Right-Wing Discussion Thread XVI: Making Things Right Again

[Diopolis]

Yeah, I really don't understand the idea of random mass casualty attack terrorism as a political point. Quite aside from being evil, it doesn't work.

I understand the reasoning and strategy behind attacks like that, it makes sense for groups and people like them when you factor in what their goals are.

But when you look into the actual shit that goes on in Atomwaffen it becomes a meme. Former members and leaked logs have shown it to be a hilariously degenerate group. The fact that they're more adept at killing each other than anyone else just adds to the amusement.

How exactly does randomly shooting at civilians make sense?

[Evil Dictators Happyland]

I understand the reasoning and strategy behind attacks like that, it makes sense for groups and people like them when you factor in what their goals are.

But when you look into the actual shit that goes on in Atomwaffen it becomes a meme. Former members and leaked logs have shown it to be a hilariously degenerate group. The fact that they're more adept at killing each other than anyone else just adds to the amusement.

How exactly does randomly shooting at civilians make sense?

It makes sense from the perspective of someone who thinks that being feared and being obeyed are the same thing.

[Diopolis]

How exactly does randomly shooting at civilians make sense?

It makes sense from the perspective of someone who thinks that being feared and being obeyed are the same thing.

Ah. So it makes sense from the perspective of "they're degenerate morons".

[Washington Resistance Army]

I understand the reasoning and strategy behind attacks like that, it makes sense for groups and people like them when you factor in what their goals are.

But when you look into the actual shit that goes on in Atomwaffen it becomes a meme. Former members and leaked logs have shown it to be a hilariously degenerate group. The fact that they're more adept at killing each other than anyone else just adds to the amusement.

How exactly does randomly shooting at civilians make sense?

When your goal is nothing less than the total destruction of society as it currently exists so you can build something new afterwards, which is the goal for those who follow James Mason and SIEGE, every attack makes a certain amount of sense. Every shooting for example further inflames the gun debate which drives liberals and conservatives further apart and every so slightly and slowly weakens the republic as a result as both sides dig further and further into their position. Choice of target and making yourself appear to belong to a different belief set could also greatly increase tensions, though most of these dipshits aren't smart enough to think in the long term about playing people against each other like that.

Really it just boils down to violence being nothing but another political tool and how willing someone is to use it in an attempt to further their political agenda. Atomwaffen and co, at least on paper, represent the furthest one can go with that.

[Diopolis]

How exactly does randomly shooting at civilians make sense?

When your goal is nothing less than the total destruction of society as it currently exists so you can build something new afterwards, which is the goal for those who follow James Mason and SIEGE, every attack makes a certain amount of sense. Every shooting for example further inflames the gun debate which drives liberals and conservatives further apart and every so slightly and slowly weakens the republic as a result as both sides dig further and further into their position. Choice of target and making yourself appear to belong to a different belief set could also greatly increase tensions, though most of these dipshits aren't smart enough to think in the long term about playing people against each other like that.

Really it just boils down to violence being nothing but another political tool and how willing someone is to use it in an attempt to further their political agenda. Atomwaffen and co, at least on paper, represent the furthest one can go with that.

That makes a certain amount of sense. Albeit, AWB shows how terrorism like that usually doesn't work.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Wow, I'm really glad sexism is back in style. Here I thought maybe that we had moved past seeing women as incubators and servants.

Men and women are servants. To Allah SWT

I low-key agree with Diopolis but at the same time, if a woman wants to do something traditionally a man's job, AlHamdulillah. If a man wants to do something traditionally a woman's job, AlHamdulillah. Yes, Allah SWT created men and women differently and to do different tasks, but still.

By "Civilized" do you mean Progressive?

No, I mean civilized. I have an evangelical mother and plenty of rural family who vote Republican religiously. But because they aren't savages, they aren't sexists.

Every community of people is civilized, and there's no such thing as savages. This goes from America to China to North Sentinel Island.

As all citizens as properly children of the Emperor

YOU'RE NOT MY DAD!!!!!

In all seriousness, no, this is weird. Citizens are governed by the Emperor/Leader/gov/what have you, but children sounds way to brainwashy for an Emperor to say.

So do you think there should only be one vote per family unit? If so, why only give the vote to the man of the family? Why not make it so both parents have to agree on who to vote for?

Because the man ought to be head of household.

I was thinking about saying something similar.

Because the man ought to be head of household.

Why so?

Because the man is the breadwinner, the provider of the family. He has a big influence on how the family is raised up (if he's in their lives) and teaches them right from wrong (tho the latter is a two-parent thing). https://legacy.quran.com/4/34

All the great men of history pass down their souls into all of us; those millions who are heirs to their spirit and their thinking. We are all, in a sense, reincarnations of these great souls, and reflect both their origin and their continued development within us.

No I don't actually believe that but it's a nice intro innit?

OT - the heir of Benjamin Disraeli

Nea Byzantia - the heir of Constantine

UMN - the heir of Leo Tolstoy

WRA - the heir of Ted Kaczynski Cato The Younger

Salus Maior - the heir of Casimir The Great

Novus America - the heir of Teddy Roosevelt

Hanafuridake - the heir of Emperor Komei

Bienenhalde - the heir of Frederick The Great

Diopolis - the heir of Charles Maurras

How do people always forget me? Srsly I'm a regular here!

You identify with Shatov, what did you expect.

I mean

I build machine guns lol

Inb4 WRA arms a militia and overthrows liberal democracy.

Bet, sign me up! I'll totally enact an Islamic government proper western conservative values!

I mean

I build machine guns lol

Seriously? That's awesome.

Yeah, that is pretty cool

I don't exactly consider nationalism and patriotism synonymous with one another. Very closely linked for sure, but different still.

I feel quite comfortable describing myself as a nationalist or an ultranationalist even but I'm not quite sure I could call myself a patriot as I feel little love for the American republic as it currently exists.

I have something close to the opposite problem. I'm a Texan patriot, albeit not totally sold on the idea of nationalism yet. I am not a US patriot or nationalist, and what little love I have for America is because Texas happens to be a part of it.

Hey, we have something in common Except I'm from North Carolina

[Evil Dictators Happyland]

It makes sense from the perspective of someone who thinks that being feared and being obeyed are the same thing.

Ah. So it makes sense from the perspective of "they're degenerate morons".

Yup. Neo-Nazis are one of the myriad groups that blames society for all their problems, even though everyone else is perfectly aware that society isn't evil just because you're a loser.
They're not the only ones who think like that, but they are by far the most dangerous.

[Washington Resistance Army]

When your goal is nothing less than the total destruction of society as it currently exists so you can build something new afterwards, which is the goal for those who follow James Mason and SIEGE, every attack makes a certain amount of sense. Every shooting for example further inflames the gun debate which drives liberals and conservatives further apart and every so slightly and slowly weakens the republic as a result as both sides dig further and further into their position. Choice of target and making yourself appear to belong to a different belief set could also greatly increase tensions, though most of these dipshits aren't smart enough to think in the long term about playing people against each other like that.

Really it just boils down to violence being nothing but another political tool and how willing someone is to use it in an attempt to further their political agenda. Atomwaffen and co, at least on paper, represent the furthest one can go with that.

That makes a certain amount of sense. Albeit, AWB shows how terrorism like that usually doesn't work.

Quite.

I probably won't be able to post it to NS for various reasons but I've slowly been putting my thoughts on paper on why I feel it's a flawed approach and what I feel would be a better accelerationist/asymmetric style campaign. Having taken in so much literature on the topic over the past couple months has made me want to write a bit of my own lol.

[Diopolis]

Ah. So it makes sense from the perspective of "they're degenerate morons".

Yup. Neo-Nazis are one of the myriad groups that blames society for all their problems, even though everyone else is perfectly aware that society isn't evil just because you're a loser.
They're not the only ones who think like that, but they are by far the most dangerous.

Islamists, perhaps?

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Yup. Neo-Nazis are one of the myriad groups that blames society for all their problems, even though everyone else is perfectly aware that society isn't evil just because you're a loser.
They're not the only ones who think like that, but they are by far the most dangerous.

Islamists, perhaps?

[The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord]

The Articles of Confederation? Really? I’m surprised, tbh; it doesn’t seem like a set of laws that you’d be in favor of, at least from my knowledge of you.

I'm a Texas secessionist and patriot. Getting rid of the federal government's power is, from my perspective, awesome.

Texas... secessionist? So you want to secede from the Union? That’s a hard disagree from me, mate.

In other news, part one of my employee training (and paperwork) is done, and my future supervisor said that I’m free to go for the time being. So that happened.

[Diopolis]

I'm a Texas secessionist and patriot. Getting rid of the federal government's power is, from my perspective, awesome.

Texas... secessionist? So you want to secede from the Union? That’s a hard disagree from me, mate.

Says the globalist.

In other news, part one of my employee training (and paperwork) is done, and my future supervisor said that I’m free to go for the time being. So that happened.

Cool.

[The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord]

Texas... secessionist? So you want to secede from the Union? That’s a hard disagree from me, mate.

Says the globalist.

In other news, part one of my employee training (and paperwork) is done, and my future supervisor said that I’m free to go for the time being. So that happened.

Cool.

I don’t like the term “globalist” tbh; it implies a hazy sort of cultural (and to a lesser extent, moral) relativism, which my conception of the world state would seek to avoid, y’know?

[Diopolis]

Says the globalist.

Cool.

I don’t like the term “globalist” tbh; it implies a hazy sort of cultural (and to a lesser extent, moral) relativism, which my conception of the world state would seek to avoid, y’know?

I agree that you don't fit the globalist stereotype, but the term applies.

[First American Empire]

All the great men of history pass down their souls into all of us; those millions who are heirs to their spirit and their thinking. We are all, in a sense, reincarnations of these great souls, and reflect both their origin and their continued development within us.

No I don't actually believe that but it's a nice intro innit?

OT - the heir of Benjamin Disraeli

Nea Byzantia - the heir of Constantine

UMN - the heir of Leo Tolstoy

WRA - the heir of Ted Kaczynski Cato The Younger

Salus Maior - the heir of Casimir The Great

Novus America - the heir of Teddy Roosevelt

Hanafuridake - the heir of Emperor Komei

Bienenhalde - the heir of Frederick The Great

Diopolis - the heir of Charles Maurras

Ooh. Do me! Do me!

And me!

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Ooh. Do me! Do me!

And me!

And me!

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

A firing squad on whom?

Well, that's not something that can really get a direct answer because of NS's rules, but lets just say the list of people I find deserving isn't exactly short.

Atomwaffen.

Also this, Atomwaffen is a bunch of degenerate morons.

Hit me up in the TGs then, if you don't mind.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

That makes a certain amount of sense. Albeit, AWB shows how terrorism like that usually doesn't work.

Quite.

I probably won't be able to post it to NS for various reasons but I've slowly been putting my thoughts on paper on why I feel it's a flawed approach and what I feel would be a better accelerationist/asymmetric style campaign. Having taken in so much literature on the topic over the past couple months has made me want to write a bit of my own lol.

Interesting. What is it about accelerationism that draws you in? And what does accelerationism mean to you?

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Why shouldn't a woman who's more qualified than the average cadet be able to join the military?

Gnothi Sauton.

Then why not have two votes per household?

What would you say to a stable loving homosexual couple of two men equally qualified to vote? Which one of them gets the vote?

A voter should be beyond reproach in conduct. This would naturally exclude active homosexuals, along with adulterers, deadbeat dads, etc. I'm actually partial to the idea of requiring a man to be a father before he can vote, although not sure about it.

Know thyself? I don't understand.

How is participating in a homosexual relationship any worse inherently than participating in a heterosexual relationship.

[Diopolis]

Gnothi Sauton.

A voter should be beyond reproach in conduct. This would naturally exclude active homosexuals, along with adulterers, deadbeat dads, etc. I'm actually partial to the idea of requiring a man to be a father before he can vote, although not sure about it.

Know thyself? I don't understand.

Gnothi Sauton, because a woman's place is not in the military. The officer corps should be made up of gentlemen, and so should have conduct which, like other servants of the state, shows the public how to act. Even if a woman would make an excellent officer, it would be best if other uses were to be found for her talents to avoid encouraging individualist attitudes amongst the people.

How is participating in a homosexual relationship any worse inherently than participating in a heterosexual relationship.

Because the natural telos of the sexual act is to, in the first place, generate children, in the second, to bond their parents, and only in the third for concupable purposes. Homosexual couples cannot have children, and so only the third part can be reached, and so homosexual sex, much like casual sex, is degeneracy. Of course, there's nothing that needs to be illegal about courtly love style romance without sex, but it looks bad, so should not be encouraged among the citizenry.

[The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord]

Gnothi Sauton.

A voter should be beyond reproach in conduct. This would naturally exclude active homosexuals, along with adulterers, deadbeat dads, etc. I'm actually partial to the idea of requiring a man to be a father before he can vote, although not sure about it.

Know thyself? I don't understand.

How is participating in a homosexual relationship any worse inherently than participating in a heterosexual relationship.

If I'm not mistaken, according to Dio's radical traditionalist Catholicism homosexual relations are in violation of divinely-ordained laws for human conduct; as Dio seeks to implement (radical traditionalist) Catholicism as the state religion for his ideal polity, namely an independent Texas, it thus follows that the official viewpoint of such a country would be that homosexuality is evil because God forbids it. Am I mistaken or did I interpret you correctly, Dio?

EDIT: It seems while I was writing, Dio responded. To use a colloquialism: oof. Possibly even a "turbo oof" if I do say so myself.

[Diopolis]

That makes a certain amount of sense. Albeit, AWB shows how terrorism like that usually doesn't work.

Quite.

I probably won't be able to post it to NS for various reasons but I've slowly been putting my thoughts on paper on why I feel it's a flawed approach and what I feel would be a better accelerationist/asymmetric style campaign. Having taken in so much literature on the topic over the past couple months has made me want to write a bit of my own lol.

Would you mind TGing me your thoughts on that? I'm not in favor of a violent insurrection, but it's interesting to know what kind of violence is actually integral to fascism.

[Diopolis]

Know thyself? I don't understand.

How is participating in a homosexual relationship any worse inherently than participating in a heterosexual relationship.

If I'm not mistaken, according to Dio's radical traditionalist Catholicism homosexual relations are in violation of divinely-ordained laws for human conduct; as Dio seeks to implement (radical traditionalist) Catholicism as the state religion for his ideal polity, namely an independent Texas, it thus follows that the official viewpoint of such a country would be that homosexuality is evil because God forbids it. Am I mistaken or did I interpret you correctly, Dio?

More or less, although there are philosophical reasons covered in the post above yours that you aren't managing to cover.

[The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord]

If I'm not mistaken, according to Dio's radical traditionalist Catholicism homosexual relations are in violation of divinely-ordained laws for human conduct; as Dio seeks to implement (radical traditionalist) Catholicism as the state religion for his ideal polity, namely an independent Texas, it thus follows that the official viewpoint of such a country would be that homosexuality is evil because God forbids it. Am I mistaken or did I interpret you correctly, Dio?

More or less, although there are philosophical reasons covered in the post above yours that you aren't managing to cover.

I realized this after I initially posted since while I was writing you responded. Now I feel rather silly, tbh.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Know thyself? I don't understand.

Gnothi Sauton, because a woman's place is not in the military. The officer corps should be made up of gentlemen, and so should have conduct which, like other servants of the state, shows the public how to act. Even if a woman would make an excellent officer, it would be best if other uses were to be found for her talents to avoid encouraging individualist attitudes amongst the people.

How is participating in a homosexual relationship any worse inherently than participating in a heterosexual relationship.

Because the natural telos of the sexual act is to, in the first place, generate children, in the second, to bond their parents, and only in the third for concupable purposes. Homosexual couples cannot have children, and so only the third part can be reached, and so homosexual sex, much like casual sex, is degeneracy. Of course, there's nothing that needs to be illegal about courtly love style romance without sex, but it looks bad, so should not be encouraged among the citizenry.

You would deprive yourself of a fine officer just to discourage the slightest ounce of individualism?

No, the purpose of sex is not recreation, the purpose is whatever those involved in the sex want.