drbrumley
Well-known member
True
True to an extent.
True to an extent.
Hmmmm, the only real choice huh? I guess the obvious question then is what is Nazism?
Liberalism is Dead and Evangelicals Don't Deserve It Anyway
- Thread starter Traditio
- Start date
- Status
True
True to an extent.
True to an extent.
Hmmmm, the only real choice huh? I guess the obvious question then is what is Nazism?
drbrumley
Well-known member
The right of free speech as laid out by law is governmental....not individual.
I'm glad you brought that up.
I don't think a lot of folks know the history and intent of free speech.
And thus it is misapplied in a lot of cases to be a support of something it was not intended to support.
Which makes many of the concerns expressed by the general public as being a denial of free speech is moot.
And that could be the start of a whole new direction of discussion for this thread.
Who's claim of being denied free speech is actually legit?
I wonder if he meant of those that have already existed, not including any "thoughts" of a new one.
I would also like Trad to explain in a little detail, and not just in general, of why the Nazi's was better than our Constitution.
Or at least what made some points of theirs better.
Well hurry up while you can still post.
:chuckle:
I do not have tolerance for Nazis. I don't pretend to have equal tolerance for everything and everybody.
Traditio, my enemy, is going on about "tolerance".
... because .....???
I don't have tolerance for everyone either.
I can't think of anyone that does.
Trad says he is tolerant to allow anyone to express their view no matter how abhorrent he might think their view is.
He doesn't have to support or agree with their view, but will support that they have a right to voice their opinion.
One could argue that you are less tolerant than Trad the Nazi.
A Nazi is more tolerant than Chair.
First of all- don't put words in my mouth.
Secondly, the right to free speech does apply to Nazis. That's how it goes.
DO you really need me to explain why I hate Nazis?
glorydaz
Well-known member
Ya just can't make this stuff up. :thumb:
I've been looking for information of what Liberalism used to be, what it really is.
In my view, it's a silly question, undoubtedly inspired on your part by a mistaken impression that I hold to some anthropological heresy/error.
Let me clear this up at once:
I do not subscribe to Richard Spencer's view that Western culture is somehow tied to the white race, nor do I think that white people are somehow uniquely fit to receive the inheritance of Western culture. Nor, of course, do I hold to the kinds of biological theories of race which the historical Nazis held. I don't think that the white race is inherently superior to others, and even if I think that there is, to whatever extent, a Jewish problem, I don't think that this problem arises at the level of biology.
I said before that it would be extremely easy to convince me that there is no need for a white ethnostate. The reason for that is precisely because I don't think that a white ethnostate is somehow intrinsically better than a multiracial society. I think that race, in and of itself, prior to individual/social/political interpretation, though, of course, to a very real extent, real...nonetheless, largely is irrelevant.
My political ideal is a libertarian leftist social democratic society, whether multiracial or not.
All other things being equal, I don't actually care about the multiracial question. I view it largely as irrelevant, just so long as the multiracial society in question is not itself racialized, i.e., just so long as race is not an actual cultural, social or political issue. If there is a multiracial society and nobody cares about race in that society, then great. I would be fine with that.
But that's not what we have.
We have a multiracial society in which racial identities have been and are being concretized, set in sharp relief, reinforced and politicized. We have a multiracial society in which white people, and especially CIS straight white men, are in the process of being demonized.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/post...racism-is-getting-worse-against-white-people/
http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/16/politics/blacks-white-racism-united-states-polls/index.html
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/670266/BBC-advert-white-people-ethnic-equality-staff-job-internship
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...wants-people-ethnic-minority-backgrounds.html
http://www.breitbart.com/london/201...lent-and-oppressive-force-of-nature-on-earth/
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/aeman-ansari/ethnic-safe-spaces_b_6897176.html
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...te-wants-to-shut-other-white-people-down.html
Overt anti-white racism is so common, and so permeates social media, that identitarian left wing journalists have had to try to define it out of existence:
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/...please-stop-pretending-reverse-racism-is-real
After all. Only white people can be racist. People of color, and especially black people, can't be racist. Ask any identitarian leftist. He'll tell you.
To which I respond:
Hail. Victory.
Intersectional feminism is a culturally marxist (let us note, for whatever it's worth, whether the fact be insignificant or not, that Karl Marx was a Jew, as was Trotzky; if you examine the sociological, psychological, philosophical, political, etc. basis of these toxic forms of contemporary thought, you will find a disproportionate amount of contribution from Jews) version of feminism, in large part influenced by poststructuralist/postmodern philosophy and sociology (at least some of whom, e.g., Derrida, let us note, were Jews) version of feminism which takes into account the "intersection" of various demographic factors like race and sex in its marxist dialectic of oppression and demographic power struggle, a dialectic of oppression and demographic power struggle which leaves practically no aspect of life, NOT EVEN VIDEO GAMES, outside of its criticism. After all, first and second wave feminism were RACIST! They were just about WHITE women!
It is this intersectional feminism which is at work whenever you hear someone going on about "privilege." Intersectional feminists fill the ranks of organizations like BLM and Antifa. And what's amazing about intersectional feminists is that they don't even rest satisfied with demonizing white people, and especially CIS straight white men, asserting that they are evil oppressors, and claiming that everyone else is an oppressed victim of the white racist patriarchy.
No.
Of course not.
https://everydayfeminism.com/2017/08/light-skinned-poc-spaces/
You question my Christian faith because I self-identify as a Nazi, Kmo., but consider this:
If you aren't an intersectional feminist, if you are any kind of right winger, even if you don't consider yourself a racist (you privileged (and automatically racist) CIS straight white male!) then in their eyes, you are just as bad as me.
You might as well be a Nazi.
So you might as well agree with me, embrace the swastika, and HAIL VICTORY!
You're white, right?
If you're white, then you are automatically a racist according to these people (who have so much power, in practice, that they are able to effect social change and get people fired from their jobs), and society would have been better off had you, and all white people, never been born! After all, white people are all evil racist oppressors.
So let's be racists together and demand a Nazi white ethnostate.
Yes I saw that in your previous post but cut it off in my quote because I don't think it's a good comparison. People aren't dogs and cats and reasons for liking them and wanting to be around them aren't going to be the same. I don't know how you'd translate the dog example to people.
Thank you for the post. It does clarify some things. I hardly think you should blame me for not understanding though. Your past and present actions hardly make it seem like you don't think whites are inherently better. And frankly it's hard to believe what you say here with all the other junk you say.
I'll try to respond to the rest of this later.
No, thanks. You say you aren't a supporter of Spencer but you have to realize that if your fantasy would actually happen the only people living with you would be Spencer and his supporters?So let's be racists together and demand a Nazi white ethnostate.
Maybe it depends on the context? :idunno:
How are you defining non-extremist Nazism?
I really must note, however, my amusement that a CITIZEN OF AN ETHNOSTATE should take such exception to the idea that white people need an ethnostate.
The citizen of what kind of ethnostate?
A citizen of an ethnostate for whom?
Oh, I'm sure that's hardly relevant.
Who are you referring to, Nazi?
- Status