Post: #26

(06-27-2016 02:03 PM)kaotic Wrote:  Is it wrong for me not to have sympathy for either side ?

It's not wrong, but probably ultimately politically fruitless. There is no center that is defensible in a practical political sense. If there was, we'd have the center. As it stands, for reasons that are a more complicated discussion, things are polarizing. The center never holds, because it can't hold due to the greater political power at the poles.

Post: #27

(06-27-2016 04:13 PM)hydrogonian Wrote:  

(06-27-2016 03:16 PM)kaotic Wrote:  You can't be pissed about nationalists and nazis on one end and flag burners/stompers on the other.

You also can't be pissed about nationalists but not be pissed about all nationalists. That doesn't happen, though. Either something is amoral or it isn't. As it stands, Black, Latino, and Jewish nationalism are encouraged.

There is a reason for that and it has nothing to do with historical precedent, fairness, justice, or morality.

You're right, it's true, if minorities have their nationalism, it's only right whites do as well. Which is why I'm non chalant about this and not "triggered"

Obviously in this world it will never happen.

However, this might be an internal battle of me not wanting to support nazis, but supporting their right to speak.

My gut tells me this is a bit unsettling, however logic tells me it's only fair.

The antifas was a given, so was their violence.

This whole situation is polarizing and frankly, downright confusing.

Post: #28

Their page is here. http://www.tradworker.org/

I don't see anything "nazi"-ish about it. This looks like another case of the media making excuses for violent leftists.

Post: #29

Why are people thinking it's okay to attack "pro-nazi" people but not okay to attack communists when the latter ideology was much more violent and destructive?

Post: #30

(06-27-2016 04:18 PM)kaotic Wrote:  

(06-27-2016 04:13 PM)hydrogonian Wrote:  

(06-27-2016 03:16 PM)kaotic Wrote:  You can't be pissed about nationalists and nazis on one end and flag burners/stompers on the other.

You also can't be pissed about nationalists but not be pissed about all nationalists. That doesn't happen, though. Either something is amoral or it isn't. As it stands, Black, Latino, and Jewish nationalism are encouraged.

There is a reason for that and it has nothing to do with historical precedent, fairness, justice, or morality.

You're right, it's true, if minorities have their nationalism, it's only right whites do as well. Which is why I'm non chalant about this and not "triggered"

Obviously in this world it will never happen.

However, this might be an internal battle of me not wanting to support nazis, but supporting their right to speak.

My gut tells me this is a bit unsettling, however logic tells me it's only fair.

The antifas was a given, so was their violence.

That's fair. But using the language "nazi" is using the language of the far left. It's essentially taking an aggressive position against a fair environment. These guys were not goose-stepping nor taking German Shepherds through the ghetto.

If you were an internationalist/gloablist, I wouldn't hold that language against you as long as you called Black, Latino, Asian, and Jewish nationalists Nazis as well.

If you aren't an internationalist/globalist, respectfully, you may want to consider making your peace with some more neutral language.

Consider that most people have been programmed with this language bias. Take your average WaPo article railing on about "Whites" and "White privilege", substitute every use of the word "White" with "Jewish", and you'd have a situation that is as bad or worse than 1933 Germany. In fact, an informative experiment would be to do just that and see how people react.

To think it will lead to anything but increasing violence and persecution against this group is ahistorical.

It's all population competition. That's the nature of politics. There are no groups that are doing anything solely for the world's interest even thought hey say that they are. Only their own. When you read these people characterized as "Nazis", you are reading institutionalized population competition against non-Jewish white people for the benefit of specific groups.

The only remaining question is whether a person is prepared to see everything through neutral glasses, or whether any language or other biases will remain even after they are aware of any concept bias. The biases come either out of being oblivious to the nature of the world (most white liberals who are globalists) or out of calculated self-interest (most minority liberals who are also closet racial nationalists).

The question is also whether or not it is just for minorities, in any land, to rule over the majority. There is no historical reference for any type of even-handed sharing of power. Majorities and minorities both have to be considered as motivated to keep control. So, again, the essence is what is fair and just? Should Arabs have privilege and thus rule over Jews in Israel? Should Whites rule over Mexicans in Mexico and Blacks in Nigeria? Should minorities rule over Europeans in Europe and America? Should Whites rule over native Hawaiians in Hawaii? Should Jews rule over anyone outside of Israel? Should the Chinese rule over anyone outside of China in the Eastern Hemisphere?

An ideal world could be considered to be one in which there is no more national interest, but the reality is that no one behind the scenes is aiming for this except when it comes to ruled-over groups. There is always a ruling group, and there will continue to be so. There could not be a lasting elimination of nationalism even if we magically started from that point one day, merely due to the effect of geographical distance on culture and political alliances. A nationalist group will always arise, cultivate power, and eventually be in charge. That's the nature of resource competition. The last remaining question is who anyone wants that to be, and where, and whether or not they will either unwittingly or wittingly support someone's else's ascent to power through liberal politics.

Personally, I see the future as being one of culturally determined nation-states policed against war and undue economic aggression by a world government that would be equivalent to a UN. But its reach would be more limited in depth-of-scope than it is today, but it would cover the entire world . They would drop the multiculturalism as unworkable, but also prohibit inter-cultural war.

But we can't have that until the various nations adopt a live-and-let-live philosophy, including allowing American Europeans, who have largely lost their native cultures to only now identify as "white", also have political self-determination. If they want to live with minorities, and the minorities will have them, that's fine too. However, I think that they will find that most minorities will also see them as a political threat and will largely reject multiculturalism as well when given the choice. We'll get no-where as long as certain groups perceive unfair treatment and persecution. The world might even be surprised at the global reciprocation should that occur.

I suspect that one or more groups are still angling for full control of wealth and governments, and that's why we continue to treat groups differently and with hostility. But, as you can tell by the media, it isn't white people.

Post: #31

(06-27-2016 04:18 PM)kaotic Wrote:  However, this might be an internal battle of me not wanting to support nazis, but supporting their right to speak.

Were these guys even Nazis?

The media is progressive, so won't report the truth of the matter.

All 'Nazi' means now is someone who doesn't doesn't agree with Progressives.

I guarantee you that just by the fact that if you're white and you use this forum, you are a 'Nazi' in their eyes. (If I remember, you're not White, which means you then have 'Internalised Racism', and have inherited Homophobia and Sexism from the Patriarchal White Structures that you incorrectly-sympathised with to rationalise your oppression. In which case, recant and accept the word of Social Justice in your heart, and you will be saved).

A couple of years ago I spoke of Social Justice being driven by Degenerates and formulated a conception of the Degenerate Triad.

I saw it as being driven by Symbolism, Irrationalism and Emotionalism, and that this naturally leads to a Fascist Mindset. As such, I could see that these people would eventually constitute a Violent Threat, as harmless as they seemed back in 2013 / 2014, so things are going exactly as expected.

Social Justice Warriors label everyone else as Fascists because, as per Vox Day's Third Law: SJW's always project.

The phrase 'Nazi' is Symbolism in action, (as is Rape Culture, Transphobe, Bigot, Patriarchy) etc. It's a clear label that can be applied to any form of other to paint them as Lacking Human Status and therefore deserving to be killed, regardless of whether they're actually a Nazi or not.

I said they'd grow increasingly emboldened and violent due to their belief that their cause is Righteous. Australia's recent riots between Nationalists and Anti-fas means they're now talking of legislation to arrest anyone covering their face. (Of course, the obvious recourse to this for any Australian Nationalist is to start wearing burqa to these sort of things, as the Police are terrified of removing these in case they get accused of being Racist).

These aren't the pacifist Leftists of old. Realising how physically-outmatched they are now they're using sticks and knives, I expect them to use guns before November to equalise the playing field, especially as their enemies deserve death.

Don't think you can protect yourself by not going to any 'Nazi' rallies, because, theoretically, anything is 'Nazi' now. Greek Frats. The wrong kind of Video Games. A movie about Snipers. Violence can increasingly happen anywhere at any time, because these people are fundamentally-batshit, and have reached a level of insanity where peaceful co-existence is no longer possible.

By this stage, I see the future as choosing either between Left and Right Wing fascism. There's no middle ground with anyone who has been through the University System post-2008. I don't ever see an end to Communist Subversion otherwise because this bullshit will never, ever stop.

Post: #32

AB & Hydro

You're right using the term Nazi isn't correct here when it's just an organization of people looking for there self interests (which many minority groups do).

So of course they use buzz words like Nazi.

Revert back to this photo:



As I said before, any side that is attacked has a right to defend themselves.

There's alot of insight in both your posts regarding who rules who, which is true.

American is quite alot younger when it comes to these topics, we're still learning.

Post: #33

I wouldn't say they're Nazis, but from the literature on their website, they are an organization by white people and for white people. I don't think I'll be taking my black ass to their meetings anytime soon. Which is fine. Black Lives Matter is a movement by black people and for black people. I have no interest in either (TWP or BLM) organization. But in America, both have freedom of speech and freedom of assembly, and anything that prevents the lawful acting of those freedoms is politically, socially, and morally wrong.

Post: #34

(06-27-2016 06:48 PM)Sumanguru Wrote:  I wouldn't say they're Nazis, but from the literature on their website, they are an organization by white people and for white people. I don't think I'll be taking my black ass to their meetings anytime soon. Which is fine. Black Lives Matter is a movement by black people and for black people. I have no interest in either (TWP or BLM) organization. But in America, both have freedom of speech and freedom of assembly, and anything that prevents the lawful acting of those freedoms is politically, socially, and morally wrong.

Yes. This is the attitude citizens must have if America is to survive.

Post: #35

It really seems as though we're looking at a generation (those 20 and under) who don't have a future to speak of, never bothered to prepare for one, and who are empty vessels simply looking to engage in some sort of primitive clan warfare. It's like watching a slow-burn towards a Mad Max outcome.

Look at the most popular agitators of the left these days. They're not promising better this or more of that. They gain power and popularity by promising conflict. "We're gonna get those bastards and we're gonna make them pay."

The push is absolutely going to be on for a political massacre before the November elections. The globalists may have let Brexit slide in a win but there's no way the oligarchy are going to allow Trump to get the election without a fight. I'm reminded of the scene from the movie Rules Of Engagement where the locals are machine gunning the American embassy and when they're shot dead in return then predictably the weapons all disappear, the men are dragged off and all that's left is a bunch of dead women and children.

I'm going out on a limb and predicting something similar before the November election, only the prog protesters are going to be gunned down by agent provocateurs and the scene quickly arranged for mass digestion by the loyal media class.

Post: #36

(06-27-2016 12:56 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:  

(06-27-2016 06:42 AM)Atheistani Wrote:  These guys are stupid. The word Aryan is Indic or Indo Iranian. White nationalists need to get educated and stop referring to themselves with Indo Iranian ethnonyms.

Well, the only people we know of who called themselves Aryans are those from ancient Iran and Vedic India, but the people who coined that word in their Indo-European language most certainly came from Southern Ukraine and were white, blonde people, no doubt about it.

It's not important, because I doubt we will ever know for sure, but I actually think they came from around Pakistan. It's an interesting topic for sure, and the academic consensus seems to be on your side (along with Anatolia as the next most likely) but it seems to me they are just theories the academics consider most likely and dont really have much strength.

Anyway, it's no big deal but couldn't help posting as I'm really into this subject. We're certainly wouldnt know as much without European research into the topic.

Post: #37

(06-27-2016 04:28 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  Their page is here. http://www.tradworker.org/

I don't see anything "nazi"-ish about it. This looks like another case of the media making excuses for violent leftists.

I read the website, too. It looks to me like some group trying to use a lot of big words to make their racism sound intellectual.

Am I allowed to join the traditionalist worker party, or do you gotta be white?

I would get the veterans discount.

Aloha!

Post: #38

(06-27-2016 10:32 PM)Kona Wrote:  

(06-27-2016 04:28 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  Their page is here. http://www.tradworker.org/

I don't see anything "nazi"-ish about it. This looks like another case of the media making excuses for violent leftists.

I read the website, too. It looks to me like some group trying to use a lot of big words to make their racism sound intellectual.

Am I allowed to join the traditionalist worker party, or do you gotta be white?

I would get the veterans discount.

Aloha!

Post: #39

(06-27-2016 07:12 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(06-27-2016 06:48 PM)Sumanguru Wrote:  I wouldn't say they're Nazis, but from the literature on their website, they are an organization by white people and for white people. I don't think I'll be taking my black ass to their meetings anytime soon. Which is fine. Black Lives Matter is a movement by black people and for black people. I have no interest in either (TWP or BLM) organization. But in America, both have freedom of speech and freedom of assembly, and anything that prevents the lawful acting of those freedoms is politically, socially, and morally wrong.

Yes. This is the attitude citizens must have if America is to survive.

I agree with this sentiment about freedom of association. I just don't agree with the ideology.

It's a counterproductive ideology. I personally believe that ethnocentric ideologies are backward thinking. They served a purpose when we lacked the abundance we have now. The purpose of tribalistic behavior was necessary in order to create hierarchal groups that worked collectively for survival. As technology advances and we reach a society with what could essentially be an unlimited abundance of resources for survival, ethnically based ideologies will serve zero purpose.

The goal long term should be able to overcome ethnically based dissent in order to work cooperatively and live in a relatively prosperous and peaceful world. Technology will make such a world possible through things like automation. We have already advanced pretty far in that direction already because of technology creating a relatively large abundance to what we had previously.

There is a logic behind dropping these ideologies beyond where your moral view of the world lies.

Post: #40

Just in case these clips get missed:

Post: #41

(06-27-2016 03:44 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  "Is it wrong for me not to have sympathy for either side ?"

Considering that you and I both went to a "rape rally" that had these same anti-fa types threatening to attack us with bats, I think we need a little bit of skepticism about the way the media is reporting this story.

Bingo. People are so often appalled by the inaccuracy and misleadingness of news articles on topics they're already familiar with, yet blindly trust articles on topics they know nothing about. There's even a name for this effect, though it eludes me right now.

Be conscious of it. This community has seen firsthand just how blatantly dishonest the media is willing to be.

Post: #42

When the Communists show up to protest the Nazis, you're supposed to pray for an asteroid- not pick a favourite!

Post: #43

(06-28-2016 12:36 AM)scotian Wrote:  When the Communists show up to protest the Nazis, you're supposed to pray for an asteroid- not pick a favourite!

I'm not completely certain the Nazis deserve to be as maligned as they have been.

In any case even if you take the MSM view on them seriously, the Communists are much, much worse in terms of brutality and violence and ideology. They're given a pass for (((reasons))).

Post: #44

(06-28-2016 12:21 AM)Delta Wrote:  

(06-27-2016 03:44 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  "Is it wrong for me not to have sympathy for either side ?"

Considering that you and I both went to a "rape rally" that had these same anti-fa types threatening to attack us with bats, I think we need a little bit of skepticism about the way the media is reporting this story.

Bingo. People are so often appalled by the inaccuracy and misleadingness of news articles on topics they're already familiar with, yet blindly trust articles on topics they know nothing about. There's even a name for this effect, though it eludes me right now.

Be conscious of it. This community has seen firsthand just how blatantly dishonest the media is willing to be.

Gell-Mann amnesia.

Quote:“Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.
In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.”

― Michael Crichton

Post: #45

(06-27-2016 11:31 PM)All or Nothing Wrote:  ...
I agree with this sentiment about freedom of association. I just don't agree with the ideology.

It's a counterproductive ideology. I personally believe that ethnocentric ideologies are backward thinking. They served a purpose when we lacked the abundance we have now. The purpose of tribalistic behavior was necessary in order to create hierarchal groups that worked collectively for survival. As technology advances and we reach a society with what could essentially be an unlimited abundance of resources for survival, ethnically based ideologies will serve zero purpose.

The goal long term should be able to overcome ethnically based dissent in order to work cooperatively and live in a relatively prosperous and peaceful world. Technology will make such a world possible through things like automation. We have already advanced pretty far in that direction already because of technology creating a relatively large abundance to what we had previously.

There is a logic behind dropping these ideologies beyond where your moral view of the world lies.

Unfortunately the globalist powerbrokers have decided that there will be no advance in the human condition without us being in chains first.

They have tired rather ceaselessly to undermine the foundations of our shining city on the hill because as far as they are concerned, for whatever twisted reason, nobody can be trusted to act in the collective goodwill unless he has the gun of a higher authority to his head (and no free man will accept that proposition, so all must be un-freed).

They have determined that to un-free us they must reduce us to poverty, and to do that they must culturally break us first. Hence the relentless targeting of white culture for vilification and liquidation.

This has finally triggered in many whites the inalienable reflex to shield themselves from harm, and to do that they must become ethnocentric because blacks, asians and latinos are not going to help save white culture, white prosperity, or white lives for that matter.

Non-ethnocentric humanism was a wonderful concept in some respects but was also about as likely to work as everyone putting down their guns at the same time.

Post: #46

(06-27-2016 11:31 PM)All or Nothing Wrote:  I agree with this sentiment about freedom of association. I just don't agree with the ideology.

It's a counterproductive ideology. I personally believe that ethnocentric ideologies are backward thinking. They served a purpose when we lacked the abundance we have now. The purpose of tribalistic behavior was necessary in order to create hierarchal groups that worked collectively for survival. As technology advances and we reach a society with what could essentially be an unlimited abundance of resources for survival, ethnically based ideologies will serve zero purpose.

The goal long term should be able to overcome ethnically based dissent in order to work cooperatively and live in a relatively prosperous and peaceful world. Technology will make such a world possible through things like automation. We have already advanced pretty far in that direction already because of technology creating a relatively large abundance to what we had previously.

There is a logic behind dropping these ideologies beyond where your moral view of the world lies.

As long as the blacks, the Hispanics, the Asians, the Arabs and the rest are not dropping their ethnocentrism, it is irredeemably stupid and catastrophic for whites to drop their ethnocentrism. We have largely done so over the last 50 years and look at where it has gotten us. Europe is overrun with third world invaders, and the United States is just one or two election cycles away from a demographic driven permanent leftist majority.

And our reward? Do minorities "like" us more now that we've started being so tolerant, so turn the other cheek, so diversity-loving? Fuck no. Anti-white hatred is at an all time high. It's at fever pitch. We're only now starting to get a taste of just how extreme our fucking is going to be when we lose political power in our own countries, and we haven't even lost it yet. So forgive me for not being ready to unilaterally drop my guns, spread by ass cheeks and sing Kumbayah in praise of glorious tolerant future.

Post: #47

(06-27-2016 09:30 PM)Atheistani Wrote:  

(06-27-2016 12:56 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:  

(06-27-2016 06:42 AM)Atheistani Wrote:  These guys are stupid. The word Aryan is Indic or Indo Iranian. White nationalists need to get educated and stop referring to themselves with Indo Iranian ethnonyms.

Well, the only people we know of who called themselves Aryans are those from ancient Iran and Vedic India, but the people who coined that word in their Indo-European language most certainly came from Southern Ukraine and were white, blonde people, no doubt about it.

It's not important, because I doubt we will ever know for sure, but I actually think they came from around Pakistan. It's an interesting topic for sure, and the academic consensus seems to be on your side (along with Anatolia as the next most likely) but it seems to me they are just theories the academics consider most likely and dont really have much strength.

Anyway, it's no big deal but couldn't help posting as I'm really into this subject. We're certainly wouldnt know as much without European research into the topic.

I think the Kurgan hypothesis is pretty much settled, no one basically believes an out of India hypothesis, there is zero evidence for it.

On the other hand there is ample linguistic evidence of the Kurgan hypothesis (words for salmon, cold, bears, winter, stars in the sky), genetic R1B1B:



And of course the archeological findings.

Proto-Indo Europeans are today believed to be such cultures as Yamnaya, who have the most genetically in common with Norwegians today, which means essentially - the Nazis were right about the Aryans.

Post: #48

I don't know if these Antifas are being tracked by law enforcement, especially the FBI, or not. If their stated goal is just to brawl with people they think are fascists, then law enforcement may leave them alone for now. If they start burning down buildings, then they'll get squashed. That's why the ELF was eventually taken down, because they started burning things down.

The only reason they were able to shut down the white group's rally was because they had the numbers. The white group showed up with more firepower (knives and swords, it sounds like), so the fight itself was a stalemate. Of course, the Antifas are discussing what happened on their private forums and making their war plans for the next brawl. Interesting to see if they break out bigger weapons next time.

Post: #49

(06-28-2016 01:48 PM)C-Note Wrote:  The only reason they were able to shut down the white group's rally was because they had the numbers. The white group showed up with more firepower (knives and swords, it sounds like), so the fight itself was a stalemate. Of course, the Antifas are discussing what happened on their private forums and making their war plans for the next brawl. Interesting to see if they break out bigger weapons next time.

Some sources claim the antifas were the ones who brought the weapons and the "fascists" were able to grab some of them and turn it against them. Not sure what to believe though.

Post: #50

So how many were wounded on each side?

also photo of antifa before being rushed to hospital

https://twitter.com/rustlay/status/747510605699907584