you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]IamCleaver[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

Russia. It is a pretty common world view here. It seems to be almost absent in the West from what I have gathered.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

In my view, you can only allow a central government to be strong if the nation has a strong, nationalist leader. In most of the world, there are no leaders at all, so there can't be a strong central government because in such a case, it quickly becomes the representative of the rich and already powerful, and tyranny ensues. This is what is happening in most of the world right now.

As such, the only solution for most nations is direct democracy such as there was in Lybia before it got "liberated" by evil. In Russia you are lucky to have such a leader at this crucial moment in your national history. Hopefully he is a true nationalist and not a sellout to the subhuman parasites that ruin everything.

[–]JasonCarswellVoluntaryist 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

a strong, nationalist leader

Is only ever a figurehead.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Genghis Khan was a figurehead huh. Damn.

[–]JasonCarswellVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Genghis Khan was a figurehead huh.

Yes he was.

Without his legions of followers, establishment systems, political landscape, and various opportunities, he would have been just a solo rampaging lunatic if he wanted to slaughter throngs of people. He didn't just decide to do that on a madman's whim though - the political climate, opportunities, and support were there and he with his trusted advisors navigated their conquests.

If you don't see than then you are just another megalomaniac idol worshiper in the cult of personality.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Again you are coming back with collectivistic, nihilistic and borderline communist rhetoric. "There is no leader. The proletariat is leading."

[–]JasonCarswellVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Again you are coming back with collectivistic, nihilistic and borderline communist rhetoric. "There is no leader. The proletariat is leading."

Bullshit.

I'm saying the ruling class is leading.

And I'm pointing out that regardless whoever the fuck is "in charge" - there's always a mob with a system supporting them. They just happen to be at the front, but they sure aren't heroically steering the whole thing themselves.

[–]IamCleaver[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

"you can only allow a central government to be strong if the nation has a strong, nationalist leader." True. The system should promote strong nationalist leaders.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The only system that did was that of the NSDAP in the first half of the XXth century Germany.

[–]IamCleaver[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Time to try again. This time, lets keep it civil.