Right-Wing Discussion Thread XVI: Making Things Right Again

[First American Empire]

Does anyone else find it kind of ironic that one of the fathers of Korean nationalism was an anarchist?

From that sentence, I already know I'm going to hate him. (Because of the "nationalism" part. The anarchism part is fine, I just hate pretty much every ethno-nationalist on principle.)

[5 Kingdoms of Britannia]

Does anyone else find it kind of ironic that one of the fathers of Korean nationalism was an anarchist?

From that sentence, I already know I'm going to hate him. (Because of the "nationalism" part. The anarchism part is fine, I just hate pretty much every ethno-nationalist on principle.)

True ethno nationalism is wrong but normal nationalism for ones nation is all good for us the civilised world

[Sarderistan]

:?

From that sentence, I already know I'm going to hate him. (Because of the "nationalism" part. The anarchism part is fine, I just hate pretty much every ethno-nationalist on principle.)

True ethno nationalism is wrong but normal nationalism for ones nation is all good for us the civilised world

There's no difference between ethno-nationalism and nationalism whatsoever. Heck, there even shouldn't be an ethno-nationalism in the first place - that's absurd, because practically every country in the world (yes, even the Vatican) is compised of more than two ethnics.

[Nakena]

:?
True ethno nationalism is wrong but normal nationalism for ones nation is all good for us the civilised world

There's no difference between ethno-nationalism and nationalism whatsoever. Heck, there even shouldn't be an ethno-nationalism in the first place - that's absurd, because practically every country in the world (yes, even the Vatican) is compised of more than two ethnics.

That is a heretical viewpoint among the current right-wing who has errected altairs and comitted blood sacrifices to the idea of the ethnically homogeneous nation state.

[Sarderistan]

There's no difference between ethno-nationalism and nationalism whatsoever. Heck, there even shouldn't be an ethno-nationalism in the first place - that's absurd, because practically every country in the world (yes, even the Vatican) is compised of more than two ethnics.

That is a heretical viewpoint among the current right-wing who has errected altairs and comitted blood sacrifices to the idea of the ethnically homogeneous nation state.

The doomsday cult using white sheets and crosses are far more than just a right-wing group; even more than simple nationalist-fascism. They are criminals, to say the very least.

[Nakena]

That is a heretical viewpoint among the current right-wing who has errected altairs and comitted blood sacrifices to the idea of the ethnically homogeneous nation state.

The doomsday cult using white sheets and crosses are far more than just a right-wing group; even more than simple nationalist-fascism. They are criminals, to say the very least.

It's not a specific group. Identitarianism is currently calling the shots among the so-called "right-wing" I am afraid. Whoever disagree with their worldview is supposedly some kind of ZOG-controlled shill who is secretly working together with the International Jewry to destroy western nations through mass immigration and race mixing.

I do agree with you though.

[Sarderistan]

The doomsday cult using white sheets and crosses are far more than just a right-wing group; even more than simple nationalist-fascism. They are criminals, to say the very least.

It's not a specific group. Identitarianism is currently calling the shots among the so-called "right-wing" I am afraid. Whoever disagree with their worldview is supposedly some kind of ZOG-controlled shill who is secretly working together with the International Jewry to destroy western nations through mass immigration and race mixing.

I do agree with you though.

I'm a Conservative. I'm a right-winger, and not-so-moderate one at that. Being "right" does not necessarily mean you are strictly ethnicist or identitiarist - after all, "right" originated from an economic and conservative ideology, after all. Moderate rightist tend to be more peaceful than your average left; "moderate" here is defined by minding own businesses and supporting the nationalist government. In fact, the Trump administration, which many considered "rightist" had been leaning closer to Israel more than ever.

(I am not American, so I can't be one to judge).

[Novus America]

The doomsday cult using white sheets and crosses are far more than just a right-wing group; even more than simple nationalist-fascism. They are criminals, to say the very least.

It's not a specific group. Identitarianism is currently calling the shots among the so-called "right-wing" I am afraid. Whoever disagree with their worldview is supposedly some kind of ZOG-controlled shill who is secretly working together with the International Jewry to destroy western nations through mass immigration and race mixing.

I do agree with you though.

Which is why we need to save the right wing from the racists, or failing that, create an alternative to it (that is not globalist shilling for tech billionaires and the PRC).

The problem is the right wing is correct in identifying many of the problems, and even some of the solutions, but when racism gets involved goes totally off the rails.

[Cappuccina]

:?

From that sentence, I already know I'm going to hate him. (Because of the "nationalism" part. The anarchism part is fine, I just hate pretty much every ethno-nationalist on principle.)

True ethno nationalism is wrong but normal nationalism for ones nation is all good for us the civilised world

Why is ethno-nationalism any less legitimate than civic nationalism?

[Novus America]

:?
True ethno nationalism is wrong but normal nationalism for ones nation is all good for us the civilised world

Why is ethno-nationalism any less legitimate than civic nationalism?

Because it judges people on things they cannot control.
Judges people on their looks and parents rather than their actual actions and beliefs.

Besides it is illogical. It is assuming that someone like Albert Einstein is less valuable to the country than some dude who bombs a church who happens to be “white” enough.

[Kowani]

:?
True ethno nationalism is wrong but normal nationalism for ones nation is all good for us the civilised world

Why is ethno-nationalism any less legitimate than civic nationalism?

‘Cause it’s an arbitrary criteria that does nothing besides divide people.

[Nakena]

Why is ethno-nationalism any less legitimate than civic nationalism?

Because it judges people on things they cannot control.
Judges people on their looks and parents rather than their actual actions and beliefs.

Besides it is illogical. It is assuming that someone like Albert Einstein is less valuable to the country than some dude who bombs a church who happens to be “white” enough.

No, actually radical antisemitism doesnt sees Jews as inferior but rather as some lizard people in human form who are bent on destroying and subjecting the rest of mankind. That is what Adolf Hitler believed.

If, with the help of his Marxist creed, the Jew is victorious over the other peoples of the world, his crown will be the funeral wreath of humanity and this planet will, as it did thousands of years ago, move through the ether devoid of men.

Two worlds face one another-the men of God and the men of Satan. The Jew is the anti-man, the creature of another god. He must have come from another root of the human race. I set the Aryan and the Jew over against each other; and if I call one of them a human being I must call the other something else. The two are as widely separated as man and beast. Not that I would call the Jew a beast. He is much further from the beasts than we Aryans. He is a creature outside nature and alien to nature.

And this is exactly as horrifiyng and mind blowing as it sounds. There is no surprise that theres a correlation between David Ickes Reptilians and antisemitism.

There is no rationale at a point, it becomes a matter of belief.

Antisemitism is a belief system in itself.

[Cappuccina]

Why is ethno-nationalism any less legitimate than civic nationalism?

‘Cause it’s an arbitrary criteria that does nothing besides divide people.

Ethnicity is arbitrary?

Why is ethno-nationalism any less legitimate than civic nationalism?

Because it judges people on things they cannot control.
Judges people on their looks and parents rather than their actual actions and beliefs.

Besides it is illogical. It is assuming that someone like Albert Einstein is less valuable to the country than some dude who bombs a church who happens to be “white” enough.

You're thinking of race nationalism, which isn't quite the same thing as ethno-nationalism, being the same race doesn't make you the same ethnicity.

[Kowani]

‘Cause it’s an arbitrary criteria that does nothing besides divide people.

Ethnicity is arbitrary?

1. Yes.
2. Why should an ethnicity have its own nation?

[Novus America]

Because it judges people on things they cannot control.
Judges people on their looks and parents rather than their actual actions and beliefs.

Besides it is illogical. It is assuming that someone like Albert Einstein is less valuable to the country than some dude who bombs a church who happens to be “white” enough.

No, actually radical antisemitism doesnt sees Jews as inferior but rather as some lizard people in human form who are bent on destroying and subjecting the rest of mankind. That is what Adolf Hitler believed.

If, with the help of his Marxist creed, the Jew is victorious over the other peoples of the world, his crown will be the funeral wreath of humanity and this planet will, as it did thousands of years ago, move through the ether devoid of men.

Two worlds face one another-the men of God and the men of Satan. The Jew is the anti-man, the creature of another god. He must have come from another root of the human race. I set the Aryan and the Jew over against each other; and if I call one of them a human being I must call the other something else. The two are as widely separated as man and beast. Not that I would call the Jew a beast. He is much further from the beasts than we Aryans. He is a creature outside nature and alien to nature.

And this is exactly as horrifiyng and mind blowing as it sounds. There is no surprise that theres a correlation between David Ickes Reptilians and antisemitism.

There is no rationale at a point, it becomes a matter of belief.

Antisemitism is a belief system in itself.

Yes, and as it is an irrational and dangerous belief system, we should combat it.

[Novus America]

‘Cause it’s an arbitrary criteria that does nothing besides divide people.

Ethnicity is arbitrary?

Because it judges people on things they cannot control.
Judges people on their looks and parents rather than their actual actions and beliefs.

Besides it is illogical. It is assuming that someone like Albert Einstein is less valuable to the country than some dude who bombs a church who happens to be “white” enough.

You're thinking of race nationalism, which isn't quite the same thing as ethno-nationalism, being the same race doesn't make you the same ethnicity.

Well race nationalism is a form of ethno nationalism, and in the US ethno nationalism is race based. Because we have no distinct ethnicity.
But regardless excluding people on ethnicity is a bad idea, ethnicity is not a measure of the quality of the person or whether or not they are beneficial.

[First American Empire]

There is no surprise that theres a correlation between David Ickes Reptilians and antisemitism.

How dare you. We Lizard People are no more antisemitic than the general population.

/s

2. Why should an ethnicity have its own nation?

It shouldn't. Ethnicity is a terrible foundation for a government.

There's no difference between ethno-nationalism and nationalism whatsoever. Heck, there even shouldn't be an ethno-nationalism in the first place - that's absurd, because practically every country in the world (yes, even the Vatican) is compised of more than two ethnics.

That is a heretical viewpoint among the current right-wing who has errected altars and comitted blood sacrifices to the idea of the ethnically homogeneous nation state.

The idea of an "ethnically homogeneous nation state" is a nightmare that should never have been put into practice. It's impossible to maintain without said blood sacrifices, and it provides no benefits at all with which to justify them.

[Bienenhalde]

‘Cause it’s an arbitrary criteria that does nothing besides divide people.

Ethnicity is arbitrary?

Because it judges people on things they cannot control.
Judges people on their looks and parents rather than their actual actions and beliefs.

Besides it is illogical. It is assuming that someone like Albert Einstein is less valuable to the country than some dude who bombs a church who happens to be “white” enough.

You're thinking of race nationalism, which isn't quite the same thing as ethno-nationalism, being the same race doesn't make you the same ethnicity.

While you are right about race and ethnicity technically being separate concepts, the fact is that most people, including political experts tend to conflate ethno-nationalism with racial supremicism.

[Totally Not OEP]

Need to peacefully encourage a reunification of Korea, as Goldman Sachs did an analysis on it back in 2009 and estimated that by 2050 such a combination could have the economic power of Japan. Collapse the Chinese then get the Koreans and Japanese at each other's throats; divide and conquer is the name of the game, Gentlemen.

Your obsession with conquest and imperialism is quite disturbing. I am supportive of international intervention against commies and other tyrants, but East Asia would be better off under the leadership of virtuous Confucian emperors and not liberal American barbarians.

Divide and Conquer; i.e. utilizing local conflicts to prevent the arising of a powerful competitor and maintain your influence in the region, is a core staple of international diplomacy.

[Nova Cyberia]

Your obsession with conquest and imperialism is quite disturbing. I am supportive of international intervention against commies and other tyrants, but East Asia would be better off under the leadership of virtuous Confucian emperors and not liberal American barbarians.

Divide and Conquer; i.e. utilizing local conflicts to prevent the arising of a powerful competitor and maintain your influence in the region, is a core staple of international diplomacy.

'Tis how the British maintained control over India.

[Bienenhalde]

South Korea and Japan should enter into a union to have a more united front against China, tbh.

Given the longstanding ethnic and economic hatred between the two, I see that union making the Yugoslav Wars look tame.

Personally, I have some sympathies with pan-Asianism, but the problem with Pan-Asian state centered in China would be that it would cause the end of the Japanese monarchy. And the problem with a pan-Asian state ruled by the Japanese emperor is that other East Asian countries had a very negative experience under Japanese colonialism in the early twentieth century.

[Bienenhalde]

Your obsession with conquest and imperialism is quite disturbing. I am supportive of international intervention against commies and other tyrants, but East Asia would be better off under the leadership of virtuous Confucian emperors and not liberal American barbarians.

Divide and Conquer; i.e. utilizing local conflicts to prevent the arising of a powerful competitor and maintain your influence in the region, is a core staple of international diplomacy.

We are not living in the age of imperialism anymore though, and anyway, many of the problems we have in world politics today originated as a result of imperialism in the first place. We need to embrace a moral approach to diplomacy that is based on universal principles, not more selfish, amoral power politics.

[Totally Not OEP]

Divide and Conquer; i.e. utilizing local conflicts to prevent the arising of a powerful competitor and maintain your influence in the region, is a core staple of international diplomacy.

We are not living in the age of imperialism anymore though, and anyway, many of the problems we have in world politics today originated as a result of imperialism in the first place. We need to embrace a moral approach to diplomacy that is based on universal principles, not more selfish, amoral power politics.

It's a tactic that was used before the Age of Imperialism and continues to be used to this day; see Nixon in China for a definitive example. You're beyond naive if you feel a moral approach to international diplomacy is possible or even useful.

[Hanafuridake]

Besides it is illogical. It is assuming that someone like Albert Einstein is less valuable to the country than some dude who bombs a church who happens to be “white” enough.

Ethnic nationalism isn't synonymous with racial purism. Some ethnic nationalists supported assimilation of minorities, such as the Fascist's Italianization of the Yugoslavs.

[Novus America]

Besides it is illogical. It is assuming that someone like Albert Einstein is less valuable to the country than some dude who bombs a church who happens to be “white” enough.

Ethnic nationalism isn't synonymous with racial purism. Some ethnic nationalists supported assimilation of minorities, such as the Fascist's Italianization of the Yugoslavs.

But they never tried to make Africans into Italians...
There is absolutely a racial component. If anyone can join you “ethnicity” if they embrace your culture then that is cultural nationalism.