The Green Party gained 20+% of the vote. 30+% among young people.
I can't stop thinking about that we need something radically new in the current century and that old-school right-wing politics isn't enough. What do these populist parties even offer? Just get rid of all immigrants and all will be fine? Then we will continue our current economic policies, our current social policies? That it?
I agree with the Left that a lot of the Populism is just talk to get populist support to gain power. The old Grachian brother and Tribune of the Plebs move.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLNvcTK6DTU
Farage for example is worshipped by many people, despite cucking the BNP, preventing UKIP from developing to something more than just an Anti-EU party and prevented them from becoming more nationalist.
If we can't get rid of refugees and immigrants, because you just get turned from wherever you are on the political spectrum to ultra far right, why not build camp-cities for them in our country and try to extract as much value from them as possible? They are coming here on their own. Why not use them as an economic ressource and exploit it as much as possible for the benefit of us?
And radically invest in Education, public transport, development of Green Spaces, National Parks. Try to become energy independet from fossil fuels ASAP.
And the EU. You know, old school nationalism and trying to take Prussia back won't work. The EU is a good way to fullfill our geopoltiical ambitions. We just need to adjust it in a better direction.
Why does Latvia and Estonia need to be independent? They are just going to be influenced by Russia, the US or China. Why not have a European Empire? I agree with Richard Spencer. Being anti EU is too short-sighted.
I am seriously thinking about these issues and I think that something like this might be much more succesful, than bruteforcing deporation of refugees and migrants, which will just get you hated. I think many Lefties would support that.
Can you talk me out of that?
OP - https://8ch.net/pol/res/13323687.html
view the rest of the comments →
[–] 18848661? ago
>>13324153
>>13324123
Is he? I don't think so.
I don't see him as an ally at all, because of exactly what I said to you before about zionists.
I had my suspicions for a very long time, but I kept an open mind. Then I saw this.
<Vid related
And all that fell away.
Anyone who telling you "islam is the real problem, not the zionist jews" is not ally - he's compromised, or he was never an ally at all.
I always found him rather less than convincing and a bit of a blow hard to be honest.
I'm more partial to Kais Murros as far as commentary goes, but Spencer has an occasional gem of insight… A shame he's ruined any faith I can or will have in him by shilling for zionism.
Vid related is far more than what you imply my man.
If you don't see that, well… Guess I'm back to calling you an emotionally-compromised idiot or a subversive LARPer, because I can't see any other way you could view
<vid related
and come to the conclusion that such was merely a claim of "israel being a good example" or a "simple objective compliment". This is the man saying "zionist jews are not our existential enemies like muzzies are u guiz!" and that is the objective opposition, its having a fight with your enemies' sword instead of the enemy himself, and nobody who pushes such a narrative line can be trusted. Especially not one with so many ties to zionist jewry, going all the way back to his ((('mentor'))).
[–] 18849334? ago
>>13324204
[–] 18849338? ago
Imo we should outlaw all sexual stimulation for heterosexual men. Make every sexual act rape. Ban porn. Ban masturbation.
I think this would in short oder lead to a better society. :)
[–] 18849336? ago
[–] 18848667? ago
There's other issues with Spencer as well, mind you, but they are somewhat "complex" themselves in terms of how people rationalize narrative positions presented by "intellectuals" and the like.
I understand how people will argue that "holocaust denial is not beneficial to the movement!" or the like, but… If you're not going to deny, you should simply maintain a neutral/silent position. Pushing the jewish narrative on this front is explicitly shooting yourself in the foot, if you're attempting to pursue explicit White advocacy, because jews view explicit White advocacy as a threat, they have established a strong holohoax-based narrative opposing explicit White advocacy and have used it to condition/propagandize, with several major organizations backing that effort.
As such, while it may be true that holohoax denial has bad optical traits, its also strategically a dead-end to embrace that narrative which is most-commonly employed to demonize the very concept of explicit White advocacy regardless of expressed intent on behalf of the advocate in question.
[–] 18848668? ago
Optics are dead.