The Soviet Union didnt collapse because some "revolutionaries" overthrew it. It collapsed onto it's own rotten core. It was a system based on lies, not unlike our current system, only our current system is even more unsustainable.

This is just rhetorical fairytales completely lacking in substance. You just say these things because they make you feel good like somehow we have the truth on our side so then liberal capitalism will collapse magically and we will be in power magically or something. It's nonsense, our society is in total disarray but the institutions themselves look even more powerful than any that have ever existed throughout history. These are the exact opposite conditions that revolutionaries look for, these have been engineered. All the signs of collapse we see are ones that suppress Social Capital but have little to no effect on political institutions, the only way out of this is through. We have to be extremely active in being involved in every civic association that exists and be the only people organising. One of the benefits of low social capital is that we have low competition, the NSDAP for example had to compete with many bourgeois parties, fake nationalists, marxists etc who were all able to organise easily due to the high Social Capital environment. We are in the age of individuals having their own special snowflake ideas and not being associated with any political groups, which means if we are the people organising we're the only game in town and we can create a parallel society of 'artificial' high Social Capital. This is the foundation of jewish power actually, known as the Kehillah.

I think some of you guys are obsessed with myths about a few hardcore types causing revolutions, but reality is always way more complicated.

No it's not, every single revolution was caused by an organised group of extremely motivated men. The Soviet Union itself came into being because of 'a few hardcore types'. Their party was not even 1/10th as popular as the NSDAP was and they still managed to take power because they had concentrated power in Moscow and St Petersburg in military guys and workers who were able to take the cities for them. I don't know what you've been reading that makes revolutions about 'complicated' and non-material realities but they're not true. Every revolution has been about real life groups fighting for power not random happenings nobody understands because one day random people who have no association with each other just find themselves in positions of power. The only ones we can apply to our own organising are the fascist ones because they're the only ones that fit us IE grassroots, popular organising with little-to-no funding. All others have come out of elite secret societies, the military, international funding etc which obviously we don't have on our side.

There's a danger of obsessing over history and always using past examples as a guide for how to proceed in the present and future.

Another empty rhetorical statement. 3 sentences in a row that actually said nothing that was practical, just throwing out platitudes about how you're right just because you say you are when in reality these tidbits are neither true nor valuable for understanding anything.

Times and events can, and more often than not are, unprecedented

Yes and revolutionaries capitalise on events by being organised and prepared. Bolshevik revolution, and the death of von Hindenburg are fine examples.

If revolution is what it takes to defend myself and my people than so be it.

Great, so then start studying fascists. I recommend 'The Civic Foundations of Fascism' and 'Bowling for Hitler/Fascism' as a starting point.

If or when it requires risk or even self sacrifice, so be it, but I'm always skeptical of people who are in it for the revolution, with revolution being the end itself as much as the means to an end. That seems like Jewish thinking.

What does this even mean? You seem to be specialising in substance-less rhetoric in this entire comment. It's 'jewish thinking' to want to kick jews that are genociding our race out of power and rule our own countries? How do you even think up this nonsense?

Im not saying any of this applies to you personally. I dont know you, but you do seem a little too invested in using the Nazis or fascists as some kind of a template.

Because I've studied revolutions and found that the only one analogous to our situation has been Germany and Italy. Codreanu's organisations in Romania too but they didn't achieve revolution. If the Bolsheviks were analogous to our situation then I'd be telling people to study the Bolshevik revolution, same with the Taliban or the IRA, or Castro and Che, the French revolution etc. None of them are though, learning about them is basically a hobby or historical curiosity for the most part. There's not much that can actually be applied from any of them, except the fascist way of organising which can be applied to us 1:1.

The modern day west, especially America, is a hell of a lot different from 1920s Germany and things that worked there could have an opposite effect, especially since our ruling class are dominated by Jews who see everything through the prism of the rise of the Nazis.

How? How will organising communities to actively oppose the people in power and give the masses a rallying point achieve the opposite effect of strengthening liberalism and jewish power? You are just saying things with literally no reasoning, evidence, or even seemingly thought behind them.

Seems to me that approach just plays right into their hands.

Yes which is why intelligence agencies advocate everyone to organise under peaceful nationalist political parties, it's why the police don't suppress us, it's why our governments don't allow us to register as parties, it's why the media never attacks us. Us organising against them is exactly what they want.