I said yes, the kind where you put on a uniform and adhere to the Geneva Conventions.

I don't have a hate boner towards moderation, but the looser the rules, the more 'in sync' the enforcers need to be to consistently apply them, and that's not really possible with a team of volunteers who took up the job on a lark.