Trump Voters Hold a More Favorable View of Putin Than They Do Biden: Poll by Ethnocrat in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 13 insightful - 13 fun13 insightful - 12 fun14 insightful - 13 fun -  (0 children)

It is an empirically-proven, Snopes-verified fact that 'socks' is the world's biggest connoisseur of black-on-Jew gay interracial pornography. The very top peer-reviewed journals have done plenty of studies confirming this, and only conspiratards deny it.

Yesterday, 'socks' was absolutely incensed that he couldn't find a pilot mad enough to go and fetch the large number of homosexual groids trapped along the Poland-Ukraine border. He wanted them to be flown to San Franshitsco, where his favourite gay porn producers were planning to have them star in their latest 'movies'.

Word was that he was spotted frequenting all of the gay porn shops in San Franshitsco in the hope of stockpiling as much of this degenerate filth as possible. The chronic, compulsive masturbator already has a whole bunker full of it. Basically, he's convinced that if Putin nukes San Franshitsco, production of black-on-Jew gay interracial pornography will drop to about zero. For 'socks', a world without such pornography isn't worth living in, so he's currently driving the last trailer-load he has of the filth to his bunker where, according to a recent interview he had, he'll be 'jacking it to the end of his days'. We know this because there have been reports that he's been leaving a trail of gay porn lying around on the local highway, due to the trailer being overfilled. Indeed, one driver reported that a gay porn Blu-Ray disc titled: Ten Blacks, One Jew flew from the trailer into the open window of his car.

Supposedly, a homo Schlomo following this trail was caught knocking on the bunker door. 'socks' told him: 'First, you have to star in the latest black-on-Jew gay porn film, or else, fuck off!' The homo Schlomo is trying to find his way to the nearest gay porn studio right this moment.

As for how all this relates to the OP's topic, it relates to how 'socks' is an avid Biden supporter because Biden is an avid connoisseur of the same filth. Both Biden and 'socks' are absolutely angry and scared shitless that the destruction of California will put an end to their degenerate 'hobbies' (addictions, more accurately).

Saidit users who aren't "alt-right," why aren't you? by Markimus in politics

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 10 insightful - 5 fun10 insightful - 4 fun11 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

It is an empirically-proven, Snopes-verified fact that 'Schwarzenigga', i.e. 'socks,' is the world's biggest connoisseur of black-on-Jew gay interracial pornography. The very top peer-reviewed journals have done plenty of studies confirming this, and only conspiratards deny it.

Recently, 'socks' was absolutely incensed that he couldn't find a pilot mad enough to go and fetch the large number of homosexual groids trapped along the Poland-Ukraine border. He wanted them to be flown to San Franshitsco, where his favourite gay porn producers were planning to have them star in their latest 'movies'.

Word was that he was spotted frequenting all of the gay porn shops in San Franshitsco in the hope of stockpiling as much of this degenerate filth as possible. The chronic, compulsive masturbator already has a whole bunker full of it. Basically, he's convinced that if Putin nukes San Franshitsco, production of black-on-Jew gay interracial pornography will drop to about zero. For 'socks', a world without such pornography isn't worth living in, so he's currently driving the last trailer-load he has of the filth to his bunker where, according to a recent interview he had, he'll be 'jacking it to the end of his days'. We know this because there have been reports that he's been leaving a trail of gay porn lying around on the local highway, due to the trailer being overfilled. Indeed, one driver reported that a gay porn Blu-Ray disc titled: Ten Blacks, One Jew flew from the trailer into the open window of his car.

Supposedly, a homo Schlomo following this trail was caught knocking on the bunker door. 'socks' told him: 'First, you have to star in the latest black-on-Jew gay porn film, or else, fuck off!' The homo Schlomo is trying to find his way to the nearest gay porn studio right this moment.

Russians are slaughtering western mercenaries right and left by casparvoneverec in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 9 insightful - 4 fun9 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

I wonder what goes on in the internal monologue (provided they even have one) of all of those people. I imagine it is something like this:

CNN... The Guardian... Salon... Slate... they... they all told me that... Hitler ... the most evil man in all of human history... is... is back... from the dead... but... this time... he's Russian!!! They... they would never lie to me. They're truly independent truth-tellers... in a world of Faux News... of Cult 45... of Agent Orange Cheeto Fuhrer Clown Man with tiny hands... I mean... The Guardian even says so on its front page ... and... everything has been... Snopes-verified. It... it must be true... Hitler has been... has been resurrected ... as Twitler... I mean... as... his name is now... I can't... I can't even say it... my anxiety... my panic attacks... is... is... Trumpenfuhrer... I mean... Trumputin... NO!... Vladimir Putin! PUTIN IS... HITLER... the Russian Fuhrer... the Ukraine is... his Sudetenland... I don't even know where these places are... but... he... he won't stop there... I'm so scared ... he'll oppress poor people of colour... like the ones on the Polish border... Trumputin rigged the American elections... but we're awesome and we managed to defeat Fascist Nazi Trumpenfuhrer Drumpf... for now... but the other... the Putin Nazi fascist... he's... he's still out there... we have to be vigilant... fascism... Fascism is... is rising again. I'M SCARED! I HAVE TO DO SOMETHING!

I have to... join the brave, courageous resistance... like Hilary Clinton... against the rising tide of... fascism... I'M PANICKING... I'VE JUST GOT TO STAY CALM... stay calm... NO, DON'T PANIC!... I've just got to... I... I don't have a choice... I think... I think I know how war is... I've played some Call of Duty: Modern Warfare... I'll get some of my friends... the ones I made last Pride Month... we'll go to the Ukraine together... when we kill enough fascist homophobic Far-Right neo-Nazi White supremacist Russians we'll... call in an airstrike on... on Putin... we'll be awesome... we'll kill Hitler again for the good of personkind... we'll defeat homophobia and White supremacy and every other evil... it'll be hilarious... I'll even bring a rainbow dildo and a pride flag just to show those fucking homophobes who's boss...

One of... my new friends... is prestige 10, level 70 in one of the Call of Duty Modern Warfare games... that means... xe would probably have my back when push comes to shove... but... oh shit, my tranny porn collection?... I can't bring it all with me!... I'll... I'll get my friends to take it all with them... I'm going to... call them... and arrange a flight to... the Ukraine... wherever that is... it probably borders on America because that's where Trumputin is... we're gunna teach those fucking fascist Nazi Russians about neopronouns ... that shit about 'preferred' neopronouns is over... they will use my neopronouns... or else... or else we'll show them how we proud queers and faggots get things done... We'll teach Ukrainian and Russian children how to love and be tolerant!!! Love Always Wins!... I'm a committed, proud, strong, independent Anti-Fascist... fascists call me a Pantyfag and it's soooo true and I love it, and pride is cumming to the Ukraine one flag and rainbow dildo at a time!!!

The new PM of Italy looks like the solution all the world needs right now: a near-perfect anti-globalist nationalist leader. by iamonlyoneman in politics

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Hardline anti-immigration is bad for the global economy.

This is an election about Italy and what's right for them, not you nor anyone else. If supposed gains in productivity or wealth come at the expense of too many other things, it is not in one's rational interest to preserve the 'global economy.'

Hardline anti-LGBT is hateful

No, you clearly state that as a fact, even though it is clearly a value-judgement, viz. an opinion.

Being opposed to a literal emotion is childish and stupid. I'll hate, despise, loathe, &c. whoever I want, thanks. What are you going to do about it? Nothing. You can't. There is nothing wrong (or preventable) regarding so-called 'hate' per se.

The concerns about retreating from democracy are valid and that would be very bad.

There are no such 'concerns' except in paranoid minds. A centre-right government was not and never will be a threat to liberal democracy. Moreover, how can people voting possibly be ever a threat to democracy, when voting is practically its essence, without which no system can seriously be labelled 'democratic' no matter how free it is in any other respect? Even if they were to elect a hypothetical 'Hitler' at some future time, that's their right, and the political system remains democratic even if it becomes illiberal. You elitist liberals unironically sound more anti-democratic than most 'fascists' with your droning about how people need to be prevented from electing 'populists' or 'anti-intellectuals' (where you, of course, predictably define yourselves as the smart and intellectual ones, as funny as that appears to anti-liberals).

The Brexit disaster: Non European immigration to Britain has dramatically increased since Brexit by JuliusCaesar225 in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Britain was the most leftist country in the EU

I think Portugal is probably more ideologically Leftist overall. And France is certainly more demographically nigfuxated.

I do agree, however, that Britain is one of the worst offenders, and it also has some of the very worst type of Leftists. The smug, sneering and openly anti-White type who identify far more with random browns than they do with non-Leftist Brits. The kind who openly mock belief in 'White genocide' and want Britain to become minority White to 'own the racists'.

Here's to hoping that their bloodlines (and this is extremely likely) become fouled up with a bunch of ~65 IQ Somalians. They don't deserve to be European, White or British, and every last one of them should have been born in the shitholes where—and as part of—the queer, brown 'Master Race' they believe in comes from.

It's a real tragedy that others are born into suffering while these pricks can afford to indulge in the comfortable lifestyles they don't deserve. It's also a real tragedy that most of them will be dead before they really see the consequences of their actions and beliefs unfold. They should be kept alive to see it. Instead, their descendants will suffer while they'll get away scot-free, having pissed away everything left that was good, and leaving them with nothing but yet another of the countless shitholes that people desperately wish to leave rather than enter. The real Brexit will be their descendants yelling: 'Britain!? I don't want to remain in this shithole! I want to leave, to exit!"

The Brexit disaster: Non European immigration to Britain has dramatically increased since Brexit by JuliusCaesar225 in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 7 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Wait... does this mean that the soy-latte-sipping cosmopolitans are the real racists? And that Brexiters are the real anti-racists? That a vote for Remain was a vote for White supremacy and xenophobia!?

</s>

I still think Brexit is by far a positive development. For starters, the British government will have a harder time buck-passing to the EU when the voters decide they're fed up with them in some way. National governments are far more accountable when there is no supranational entity to which they can point and say: "Look, it's really their fault!" The blame for immigration cannot really be passed to some other group anymore. Only the British government and people can be blamed every time shit hits the fan, not some bureaucrats in Brussels.

Another obvious benefit is that at least all of the Nigerians and Pakis and whomever else who were still coming under the EU at least can't travel around Europe as easily. Britain can keep its shitty 'minorities' to itself.

The developing perception of the US, thanks to a cruel minority by [deleted] in politics

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

You aren't civilized, though. You're more stupid and less civilized even than the average primitive caveman. You just happen to have access to technology. That's about where the differences end.

You don't even know what a woman is. You talk about 'birthing people' and 'wombed people' without requiring definition, but 'woman' needs to be defined by a biologist. So shut the fuck up about 'women's rights'. There is no such thing as a 'woman' in the current year, 2022 AD, after '100 years of work'.

You talk about 'coups' and 'insurrections' while your fellow extreme ideologists are attempting the same thing all across the country right now, storming government buildings, even going as far as to call for the deaths of the six justices and the destruction of their homes.

Lastly, there are no such thing as 'rights'. Stop invoking imaginary nonsense to attempt undergirding your rationalizations for whichever dysgenic, degenerate thing that comes up.

You think the average caveman didn't know what a woman was? Nah. That's just for braindead fools like you and the other Redditards. Fuck off back to Reddit, tough guy, where you can fantasize about killing Tucker Carlson and the six new names you've added to your long, ever-growing list of people you want dead: Elon Musk, the whole Trump family, Vladimir Putin, and so on. You're a pathetic tinpot revolutionary wannabee; you're no Rambo. You'd be dead long before you got anywhere near any of those people. Not that you're man enough to even try, constantly ban evading, unwanted, mental case little shit.

Are calls to violence allowed on saidit? by Blackbrownfreestuff in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 6 insightful - 5 fun6 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

Also what say ye, u/socks-the-nigger?

Abortionist Riot Thread by LGBTQIAIDS in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS[S] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Update 1:

3. 2022-05-03, United States Courthouse, 350 West 1st Street, Los Angeles, California

YouTube: https://youtu.be/HOwT6-Y3yLA

Here we see another abortionist march. I'll be mostly focusing on the many signs that haven't yet been examined.

A Soyviet Soycialist flag at the very start.

A sign reads: Abortion Rights are Trans Rights are Gay Rights are Human Rights:

Again, we see the intersectional, slippery slope worldview considered earlier. The 'rights' of deviant groups are attached to the concept of human rights more generally, as if to say that the such 'rights' are a prerequisite to the full realization of human rights, and thus that human rights will remain a work in progress until manhole drillers and all other deviants have attained the elusive 'true equality'.

In this video we can also see quite plainly the symptoms of LA's White minoritization in language. At 0:15 almost every 'RiseUp4AbortionRights' sign displays a Spanish language translation of their English language counterpart: 'Abortion on Demand & Without Apology'. We can see a clear effort to extend their cause across racial lines, such that singular movements do not need to be created for each race.

0:30. We are introduced to Alex Mohajer, who according to his organization's website, in 2021 'became the first millennial and first Iranian American elected President of the Stonewall Democratic Club, the nation's oldest LGBTQ+ feminist political advocacy organization'. Unlike the anti-Democrat rhetoric in the PSL-dominated speech, and as a Democrat, Mohajer clearly the protesters to 'do everything in our power to make Republicans pay'. 'We cannot allow the Republican Party to control even a faction of the Federal government'.

4. 2022-05-06, Supreme Court, Washington D.C.

We have several videos from outside of the Supreme Court.

https://youtu.be/BePijz7NYHw

Reminiscent of the Portland Federal Courthouse in 2020, similar barricades have been put up around the Supreme Court.

https://youtu.be/_QLFWmbow2I

This is the 'ReproRightsRally'. I just had to share this one for the 'Jews for Abortion Justice' sign. There is also a visible sign for another organization, NARAL, founded in 1969, that reads: "Reproductive Freedom for All", which purports to have 2.5 million members (https://www.prochoiceamerica.org/about/).

https://youtu.be/Y4sxhpltloc

This girl is plain and simply an absolute lolcow.

It pains me every single fucking day that a gun has more rights than I do.

This one had me burst out laughing. Have you ever seen women being crushed by steamrollers in the way I've seen confiscated guns, motorbikes and cars? Indeed, is a woman ever 'confiscated' by the state for anything other than, say, being arrested for a crime?

Abortion is not just for women, it is for [...] non-binary people, trans people, everyone who can fucking have a child.

Bahaha... that's gobbledygook for non-confused women and confused women.

0:50: Muh Handmaid's Tale

Overturning Roe v. Wade is more about just forcing people to give birth. It's about controlling people, keeping people in a system that keeps them down and continues to let poor people be stuck in cycles of poverty.

1:50: Again, the laughable intersectional slippery slope. Notice that when one claims, for example, that fag marriage is a stepping stone towards pedophilia, this is a 'logical fallacy'... only for them to then promptly turn around and claim that making abortion a state issue is a stepping stone towards banning 'gay rights', 'gay marriage' and 'interracial couples'!?

2:07: 'We're here, we're a fucking gorgeous generation. I mean, look at us, we're hot as fuck.'

Bahahaha... I couldn't make this shit up.

This video then ends with a comical chant: 'This [us protesters] is what democracy looks like; that [the Supreme Court] is what hypocrisy looks like.'

Many more videos have been uploaded to that channel over the past 24 hours for anyone who is interested in further viewing.

5. 2022-05-03, Foley Square, New York City

Twitter: https://twitter.com/i/status/1521620802151477248

This is a clownish nine seconds of members of the Abortion Access Front (AAF) wailing like banshees at their appropriately named 'Primal Scream Station'. They're also bizarrely holding cutouts of the heads of the six Republican justices (including Chief Justice Roberts, who isn't opposed to RvW) mounted atop poles. The idea was that participants could indirectly take out their anger on the six justices by screaming at the cutouts. 'Left Voice'—a Trotskyite 'revolutionary socialist news site and magazine' according to its website—flags and signs were also present.

My impression is that the Los Angeles riots are more Far-Left radical than abortionist, whereas NY and Washington D.C. have more comical (for now, and speaking comparatively) 'peaceful protests' which are dominated by abortionist groups.

Lastly, in partial response to some comments here, the Supreme Court has had nine justices since 1869. While a Congressional majority + Presidential approval wouldn't be difficult to attain in order to raise the number of justices in order to make Alito, Thomas, ACB, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh a minority, that would perhaps be the most extreme and transparent power grab in American history. 'We Democrats don't like the current Supreme Court, so we're simply going to change it in a way that favours us' is incredibly blatant interference by the first and second branches of government in the third, and is clearly going to polarize the public even more. Personally, I don't think that will happen. The only way the riots will stop is simply if one of five justices caves in, not through adding two (or more) Democrat justices and thus reducing the 5-4 majority to the needed 5-6 minority. We'll see if any judge switches sides or if Biden and the Democrat-majority Congress begin making the necessary moves to effectively seize the Supreme Court, but I'm hoping that this will go the way of the Yellow Vests: that even after Macron backed down on the fuel tax hike which sparked them in the first place, the protests had already developed a momentum of their own. The Supreme Court doesn't need to succeed, it only needs to hold on for long enough to trigger enough Leftists to keep the momentum going independently of what the government does.

Putin lost 5 generals? by Ethnocrat in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Russia is believed to have deployed twenty generals into Ukraine, which indicates a very different leadership style from, say, America.

1. Pravda reports the death of one Maj-Gen Sukhovetsky. It does not report the cause of death.

https://english.pravda.ru/news/world/150554-russian_general/

Western sources claim he was killed by a sniper, but seem totally unsure of exactly where he was killed. Some claim he was killed near Mariupol, others claim he was killed near Kiev, i.e. near two opposite ends of the country.

2. Russian sources have not reported the death of Maj-Gen Gerasimov. Only Western sources (including The Guardian, The Independent, The Telegraph) are making this claim. CNN claims it was unable to confirm his death. The rumours of his death come from allegedly intercepted transmissions which speak of a deceased 'Gerasimov'. However, it is believed that it might be a different, lower-ranking man.

3. Russian sources have not reported the death of Maj-Gen Kolesnikov. Only Western sources (including France 24) are making this claim.

4. Russian sources have not reported the death of Maj-Gen Mityaev. Only Western sources (including The Daily Beast, The Times) are making this claim. A photo, supposedly of his corpse, was released by the Ukrainian Interior Ministry.

5. Russian sources have not reported the death of Lt-Gen Mordvichev. Only Western sources (including Newsweek) are making this claim.

There is also a sixth which has been particularly disputed to the extent that even the Western media won't accept it. A Chechen, Maj-Gen Tushayev. However, Chechen media was reported to be broadcasting Tushayev explicitly denying his death on video around two weeks after it was first reported.

Only one Russian general has probably actually been killed, since I doubt that Russia itself would be mistaken about their own generals' statuses or have reason to lie about his death when it clearly disbenefits them to even admit it. The other five are entirely claims by the Ukrainian government passed on to Western media outlets.

Are calls to violence allowed on saidit? by Blackbrownfreestuff in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

'socks' is finally banned.

Now that is the best news I've heard today.

Advocating violence is not allowed on saidit, and you know that. Your account has been banned for doing it numerous times over the last few months.

Zelensky: Ukraine to meet with Russia for peace talks by Ethnocrat in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Zelensky needs to rot in a Siberian gulag (actually, I'd love it if he was charged for being the 'neo-Nazi' and 'drug addict' that Putin accuses him of being—the Jewish pro-EU, pro-NATO liberal neo-Nazi drug addict comedian). His disgusting refusal to vacate power, instead forcing civilians to fight his already lost war while his army dissolves, instrumentally resorting to pseudo-nationalist rhetoric because no one wants to die for liberalism, while he hides in a bunker somewhere so that he can't be taken out by a simple airstrike, only means that more White blood will be spilt for his self-preservation and egoism.

Meanwhile, every normie low-IQ shithead and his dog is hilariously calling him 'brave', 'patriotic', etc.

Every single Ukrainian who dies for the yehud and his regime only brings shame to his people and race. When Reddit, Western mass media, Israel, the EU, NATO and America are all on the same page: whether 'Left-wing' or 'Right-wing', 'Liberal' or 'Conservative', 'Democrat' or 'Republican', the only message that should be taken from it is: 'This is fake and gay'. Putin can't be that J-controlled if the System is opposing him as hard as they are right now.

Keith Woods literally claims that since 2017-18 Putin has become more ethnonationalistic and that the constitution was amended to claim that the russkiye (ethnic Russians) are now the 'state-building peoples of Russia', putting them above the rossiyane (Russian citizens of any race). At the same time, some hate laws were weakened: there are only fines rather than harsher punishments for this offence. If all this is true, it suggests that Putin has become something of a bad goy, explaining why the West keep provoking Russia by putting bases and military parades near their borders.

Reddit regiment gets slaughtered by Russians, surviving soy rambos are deserting in terror by casparvoneverec in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 5 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

I thought that... we'd be awesome... we'd kill some Russian fascist Nazi homophobe bigots and call in an airstrike on Trumputin... we'd win the war all by ourselves... Reddit regiment... I thought we'd call in a MOAB like in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3... any one of us just needed 25 kills... but we haven't gotten a single one... we'd destroy the Russian Fuhrer Trumputin with that MOAB... we'd drop it right on his shiny balding head... send a message to that fucking Agent Orange Cheeto Fuhrer with tiny hands that we'd be coming for him next... revenge for Trumputin hacking our elections in 2016... revenge for all those sleepless nights where I couldn't help but look underneath my bed every few minutes for hidden Nazis...

I wanted to fight for freeedumb and dumbocrazy... for the rights of Ukrainian and Russian transchildren to grow up in a world without hate and fear... but... but it's all gone horribly wrong. The Russians... they're... they're winning... the fucking hateful bigots are... are winning... my best friend... we used to watch my favourite trans porn videos together... and... and... I just saw xem with xir head blown off... Russians started deadnaming us with their loudspeakers... the microaggressions were so strong that... the sheer level of aggression must have killed xir... we just met at the last Pride Month and xe's already dead... the Russians started calling us men and we started dropping like flies... we're trans women, damn it! Why don't these fucking transphobe homophobe pieces of shit get it!? I knew that microaggressions caused harm... but these... these are macro-aggressions. They really hurt! They're taking lives!!!

We were already taking heavy casualties before we got here. The Ukrainians killed my friend CeCe, and many others too, having met us as we got off the plane... they started mansplaining how to get to the frontlines... xir head simply exploded on the spot... it was terrible. CeCe was prestige 10, level 70, I thought that meant that xe was going to have my back... now we're here firing all of our ammunition into the distance... we thought it would be funny to kill homophobes with rainbow-painted guns... like... like in Call of Duty: Black Ops III... we even went a step further and painted our bullets rainbow too... soon all I'll have left is a rainbow dildo... they're popping up with loudspeakers, firing microaggressions... they're killing us all without firing a single bullet... we're almost out of supplies... we've ran out of soy latte... I'll never be able to watch trans porn while sipping soy lattes ever again! What... what will happen to my humongous trans porn collection that I managed to bring with me? I... I think my last remaining friend, Vaginal, a strapping... strap-on-ing? ... young drag queen from Queens, New York... just died... full body explosion from the sheer weight... the sheer pressure of the microaggressions... all of my 4K Blu-Ray discs are... are being shattered... terabytes of trans porn... by the sheer bombardment of the microaggressions... xe carried some of them for me... I want to live... but... without my colossal trans porn collection... is it worth it? ... I... I'm scared... I'm panicking... everything is... going dark... I'm... I'm sure I'm going to be next! The microaggressions... the deadnaming... they're... they're killing me! I'll never be able to watch trans porn again! What will be... my last words... they... are... MY... MY TRANS PORN COLLECTION!

Are you sympathetic to Ukraine or Russia? [POLL] by DisgustResponse in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Voted Russia (it's currently at 4-1-0). It's just a matter of simple induction: observing that every moron and his dog is on Ukraine's side, while the only Western morons on Russia's side are 'tankies'. This is the first time in years that I've seen Guardianista and Sandernista lunatics actually overwhelmingly agree with Fox News. Literal Antifa, trannies and other nutcases are on the same side as Breitbart. It shows, quite remarkably, how durable the status quo actually still is despite the seeming polarization that all of a sudden seems to have largely disappeared. It just took the perception of an existential, outside threat to first appear for the same Russophobic (and anti-White attitudes more generally) that drove 'Russiagate' to spiral out of control and the world to cheer on a war between Whites as though it is some great, entertaining spectacle.

Now, Putin can lock up the Russian analogue of the DR, be a Jew, have a bunch of corrupt Jew oligarchs running everything (all of which are likely to be true, just look into Putin's mother's surname) and still be better than these utter shitwitted transsexual, non-binary, genderqueer, genderfluid, pansexual, sexually-confused, STD-ridden, puberty-blocker-injecting, hormone-gel-rubbing, rainbow-flag-waving, rainbow-dildo-inserting, compulsively-masturbating, consumerist, degenerate 'Westerners', who are lashing out calling Putin 'cowardly' and 'insane' (projection much?) and desperately hoping for an anti-Putin coup to happen in Russia. Plus they have their own Jew oligarchs like Soros as well.

Russia is just better. Not much better, but just so. The bar really is that low.

I don't care about 'Ukrainian refugees' since:

  1. Zelensky won with 73.22% of the vote. 13,541,528 of them officially voted for him and every last one of them should be forced to live in Putin's Ukraine.

  2. Our closest analogues in the Ukraine, i.e. Svoboda, got 1.62% last election.

  3. Azov number only a few thousand people and there is no serious third option, e.g. of 'Intermarium'. Azov can neither repel Russia nor oust Zelensky, meaning that there will strictly be either a globohomo-dominated Ukraine or a Russian-dominated Ukraine and anything else is just a fantasy.

  4. Because they are disproportionately going to be the dregs of Ukraine (Zelensky voters, various 'sexual minority' groups in particular).

They need to stay right there so that they can live under the 'homophobic' or 'transphobic' or whatever it is regime that they fear will come back when Yanukovych is reinstalled in Kiev and/or where Russia will carve out new nation-states in occupied areas as it appears they are planning to do. Same with the Afghani refugees half a year ago: the West probably succeeded in getting most of their trannies and feminists out. Fuck 'refugees'.

In short: pro-Russia, anti-refugee.

"Populism" is just Democracy libs hate by Trab in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

There has always been a tension between liberal and democratic ideology; indeed, they weren't even that well merged until the early 20th century, especially after WWI. Ardent 19th century liberals like J. S. Mill were highly sceptical of democracy.

We're seeing that they still haven't been fully reconciled today, with plenty of liberals clearly preferring some sort of unelected bureaucratic government composed of self-styled 'intellectuals' (viz. the 'enlightened', 'educated', 'sophisticated', &c. cosmopolitans) running everything, most of whom are foreign to their own country.

The cosmopolitan soy-latte-guzzling Remoaners who voted against Brexit because 'mah holidays to Europe' and who read The Guardian to whinge about the 'Far-Right Tories' all day are an arch-example: they have zero problem with having their national sovereignty and borders eroded, and they were 100% willing to discard the referendum results, what with all their nonsense about annulling the first Brexit referendum to hold a second one in which the people would realize their 'error' and that their 'true' interests were 'really' served by remaining in the EU. Of course, if the second one also failed, many of them would be open to a third and a fourth and so on right up until they got their desired result, at which point they'd immediately switch to being anti-referendum.

Liberals very easily become anti-democrats if they think that the 'ignorant', 'uneducated', 'unsophisticated', &c. people are shifting Rightward. You could also see strands of this with the '2016 was rigged', '#NotMyPresident' thing during the Trump Administration: there is this persistent idea that Trump was 'illegitimate' and that he either wasn't voted in or was only voted in by 'inbred uneducated hillbilly rednecks' (as if those people even remotely outnumber the typical big city urbanite scum such that they could win the federal election). Just like the fool you linked, who writes that Bernie Sanders (compared to Biden, more populist and less elitist and pluralist, that is, a more extreme and arguably more illiberal democrat) is 'anti-intellectual'.

They just can't face the fact that educated urbanites can also oppose them. 'Like, dude, surely being educated would make you a liberal cosmopolitan, r-r-right?'

Just look at this comment. Obvious liberal who calls democracy 'a shit system'. Yeah, it's 'shit' and needs to be replaced by unelected and mostly foreign 'intellectuals' when Meloni wins:

https://saidit.net/s/politics/comments/9sns/the_new_pm_of_italy_looks_like_the_solution_all/zm60

Of course, democracy's great, definitely not rigged (e.g. 'the most secure election in US history') and the 'adults are back in charge' when the likes of Biden wins.

One of the many things that I like about the actual Far-Right is its sheer consistency compared to all other positions: there, liberalism and democracy are always trash, and not only situationally so. 'I win, therefore democracy is good and not rigged; I lose, therefore democracy is bad and rigged' is reasoning befitting merely of the idiot masses and unbecoming of anyone genuinely possessing of intelligence.

Think about it: every future Federal election in America will be considered 'fake' and 'rigged' by millions of people. And the only thing that decides who those millions of people actually are is who wins. For instance, if a Republican wins in 2024, there is practically 100% certainty that millions of Democrats will go through the '#NotMyPresident' spiel all over again, that there will be a 'Russiagate 2.0' conspiracy theory (The Russians hacked it again!!!).

England is excessively cucked and really deserves its destruction by casparvoneverec in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm not joining in on the anti-royal bandwagon either: all of the Leftard morons out there are ecstatic about it for all the wrong reasons.

Without the British Empire there would be literally no civilization in Australia and NZ. Just tribes of nonwhites killing and occasionally eating each other, and eating vile grubs. The Leftard dipshits have no idea how vastly Britain improved those lands: they went from Stone Age to first-world within a few centuries. The transformation was incredible.

Now look at Papua New Guinea, one of the world's worst countries. A much larger, sparser populated version of the PNG is exactly how these countries would look without the dreaded White Man, simply because Papuans are genetically very close to the natives of those countries.

Now, the royal family is literally the last thing that these countries have that connects them to Europe, and if that's severed, then these new republics will be fully part of the third-world SEA region as well as far more indigenized. A republic would be an absolute disaster for either country. They'd both elect some idiot celebrity for President, and the Constitution would be far more 'woke' than the recently proposed but rejected one in Chile. Of course, both countries have been de facto republics for decades, but a de jure republic would scrap the old constitution and put in something vastly worse.

Furthermore, the continuation of the constitutional monarchy in both countries is a massive 'Screw You' to Leftard indigenist morons. Sure, I don't care about any specific individual on the throne either (and I absolutely hate the insufferable Harry and Meaghan), but the constitutional monarchy is vastly superior to the absolutely woketarded dysfunctional cesspool that has the support of, and would be run by, all of the countries' worst inhabitants. The White politicians are already atrocious; they don't need to be replaced by petrol huffers who have it in for Ol' Whitey. We'd be better off just allowing the White politicians to be sidelined and eventually replaced within their own parties by Chinese, Indians and to a lesser extent other nonwhites (which is inevitable) than to let any indigenous body of government full of endless whinging voices be formed.

So... some borderline retarded 'indigenous' celebrity figure as Head of State rather than King Charles III? A new constitution full of queer and trans shit? A political system that has the representatives of the 'indigenous'—who probably won't even be elected or who will only be elected by the tiny 'indigenous' minority of the overall population—able to heavily condition public policy? That's a no from me, G. The constitutional monarchy is the very last bulwark against that: I don't believe in letting go of that just because there are plenty of arguments that we can make against the House of Windsor.

Imagine if we took the most woketarded 'native Americans' we could find, made them a de facto or possibly even de jure third tier of government through whom everything that goes through the Senate and House would then have to be passed. Plus we scrap the already garbage US Constitution and replace it with an even worse one full of Left-wing buzzwords that cedes all sorts of powers to that third tier. Plus we take the biggest dipshit of all of them and make xir the President. That would be akin to what these new republics would be.

Putin lost 5 generals? by Ethnocrat in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

This is simply your typical fake news, filter bubble, misinformation, mediatization-influenced perspective. You make one wide, sweeping statement, address no specific cases and provide no sources for that wide, sweeping statement. If you actually had the sense to look into each individual case as I clearly did above, most of them weren't even purported to have been killed by 'snipers' like you claim. If you're some kind of academic or teacher... well, no wonder the world's a mess.

Also, just to remind people of your ilk of how far away from reality your perspectives on this matter (as with all matters) actually are:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_engagements_during_the_2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine

13 Russian victories;

2 Ukrainian victories

But, you know, Ukraine is totally winning, right?

I'm not sure why you bring 'mercenaries' into this when the Ukraine is doing the exact same thing with the calls for establishing an 'international brigade' plus much extra: arming civilians, imploring civilians to make improvised weapons, releasing and arming their prison populations and otherwise resorting to actions that can only be those of a desperate, losing regime.

Are these videos 'fake news' or 'Russian propaganda'? Because if they aren't, it sure isn't looking good for NATO and EU bootlickers:

https://southfront.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/222222.mp4

https://southfront.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/222-2-1.mp4

Ian Cranston: Guilty of Self-Defense while White, Warren Balogh by Fitter_Happier in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I have been in [dozens] of fights

I doubt that. Why would one man have been in dozens of fights without starting at least half of them? Care to explain why you're any different from the deceased? Trying to be a bigger man by brawling more than Andrew Jackson?

It's difficult to imagine you'd say that was acceptable.

Nah, that's your misunderstanding of, and attempt at a 'gotcha' directed at, 'White supremacists', etc. Truth be told, we don't like degenerate Whites either: after all, if you're that aggressive, you should have been bagged long ago, and I'd have zero problem with any groid that does the service. On those rare occasions we invoke the words 'Master Race' (Shock! Horror!), you're evidently not part of it.

Are you suggesting it's ok to kill someone who keeps approaching your fiance, etc.

This scenario has nothing in common with the event in question. (Although I have zero problems with someone being bagged if it can be proven that he's persistently being a pest of that nature.)

Now, I doubt that any decent, moral person has any problem with some abeed getting bagged who, after sexually harassing a woman (that alone enough of an offence for many feminists and some others to want a man put to death), proceeds to throw punches for no justifiable reason. Either the former or the latter is enough moral justification for bagging someone, let alone the both of them combined.

More to the point, regarding your last line?

Why are you so protective of 'black people'?

It's because you think that criminals are the real victims; that the police are the real criminals, etc. in typical lopsided liberetardian-progressive fashion, right?

Furthermore, your attempt to bring race into the equasion is merely another attempt to advantage you in an argument with 'White supremacists'. Him being black—while drastically increasing the chance of him being a piece of shit to anyone who isn't an egalitarian low-IQ moron who lives in a fantasy world—doesn't actually mean much here. Nobody should be free of the consequences of immoral and stupid actions, whereas you're clearly implying that we view all nonwhites as guilty and all Whites as saintly, which demonstrates your lack of understanding. You think we really value the lives of Antifa Whites or White queers and trannies, for instance? Nay, it wouldn't be an understatement to say that many of us rightly view them as worse than many nonwhites: I respect Erdogan or Assad more than some Antifa crackhead obese pansexual tranny. All that 'White supremacism' really entails here is that I consider a White Antifa crackhead obese pansexual tranny to have very marginally more value than a black one, since the latter would be even more low-IQ and otherwise incompatible with civilization than the former.

Batman latest bit of cultural vandalism by Richard_Parker in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Kravitz is a Negro-Schlomo whose 'interpretation' of Catwoman is as bisexual (see, for example, https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-pop-culture/zoe-kravitz-says-interpreted-catwoman-bisexual-batman-rcna18172 ): it's a sort of triple whammy. Yehuds wearing blackface while playing queer roles? Yep, sounds about kike.

She also has some hilarious identity issues. I remember reading something about how she didn't really know whether she should identify as Negro or Schlomo. I think the answer is flagrantly obvious: just identify with the one that benefits you most at the time. Mayo-Schlomo hybrids have perfected the art of shapeshifting par excellence. Why can't Negro-Schlomos do the same?

Who is the greatest country in the world (today)? by radicalcentrist in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Indeed. Your comment reminds me of two different narratives on Israel.

The first stems from what was a few years ago being referred to, and perhaps still is, as 'Left-wing anti-Semitism'. Examples of 'Left-wing anti-Semitism' include narratives such as that 'Israel is an Apartheid state' and all others that analogize Israel either to the Union of South Africa or any fascist state. Naturally, when Leftards say this, we flip the value judgement they assign to it and say that our aim is to essentially get for Whites what Jews already have for themselves. We also see that the prime facie contradictory 'ethnostate for me, globalization for thee' attitude of many Jews exemplifies a sickening hypocrisy. Of course, when one understands that ethnocentrism strengthens oneself and that the lack thereof weakens oneself, then this attitude no longer exemplifies hypocrisy, only Jewish supremacism.

And this nicely leads into the second narrative worthy here of consideration: the insistence by certain figures that Israel is in fact not ethnonationalist, not Jewish supremacist, not 'racist', not religiously sectarian and so forth, and that the 'real racism' resides first and foremost in the domain of their 'racist' and 'anti-Semitic' detractors, even when said detractors are Left-wing. This is at some point followed by messing about with the definition of 'Jew' or 'race', and the strange notion that Israel is the 'best hope for'—and, further still, the 'only example of'—'liberal democracy' in the Middle East, as well as the 'greatest ally' of 'liberal democracies' worldwide. They will, for instance, point to the number of Arabs in Israel as evidence of these supposed 'facts', even though the laws of Israel overtly and unmistakably privilege Jews.

Of course, there is plenty of degenerate nonsense in Israel; for instance, the sheer amount of homosexuality in Tel Aviv, admitted by its own authorities. But one notices that the 'Left-wing anti-Semites' now condemn the State of Israel for having the 'most Right-wing' government since its establishment, and Israel is perhaps the only country on the face of this planet that could realistically be viewed as progressively shifting Rightward, and thus the only country that is genuinely progressing full stop. Indeed, Netanyahu seems to be forced into an alliance with them, lest he unable to rule otherwise, even if it seems as though he is trying to minimize their influence by ensuring that Likudniks rather than the members of these 'Far-Right' parties occupy as many of the top positions in government as possible. Nevertheless, the fact that open Jewish supremacists are in government at all exemplifies how Israel's political culture is shifting. Go back thirty years and Israel was banning the likes of Meir Kahane and his overtly Jewish supremacist Kach party from politics. Today, two Jews whose beliefs are similar to those of the Kahanists are in top governmental positions.

The Little Mermaid trailer is being destroyed by Ethnocrat in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Best comment section since the Santa Inc. trailer. But what's great is that they haven't shut it down.

One thing that you notice is that almost all groids are in favour of it (because of their ethnocentrism) whereas all the other races are overwhelmingly against it. Most commenters seem to be nonwhite, so seeing all these Hispanics, Asians and Muslims pile in on this Afrocentric shit is hilarious. It's groids v. almost everyone else.

I've probably left a hundred comments, mostly directed at the low-IQ hateful niggers who are defending cultural appropriation of a Danish work for racial reasons.

Jewish Troubles with Uppity Rappers, TOO. Enlightening read about Jews (if you can believe it) and rap. by Fitter_Happier in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

So this thread attracts nothing but six comments from three of the biggest subhuman tards on this site, the biggest of whom (the mentally ill moron 'socks' who continues to imperialistically spread hegemonic, pro-System narratives into this site instead of fucking off back to Reddit) turns this thread into little more than absurd paranoiac waffling about a practically non-existent group like the KKK with a doused in drivel about how intelligent he supposedly is.

Imagine waffling about the KKK... in 2022. Last I heard, they had black members and were merely building literal roads: well, that's more than the worthless subhuman perpetually online 'socks' will ever do.

Likewise, imagine being a philosemite in 2022. Unable to see patterns to the point of being utterly braindead?

Likewise, imagine thinking that the 'Far-Right' was bad in 2022. Do these people just have a sick urge to castrate little boys or something?

Now, look at this low-IQ drivel:

then a day to respond to DAR arguments

Does anyone seriously think that socks is anything more than a vile failed subhuman who doesn't even remotely deserve a response to anything that he ever writes? Notice that the number of DAR arguments are precisely zero, because nobody of sane mind actually takes socks' worldview seriously? Notice that this asshole inflates his own worth wherever he goes, acting like some bigshot when he's a terminally online nobody in reality?

This appears to be his main concern and deserves attention, but ALL of the owners and managers are not Jewish. It's a strawman argument.

So if 99.9% are Jewish and 0.01% are goy-ish... no problem according to 'socks'? We need to increase it by 0.01% at which point it arbitrarily becomes a problem?

Do 100% of blacks need to commit crimes to warrant declaring them subhuman? Evidently not. 13-56 is enough of an argument. Likewise, we do not need 100% of something to be zhiddish for it to be a problem.

More of the same stupid victimhood BS.

The same victimhood 'BS' that pervades Jewish thought even more than black thought? Victimhood: wrong when blacks express it towards Jews; correct when everyone expresses it towards Whites? Ah... the usual nonsensical Left-wing double standards at play. There is no strawman involved here.

Jews are clearly above blacks in America—as evidenced in the cases of Oprah, Nick Cannon and most recently, Kanye and Kyrie, except in the deranged mind of 'socks' in which the KKK lives rent free. Note: Jews are the only group that are 'lower' (from a Leftist perspective, i.e. actually at the top in practice) than blacks in the American social structure. Zhids can criticize blacks all they like; blacks cannot criticize zhids. Both can say whatever they like about Whites, who are at the 'highest' (i.e. at the bottom in practice) point of the American social structure, as evidenced by nobody caring one iota about the numerous anti-White statements made by the likes of Oprah, Nick Cannon and Dave Chappelle, all three of whom would have long been deported or killed for their bullshit in any White supremacist society.

Ban these three low-IQ subhuman fuckers, none of whom contribute anything to do this site. If someone walks into your home and takes a massive shit on the floor like they do, you'd want them gone. Online, things should be no different.

Another humiliation by DisastrousDepth14 in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Given that they've been through Cameron, May, BoJo and Truss since 2010, I don't think that he will last too long. For starters, how is he is supposed to succeed on the issues that led both BoJo and Truss to lose too much support? For all we know, he might be gone in a few months after he fails to work the miracles they seem to be demanding, i.e. to seriously get them back up in the polls (Labour is getting up to around 56% in some recent polls, with the Tories sinking to around 20%—as inaccurate as polling can be, such dramatic changes can't be dismissed). And that leads to my second point.

This is all because people actually voted for a Right-wing government and keep getting these losers that keep going to the Centre to Centre-Left in practice. Do these utter idiots not understand that if people wanted a Centre or Left government, they would have voted LibDem and Labour far more than they actually did? But because power lies on the Centre-Left (where most of the mass media sit, for example) and these cowards know it, these idiots all instinctively go there so that The Guardian might call them less nasty names such as Fash-cyst and Naht-zee for a time (as if it matters: Guardianistas and the other more idiotic peoples of Britain strongly believe that the Tories are Far-Right fascists, literal Hitlers, as laughable as that seems, and nothing will change their mind on that).

Meanwhile, Labour has gone from its biggest loss in history due to being considered too extreme Left under the Corbynites, to presenting a more united and rather 'Blairite' Centre-Left front under Starmer. The Tories seem to be doing everything they possibly can to sink their own 2025 re-election chances.

If there's anyone sane left in the Tories (fat chance), surely they can see the obvious answer to beating Starmer's Labour: How about putting an actual conservative in power, who at the very least seriously lowers immigration, who reindustrializes (seemingly a popular talking point, one to which a paleocon or Right-Gaullist like Zemmour clung to in France), and who continues to distance Britain from the EU? The things that people voted Leave for, which should have told you what many if not still a majority want? The problem, of course, is that I can't see a single person like this anywhere near power. Instead, it's a bunch of uninspiring careeristic, economistic, non-ideological types: hardly what less conservative Tories want, let alone more ideological and principled ones. If I were British, I obviously wouldn't have voted for any of these people, because I never have and never will vote for a Leftish or centrist 'conservative', with a Zemmour-style CivNat or paleocon as far Leftward as I'm even remotely willing to consider (which is as Rightmost as I can vote for in my own country). That is, not Cameron (fag marriage, opposition to Brexit, betrayed his promise to lower immigration and actually increased it), May (constant talk about governing 'from the centre' and her verbal condemnations of 'nationalists'), BoJo, Truss or Sunak. No sufficiently paleocon Tory in Downing Street, no vote: it would go back to whichever third-parties are to their Right.

And, indeed, anything short of that and many High Tories will be staying home, and many Red Tory/Blue Labour Leftish to centrist types will be seeing Starmer's Labour as sufferable enough to replace a series of unstable Tory governments. After all, with Corbyn gone, the same mass media who sunk Labour last election because Corbyn's insufficient support of Israel led the usual zhiddish and/or Zionist types to hysterically call him an 'anti-Semite' will by and large be on Labour's side next election. The Tories have lost that big media advantage that aided BoJo's decisive victory in 2019.

Starmer just needs to keep his philosemite + Blairite combination going, and too many of the less committed Tories will say that Starmer is sufferable enough to be like David Cameron, i.e. someone who less committed and more centrist Red Tories/Blue Labour types accepted, and too many High Tories will stay home in early 2025, leading to a dramatic Labour comeback possibly even eclipsing BoJo's 2019 decisive victory.

In conclusion, I don't think this Sunak character will be worth much even for less committed or ideological Tories, swing voters, etc., and as one moves further Rightward, I think there's even less support to be found. But the Tories also have no one obviously better to replace him with.

Pound crashes as Liz Truss and negro chancellor announce massive tax cuts for the rich by VacaLeitera767 in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

It's almost like they're deliberately sabotaging themselves just so that the masses can be easier convinced that Brexit was a 'mistake' and thus that rejoining the EU again out of nostalgia for the marginally less dysfunctional times of Blair and Cameron is desirable.

Of course, this would be an unsound argument even if it were to suffice for the masses: there is no reason whatsoever to believe that Truss, Kwarteng, &c. would not be high up in the British government if Remain won. George Osborne, who seemed to be Cameron's personal preferred choice for a successor when he resigned in 2016, is right up there with the worst of them.

Almost all heads of state and government seem to be worse than their immediate predecessors these days. Perhaps nowhere is that more clear than if we abstract away all male British heads of government and consider the three remaining.

That is to say that Truss is clearly shaping out to be worse than May, and that May was clearly worse than Thatcher.

Now, a question about Brazil. Over the past few years it seems Brazil has seen the rise of what I can only really describe as a Brazilian analogue to South Africa's EFF. That is Leo Pericles' 'Popular Unity' party.

Do they seem like they could become a big problem in future, given that they are rather like America's RCP or PSL writ large? Even a cursory look at their website brings up a slew of Leftist buzzwords, such as 'fascista' (predictably used to denote Bolsonaro and his government), 'lgbtfobicas', 'racismo' and 'racistas'. They seem like the PT, but even worse.

Hard to believe that contemporary Brazil is the same country as what's in this video: https://files.catbox.moe/37of2g.mp4 How did things regress so far in less than four decades?

Indian "comedian" from Britain celebrates "white men brought down by asians" by arainynightinskyrim in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

There's definitely an asymmetry here.

The British friend-enemy distinction essentially maps onto a liberal-illiberal distinction. They simply can't identify that they're in a race war against people like Professor Ladwa and Mr. Kumar, who are open about their intent being nothing short of seizing their country.

Meanwhile, the 'British Indian' friend-enemy distinction remains highly ascriptive. 'Friends' are fellow ethnic 'minorities' who are useful 'allies'; enemies are the British people. Beliefs, values and the like simply play very little into how they determine friends from enemies.

So the race war is simply being fought by one side whilst the other seems to be almost completely incapable of understanding that there is indeed even a war to begin with. I think that the 'minorities' sense this weakness and are simply using it, quite predatorily, as an opportunity to fulfill various kinds of self-interests (we can't make a land like this, so we must take it; then we will have the 'privileges' that our European competitors [supposedly] have but which they have been 'withholding' from us, and without them in it), justified by revenge fantasies, ressentiment and the like.

I think these people will be very disappointed to find that if (more likely a matter of when) they take over, that is actually nothing that is being withheld from them, and that things will rapidly devolve into contests between the 'minority' groups themselves. It isn't going to lead to them having more resources or living the sort of playboy lifestyle—this semi-mythical lifestyle full of fun and fast cars, one that in reality very few Europeans live—that so many of them seem to desire and romanticize (especially the younger ones).

There isn't really a 'White privilege' where many Whites are living like aristocrats and monarchs and are unfairly or unjustly withholding all these goodies from the lumpens and have-nots, who just need to take from the haves. But it's exactly how they argue: the White majority parts of a city are not better than the 'minority' parts in spite of keeping 'minorities' out (i.e. the Leftist argument: the Whites withhold, keep to themselves, what is good from others), but because of it (the Whites are not keeping anything to themselves, it's just that 'minorities' have a reverse Midas touch and turn good into bad, gold into shit). Whites don't build the good and withhold it from 'minorities'; 'minorities' take the good and trash it.

But notice that the outcome ends up the same in either scenario: namely, the Whites are left with what is good and the 'minorities' are not, and that it is easy for 'minorities' to simply reinterpret the latter scenario (we have nothing good because we destroy the good) into the much more psychologically acceptable former (we have nothing good because they keep the good).

Leftists respond to the "Don't Say Gay" bill by LGBTQIAIDS in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS[S] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Spot on. They know 0% about the bill... but 100% about being gay. The consequence of identifying with their gender or sexuality before anything else.

Even then, I doubt that any of them can concretely recite the differences between each gender and sexuality, since new ones are being invented all the time.

They hilariously see it as an attack on themselves, even though the bill apparently also prevents all sorts of hetero things as well. Basically, it seems that you can't teach kids LGBTQIA+ crap or heteronormativity.

Of course, the gains made in wiping out the presence of LGBTQIA garbage are greater than the losses incurred in also wiping out the limited presence of what is already a practically non-existent heteronormativity along with it. But it isn't even what it's being summed up to be.

Firstly, it's literally one state, Florida.

Secondly, I suspect this graphic here is supposed to indicate that the bill only applies up till grade four. Where I am, that's when a person is around age ten. So it is possible that none of these protections really apply to most kids aged eleven years and over.

https://twitter.com/Monkey_D_Monke/status/1511826818684268547

The bill really looks like typical performative nonsense. It's the typical bone dropped to conservatives, not much different to Macron's government a few days ago banning a very small Antifa group that was particularly violent towards police. The message he intends to send to conservatives and to the police, who are known for inordinately supporting RN, is simple:

'Macron did this one little thing for us. That means that we don't need to shift Rightward to be tough on crime, because Macron really has our back'.

It's similar to the noise he made about American-imported 'wokeness', as if postmodernism isn't totally French, only to do nothing about it. And at around the same time that one of his ministers banned Generation Identity.

Take fifty bones away from them and then give them one back. Now the Right are being good dogs again!

What is your opinion on the Ghost Of Kyiv? by Edjean50 in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

There's an incredible amount of fake news involved in this war, possibly unlike anything we've ever seen before. Even the whole Western media perception of how the war is playing out clearly contradicts what's actually happening on the ground.

For example, look at both of these article's headlines.

'The war in Ukraine hasn't gone well for Russia. But it has more weapons it can deploy':

https://www.npr.org/2022/03/02/1084033803/the-war-in-ukraine-hasnt-gone-well-for-russia-but-it-has-more-weapons-it-can-dep

'Ukraine war: Ukraine can absolutely win against Russia - Blinken'

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60626921

This article (and Blinken) is particularly delusional. It's the same kind of talk as the American spooks claiming that Kabul would be encircled and fall within 90 days, when the Taliban didn't even bother encircling it and it fell in less than 7. It's a feedback loop: fake news is propagated through the mass media and becomes 'truth'; the mass media believe their own fake news and interpret future events through the lens of this 'truth', and thus move further and further away from reality each iteration.

"If it's the intention of Moscow to try somehow to topple the government and install its own puppet regime, 45 million Ukrainians are going to reject that one way or the other," he said.

As if to say that the current regime isn't a Judeo-NATO-EU puppet.

Stiff resistance by Ukrainian forces continued to hamper Russian advances across the country on the ninth day of the invasion.

Asked if he was convinced Ukrainian [sic!] could win, he said: "Over time, absolutely."

Now, let's look at the reality. Wikipedia's list of military engagements with links to each individual one includes the current result of each engagement:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_engagements_during_the_2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine

And let's tally the number of each:

Ten 'Ongoing'

Nine Russian victories

Two Ukrainian victories

Two 'Inconclusive'

So... of battles with clear outcomes, Russia has won nine and Ukraine two. If Russia is winning over 4x the engagements of Ukraine... just how exactly is a Ukrainian victory 'absolutely' possible? The only war that they're winning is the 'information war' (i.e. the fake news, propaganda war), with the whole Western media willingly becoming the Zelensky regime's propaganda department.

Even after Kiev falls, Zelensky has fled or died, and the rest of the country begins crumbling without a ruling regime to fight for, these losers will still preserve this narrative. 'Just keep waiting, goys! The resistance will make a comeback! The Ukrainian government-in-exile will make a comeback!'

Hollywood and porn hub stop the distribution of their products in Russia by casparvoneverec in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

They also seem to be trying to rein in the out-of-control Western social media:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/26/technology/russia-censorship-tech.html

Basically, these muppets have to comply or simply lose the Russian market.

Apple, TikTok and Spotify have complied with the landing law, according to the Russian internet regulator, Roskomnadzor, and Google has taken steps to do so as well. Twitch and Telegram have not. Meta, the parent of Facebook, and Twitter have complied with some parts of the law but not others.

However, Jewgle has taken advantage of the conflict by using it as an excuse to demonetize practically all Russian YouTube channels. This makes sense from their viewpoint: virtue signal and pay out less.

In November, the government listed 13 companies that must comply with the new landing law: Meta, Twitter, TikTok, Likeme, Pinterest, Viber, Telegram, Discord, Zoom, Apple, Google, Spotify and Twitch.

Sounds great. Fuck all of them. Meta (Facebook) bans our profiles, groups and pages, Twitter has been even worse since Dorsey's ousting, TikTok is full of genderfluid transsexual retards, Discord bans our groups and every single account inside them at the same time, Apple interferes with the Telegram app to hide our channels from their device users, Google pushes our websites down the search results to reduce traffic and constantly bans our YouTube channels, and Twitch instabans any of us that even try to get on there.

Since these MNCs have become more powerful than entire nations while the American idiots foolishly do nothing, here's to hoping that Russia will begin trying to cut them down to size. For some reason, they all think that they should be able to provide services in Russia while employing practically no one there. That will soon end: they'll either employ Russians or be forced to leave.

Now, a Russia in which there are no more pozzed, woke, gayer-than-AIDS American films, and where the local homo Schlomos are all complaining about their onset of erectile dysfunction because they're unable to jack it over the gay section of Porn Hub, and intend to return to Israel so that they can resume their old habits of compulsively masturbating right where they left off? How could that not be an improvement?

Almost All Scientific Fraud In Psychology Backs Up Leftist Dogmas - Ed Dutton by cisheteroscum in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I saw that one, but didn't think much of it. Basically, certain academics are willing to write convincing but false studies in order to promote their worldview. For example, Stephen Breuning claimed that IQ could be raised by dozens of points by changing one's environment—naturally something Left-liberals wish was true—but practically all of the data he provided as evidence was fabricated. He got away with this from around 1978 to 1983. In 1983 he was found out, and yet strangely his 'work' is still being cited today.

More importantly than this video, Keith Woods' latest video on the harmful effects of 'diversity' was the most productive one I've seen recently, mostly because it brings to attention several academic papers that were heretofore largely unknown to us. He clearly did his research.

Donald Trump confirms 2024 Presidential Campaign. by radicalcentrist in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm for it simply because of the sheer destabilizing effect of this man on America. There is no man alive today who makes all the right people more upset than DJT. Tucker Carlson and Elon Musk, as hated by the lumpenproletarianized masses as they are, don't come anywhere near close. At the same time, however, practically nothing could compel me to support him.

MoRon DeSemitus should step aside and let Agent Orange Cheeto Trumpenfuhrer TrumPutin with tiny hands who can't read run unopposed. Polls of GOP voters indicate that around half prefer TrumPutin over any other candidate, and DeSemitus is in distant second place.

Recently, some 'progressive' politicians have declared that they aren't for Biden 2024, and I still think that the chance of him not being the Democrat 2024 candidate remains quite high. However, whether he is not the candidate because: a) He is talked out of running again; b) He loses his own party primary, or; c) His health declines to the point that he becomes a retarded vegetable, remains to be seen.

TrumPutin simply needs to threaten to run as a third-party candidate if he doesn't win his primary. He should simply present them with the ultimatum: I win the primary or I destroy your party permanently. That'll be enough to ensure that the GOP fall back in line, since a Trumplican third-party would cause immense havoc to the GOP and they aren't so stupid as not to know it. They can stick together or sink together.

I'd assume that TrumPutin will be up against a candidate who is 'progressive' and 'not Biden nor TrumPutin, therefore vote for me!', and will then lose by a slightly bigger margin than in 2020.

With my estimations out of the way, let's consider what I'd like to see happen at that point. Mainly, for the GOP to really panic and realize that they're already in a Democrat-run dominant-party system, and, from there, begin to seriously question democratic legitimacy. From there, I hope that the country will begin to break up along Red-Blue lines (which largely map onto majority White-majority nonwhite lines). Of course, secession has long been practically illegal (as the libertarian idiots in the Confederacy learned the hard way) and doesn't seem to be as simple as a mere referendum, but we'll see what happens there as it slowly sets in to their thick skulls that they've conclusively lost the war. After all, it was all due to their unwillingness to actually stop immigration, deradicalize the education system, make their big-tent ideologies more attractive than the Democrats' potent combination of hedonism, nihilism and parasitism that has immense appeal to impressionable and stupid people, &c. If they simply became the 'fascists' and 'racists' the Left has always accused them of rather than being Leftists a few years removed, none of this would have happened. America would have been vastly more powerful than it is now, and nobody would have messed with a nuclear-armed White ethnostate just because they disagree with its racial and social policies. Alas, the chief opposition to the party of evil so happens to be the party of stupid.

Under a Democrat-run dominant-party system, secessionism will only come from the Republicans since support for secession seems to negatively correlate with the amount of authority held. Obviously, if the Republicans were the ones to capture the state instead of the Democrats, it would be Left-wing secessionisms like CalExit, Cascadia, &c. which would grow, but one notices that these have reverted to a sort of dormancy since TrumPutin left office. It would take a GOP victory for them to regain momentum.

Obviously I'd prefer it if Left-wing secessionisms (whole American states and not some retarded LARP by Antifa nutjobs like the CHAZ/CHOP) occurred under a GOP Presidency, since CalExit and Cascadia seemed to be far more serious than anything going on in Republican states. Because of the more patriotic and thus centralist approach of the GOP, too many in the GOP do not want cede over any land no matter the cost of keeping it, whereas Leftists seem more likely to actually secede. Perhaps it is because they care less about national unity, or perhaps it is because they project their various fantasies onto those hypothetical new nations, whereas the GOP is more realistic and present-oriented than idealistic and future-oriented.

I also think it's to do with intelligence: Many Leftists, being hardcore racial egalitarians, really are that stupid as to think that an independent California wouldn't begin rapidly descending into a fourth-world dump full of retarded trannies, whereas we here obviously know better.

For instance, an ethnic Tanzanian YouTuber has recently been uploading footage of minority-White Los Angeles. You can only imagine how much worse things would get if California became a country, i.e. a non-white country governed by idiots adhering to insane ideologies.

See, for instance, https://youtu.be/OjC4CqnXxBg and https://youtu.be/642gtvi9XL0 It's all garbage, graffiti, tents and 'diversity'. Even the slogans are stupid. 2:15 reads 'Racism Is A Pandemic'. Yet LA wasn't like this until the 'diverse' became the overwhelming majority of its population. Does any non-'diverse' city come to mind when you see this footage? Nope, they all share 'diversity' in common, whether Chicongo, Detoilet, Filthadelphia, Johannesburg or anywhere else.

It's almost 50 degrees Celsius in Iraq right now by Ethnocrat in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I also can't figure out why it really matters. As a long-time private 'black piller' who doesn't actually think that most late-modern processes are actually reversible, and certainly not enough to sustain civilization, I couldn't give a rat's ass about what happens to an exceedingly larger population of this planet. In fact, if enough of us could safely get to other planets I wouldn't care at all: just bring enough animals that don't deserve to go extinct and things that don't deserve to be destroyed. This way, the worthy things of the Earth may be preserved whilst the greater number of unworthy things—like every last copy of that homo-negro Lil Nas X's 'music' albums; or every last video of the morbidly obese 'Ukrainian' (I honestly thought he was Hispanic for a while) homosexual Nikocado Avocado gluttonously pigging away at mounds of junk food—can be submerged, hopefully never to be found again.

My view? Get the popcorn ready and sit back. This is either one of the biggest lies in all of human history or there will be mass death and destruction unlike anything we've ever seen. Climate change, it is assumed, gives some people too much water (e.g. Indonesia, Bangladesh), or too little (e.g. Egypt).

I wonder if the global population will even reach 10,000,000,000 given how rapidly population growth seems to be slowing. After all, the birth rate declines around the world keep exceeding what they think will happen. But if it reaches 11,200,000,000 in 2100 as the UN still believe it will, and we assume that climate change is what it's drummed up to be, those numbers will plummet fast.

Based or cringe? by HeWhoGlows in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They're unironically still more sane than most people of their age in an ever-growing number of countries.

Tattoos? I can't stand them, but these tattoos aren't as cringe as ones saying 'Pfizer' or 'Moderna' plus the date of being jabbed. Or a favourite brand's name or logo.

The music? I imagine a billion or more whiggers, chiggers, niggers, etc. listen to similar (c)rap 'music' around the world every day. Just another sign of the times.

Smoking? I never have. Still far more cringe things out there.

More interesting is that it is those things that are exactly what the Leftists who post videos like this on Reddit to ridicule White people would point out, even though they defend these things in almost any other context. 'Like, look at these tatted-up White supremacists smoking and listening to rap music, hahaha', says the Redditard, to a room full of 'they/thems' while Lil Nas X's latest album is playing on full volume in the background.

Indeed, I can only laugh at the notion of some Redditard trannies with My Little Pony tattoos watching this and thinking that they're in any way above these people. At least these people aren't a bunch of trannies or queers who proudly list their mental illnesses on their social media bios and pop numerous meds every day.

Just don't get involved in the war. Both sides suddenly pretend to be neutral to ethnonationalists since Ukrainian liberals or Putin's supporters don't find their respective sides worth dying for. Both sides use men animated by higher ideals as cannon fodder.

Use this time in which the Putinists have been willing to ignore you wisely, because both sides will come after you right after this war.

Former Japan PM Abe Shinzo is shot, not showing vital signs. by radicalcentrist in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Abe kicked the bucket. Around four hours after the shooting.

Wow... I don't think anyone saw that coming. At least we aren't hearing 'Far-Right, Far-Right, Far-Right!' all over the media as we would if it happened to a Bush or Clinton or any other Western politician.

Anyone know the motive of the shooter?

I guess three potential motives come to mind: a Leftist who sees him as too Right (e.g. because of his performative pushing back against the pacifist parts of the constitution), a Rightist who sees him as too Left or liberal, or a simple attention seeker? After all, anyone who kills such a high ranking politician—the longest serving PM in Japanese history—especially with two shotgun shells in such an anti-gun place as Japan, will clearly have their fifteen minutes of fame.

Apparently, rumours are spreading all over Japanese social media that the shooter was ethnically Chinese or Korean despite his name.

Update 1: There are claims that the double-barrel shotgun was homemade. He also may have been ex-JSDF.

Update 2: Many reports of Chinese 'netizens' praising the attack. A still from Indian media right now: https://media.patriots.win/post/t5PncLYsBjpw.png Also many reports of anti-CCP 'netizens' who hope that Xi will meet the same fate.

Update 3: Rumours that shooter was part of the JCP (Japan Communist Party). More rumours that he wanted to stop a potential resurgence of Japan.

You should pay attention to what is going on in Chile by VacaLeitera767 in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think Chile is probably the third most European country in LatAm, behind Uruguay and Argentina? Isn't the average Chilean somewhere around 48-52% European?

Avena et al. (2012) (n = 441) states that Argentinians are now only averagely 65% European. I imagine that this percentage has trickled down further still over the past decade; firstly, because other non-European plus non-Hispanic immigrants (such as literal Africans, though I don't know of the exact nationalities) started appearing there no later than the early 1990s, and because the birth rate of the many Paraguayans and other less European immigrants from up north are higher.

https://booksc.org/book/41258277/132e5c

As for the new constitution. It looks far worse than any constitution I've ever seen. The Western ones would be worse, but many of them are also very difficult to change without a clear legislative majority and so forth, preventing Left-liberals from simply replacing them with new documents.

That 50% women quotas are being shoved into a wide range of things at the beginning of the document tells me all I need to know. And, indeed, it's peppered with buzzwords like 'diversity' and 'discrimination' all the way through. It's not minimalistic like the U.S. Constitution, which leaves most things to the three branches of government, but is maximalistic. There's little ambiguity here: 'diversity', 'anti-discrimination' and so forth are going to be shoved down Chilean throats at full throttle.

This goes to show that not only White/European people are susceptible to this garbage. It's a highly contagious mental disease spreading globally. An unfolding process devouring everything in its path.

What exactly is the background of this document? To my understanding, in 2020, under the Right-leaning previous President, Pinera, Chileans overwhelmingly voted to change the 1980 'Pinochet Constitution'. However, it looks as though the Constitutional Convention, the body tasked with drafting the new constitution, is full of total morons (e.g. 'indigenous' activists, communists). Consequently, this draft is a bit too stupid for a slight majority of Chileans to accept according to the polls, which make it look as though it'll be at least 55% for 'Reject': https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Chilean_national_plebiscite

I take it that after this vote we'll then see further polarization in Chile between the Far-Left and Left-liberal nutjobs who will feel like the rejection proves that Chile is 'fascist', etc. and the slight majority of people who aren't quite as Left-wing and who will only vote to replace the 1980 Constitution if the proposed replacement is less stupid?

As an aside, mind telling us more about the next Brazilian election?

A Literal Bot Subreddit by LGBTQIAIDS in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Imagine a world in which that post isn't just regarded merely as some gibberish, but as an objective truth.

Perhaps those who defend him, in such a scenario, will themselves be the ones accused of being 'the real bots'.

That's probably how it'll end up between the future humans on the internet.

Online conversations between human users, many aware of the ubiquity of bots but unable to differentiate them from other human users, may well end up resembling something like:

'You're the real bots!'

'No, you're the real bots!'

'No, I'm not a bot. You're the real bots!'

I think we can actually already see this beginning to happen with the 'Russian/Putin shill' thing. Plenty of conversations already play out like the above, but with terms like 'Russian shill' in place of 'bot'. In both there is a common theme that is not shared with other common things such as the "You're the real racist!" spiel; namely, that the person on the other end is in some way fake.

One thing that reminds me of all this is the long-running 'Postmodern Generator'. At first glance, what it produces might seem to be coherent, but it is actually—and quite obviously upon closer inspection—complete nonsense. The purpose of it was to ridicule academicese, but it is easy to see how people just starting out in continental philosophy might mistake some of this nonsense as academically rigorous work:

https://www.elsewhere.org/pomo/

I can imagine an undergraduate student reading the following, and believing that it is indeed as believable as anything he has read from a book or journal:

“Sexuality is part of the collapse of culture,” says Lacan; however, according to Werther, it is not so much sexuality that is part of the collapse of culture, but rather the absurdity of sexuality. In a sense, von Ludwig holds that we have to choose between Derridaist reading and textual dematerialism. If the precultural paradigm of reality holds, the works of Tarantino are postmodern.

It is, of course, random gibberish. But with a bit of alteration, it would not look out of place in the works of some postmodernist author.

What is your response to this "white" redditors comments about White Replacement by Nasser in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

We just need people to be talking about it, because discussion is the first step that the problem is being acknowledged to even begin with. Just how can a problem even begin to be solved if it is constantly subject to what is known as 'non-decision making'? Prevented from even becoming acknowledged as an issue by those who hold power. Hidden, downplayed, made taboo. Acknowledgement is the first step towards resolution.

This is the main reason I felt that Zemmour was more good than harmful. He simply got people talking about mass immigration to begin with.

And what does this talking do? It forces people to take sides. It forces Whites to be pro- or anti, and makes worthless fucktards like whoever the OP quoted show their true colours. It encourages nonwhites who have antagonistic views to become more vocal and paranoid. There doesn't seem to be any downside whatsoever to the acknowledgement and discussion of the issue.

Let it become a wedge issue in the same way as Roe v. Wade. The more such issues appear the more divided publics become. And there is no such thing as 'too divided' in the current year.

Finally, you can't rebuild the asabiyyah, thumos, etc. of individuals. Nobody seriously argues that allowing endangered species to go extinct is fine even if the members of those species are not the best at any particular thing.

If this asshole needs some kind of proof that there is an instrumental value in keeping any particular group alive, then he is anti-survival for everyone. 'We're not best at this, we're not best at that, we're not best at the other'. Yeah? Well who is? I could just as easily say that groids don't need to be preserved as a race because they sure as hell aren't the smartest or richest, and win fuck all in the way of medals in the Olympics despite being what that guy has in mind when he writes 'best athletes'.

Using his reasoning, why should I give a shit if they go extinct? I also can't think of one single positive thing that Latinos or MENAs are supposed to be the best at, so I guess they should all be wiped out as well. He, of course, won't extend this reasoning that far, because he'd be a racist/Nazi, etc.

How does he even rationalize his own existence? I doubt that he and his family have achieved anything of note, so why would it matter to me if they were all gunned down in the next mass shooting? Apparently people need to be 'superior' to be worth saving, and 'superior' is a club that this fucktard and his family ain't in.

Zionist shabbos goy Putin fires missiles at Israeli jets in Syria by casparvoneverec in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Azov got played so badly. If they had any sense, they would have went to the far-west of Ukraine and let the regular army fight it out. Zelensky wouldn't be able to declare war on Azov because of the larger Russian threat, and if Russia made sufficient gains, they'd be able to coup Zelensky and then take on Russia and become the true heroes as the last men standing, even if they eventually lost. Leaving aside the fact that the West would probably prefer a Russian-dominated Ukraine than a nationalist one and thus would give nothing to an Azov-dominated government.

Instead, they did the exact opposite, running headfirst into battle and senselessly getting destroyed for globohomo. All so that more libtard Ukrainians can survive the war and act like they were the ones who resisted Russia right after they write Azov's whole existence out of the history books. Since I suspect that the attacks on Kiev were merely diversionary and that Russia is only interested in seizing the east while trying to convince the regime that they were really going for the capital, the libtard Zelensky regime will indeed be able to claim that they are the true heroes who stalled a Russian advance, one that was never actually intended to begin with.

Of course, they were probably never really that smart. A bunch of nationalists effectively becoming a unit in any regular libtard army should have known damn well that they would be the first to be put on the frontlines. And they accepted that avoidable fate just to fulfill some sort of thumotic desire.

A lot of the least faggy men left in the Ukraine having gone down in a 'blaze of glory' just so that they can be written out of history. Great way to help the world become even more retarded.

Fall of liberalism: we are doomed to Byzantium? by Rakean93 in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Fukuyama's views are essentially:

  • Liberalism is the ideal political ideology;

  • Democracy is the ideal political system;

  • The development of liberalism is inevitable (it will eventually destroy Islam, conservatism, Marxism and anything else that deviates in some way from liberalism);

  • The development of democracy is inevitable (authoritarian regimes like those in Venezuela are doomed to be replaced by 'liberal democracy', populists like Orban will also fail to move towards 'illiberal democracy');

  • The Far-Right (of which he seems to think Nietzsche is essentially part, similar to his teacher Allan Bloom, who also identifies Nietzsche with the Right) is very bad;

  • The Far-Left (of which he mostly thinks of as Marxism) is also bad, but not as bad as the Far-Right;

  • Trump bad, Obama, Clinton and Biden good;

  • The only acceptable forms of national identity are 'creedal', ascriptivist forms of national identity (e.g. ethnonationalism) are bad. I think he's on the Left-wing of Civic Nationalism;

  • Problems with 'liberal democracy' can only be solved by even more 'liberal democracy', that is, they come from too little 'liberal democracy' rather than too much;

Three things that come to mind that I have no confirmation of:

  • I think he is wary of 'The Squad' but still prefers them over Trump, which is why he's an Obama/Clinton/Biden Democrat and has probably voted straight Democrat since 2008 or even 2004;

  • I think he would choose liberal-progressivism over democracy if forced to choose: he'd rather a 'progressive' undemocratic regime than a conservative democratic regime. This is why he's become a mild Civic Nationalist: he, I think, has slowly realized that atomistic hyperindividualism is corrosive and unsustainable, and hopes that a 'creedal', Civic Nationalism can save liberalism from collapse and replacement by something like what Orban offers (which is clearly unacceptable to Fukuyama, for who liberalism must be saved by all means necessary);

  • I think his conversion from Republican to Democrat is representative of a wider process that will likely occur in all democracies that become too liberal, especially that become multiracial: that is, the general replacement of ideology with identity. In other words, Fukuyama started to care less about his liberal triumphalist ideology in the Bush era (belief in which perfectly augmented him being a Republican) and aligned with his immediate racial interests as a nonwhite combatant in an informal racial war over control of the United States (which are better served by the Democrats). This is probably why he has backed away from some of his claims since he was catapulted to fame in 1989. But I've heard nothing which suggests that he's rejected the core liberal triumphalist beliefs that made him famous in the first place, he's only changed peripheral beliefs.

I don't really know what Dugin believes in order to comfortably contrast the two.

As for my view on Fukuyama, I think that Fukuyama is probably right in his core argument that 'liberal democracy' will eventually take over everything, though I believe it has very little if anything to do with the thumos or recognition he believes is the prime mover behind this development. The only difference is the value-judgement to which I apply to it: For Fukuyama, 'liberal democracy' will perfect the world, whereas my view is precisely the opposite, that it will literally extinguish the world (i.e. reduce all birth rates to zero if given long enough, through a very wide range of proximate causes in which 'liberal democracy' plays a clear causal role, such as feminism and transsexualism).

Zemmour endorses Le Pen by Ethnocrat in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You don't think that the mass media and political classes would prop up a whole bunch of Right-wing candidates to ensure that none of them get through? I don't think it is particularly farfetched at all. They are trying to stop a 'Fourth Reich' or 'Second Vichy' and history would damn them if Le Pen wins, in their own minds. Of course CEOs and other 'elites' would do this.

Next, is Mélenchon actually anti-NATO and anti-EU? Or just performatively? I don't think that he is a risk anywhere near to the extent that Le Pen was before she moved away from those ideas. Mélenchon is far better for the System than Le Pen. I also do not believe that a Left-wing candidate would ever be viewed as a threat by the System, no matter how extreme.

Do you have any polls on the way that LFI, RES, EELV, PCF, PS, NPA and LO voters want to go?

More unpleasant topics aside, I'm seeing plenty of Left-wing derangement right now, and it's uproarious. They're having a meltdown, probably too stupid to remember that RN will probably always make round two in the absence of the likes of Zemmour:

I hope that the Far-Left heed this guy's demented message. Macron is 'Far-Right' so waste your vote!

So if this is confirmed, it will be necessary to massively vote blank in the second round. You can't choose between two far-right scoundrels.

It's also combining itself with Putin Derangement Syndrome:

No friends of #PutinWarCriminal #UkraineRussiaWar shall ever get near any public office. Ever.

Muh Putin, muh Russia.

Ukraine and the New Al Qaeda, by Whitney Webb. Repost but, this is THE story of the situation in Ukraine long term, i.e. ZOG creates NeoNazi terror groups to "fight the Russians" then OMG they spread to America, ... war on White Terror (i.e. White Nationalism). Sound familiar? by Fitter_Happier in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's hilarious. I remember that some of these people were in the Ukraine back around 2014, including one who was apparently killed. But that was back when a truly independent regime seemed slightly more possible and before Groysman, Zelensky, Shymal and all these other yehudi wormed their way into power.

How many Western 'neo-Nazis', 'fascists', etc. can be arsed fighting for Zelensky's regime? It literally exemplifies the 'ZOG' that they constantly rail against. It's actually even worse, since that Z for 'Zionist' needs to be swapped out for the good ol' J. It's a JOG. Zelensky is King JOGger.

Even Azov is simply viewed by most of the 'Far-Right' as at the very least being played for suckers if not outright a 'ZOG' front that exists merely to keep nationalists controlled and useful. They're needed because globohomo liberalism is so utterly unappealing to actually fight for that the liberal international order can only muster up 20,000 or so useless idiots out of the billions of people it controls to actually volunteer to fight for it. The average person in the unipolar LIO doesn't give a shit. 'It's a far away war between people I don't care about in countries I wouldn't know about if it weren't for the mass media, everything's comfortable, and, well, I'd rather play with my new mePhone.' Without Azov, Mariupol would already be in Russian hands. It's the perception of a more serious Russian threat that is the only reason that Azov remains tolerated: without that, they would have been crushed by Poroshenko or Zelensky long ago.

They aren't even going to fight for Putin because over these past few years there has been a growing awareness that he's even worse for the 'Far-Right' than the West are. For Russians, even being caught posting 'Far-Right' memes can get you fined or worse. So just who are 'ourguys' in the Ukraine? There aren't any. It's simply one set of anti-fascists against a somewhat less gay and trans set of anti-fascists, with Azov making sure that the only good men left in the Ukraine die for the gayer set.

Also, the thought of these soy-guzzlers at places like r/volunteersForUkraine being 'Far-Right' is hilarious. These are the degenerate lunatics responsible for things like...

Leaving a vibrator behind at 'abandoned Ukrainian military positions': https://i.redd.it/o67g9zde5zo81.png

It's far more likely that if any of these dipshit American foreign fighters pick up any skills whatsoever in this conflict, they're just going to use them to try and make a more militarized, violent version of the CHAZ/CHOP. The rest of it is just Left-wing paranoia about a borderline non-existent 'Far-Right' who would be totally bombed to oblivion if they tried anything even remotely close to seizing a part of America. Only Antifa, BLM, etc. are allowed to do that.

But if they want to keep tabs on r/volunteersForUkraine and call these soyboys 'neo-Nazis', please do. Less Feds to watch other places.

The Russian ‘denazification’ PR disaster by TheJamesRocket in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The world has long been itching to get at Putin. After all, whether he knows it or not, he's in charge of one of the last two global 'White powers'. It was Brezhnev who was probably the last leader in that region to have actually understood to some extent the importance of race, even if he only used his understanding pragmatically. For example, in trying to get Nixon to see China as a bigger threat than the USSR because their countries were ethnically similar despite being ideologically divergent, whereas the Chinese are ethnically alien and yet ideologically similar. Thus Brezhnev was simply saying: how about you Americans start seeing ethnicity above ideology? That Soviet Slavs and White Americans should be on the same side at least insofar as Red China is concerned, first and foremost because our blood is closer.

Everyone who adheres to 'anti-racism' and 'CRT' and so forth want Russia destroyed just as they do America. These people like Kendi, DiAngelo, Delgado, etc. whose ideas today abound indeed do see the world in terms of races (albeit not biological races, only in the limited but very clear sense of 'White oppressor', 'blacks and Jews oppressed', 'everyone else somewhere midway'). Russia and America destroying each other would be truly amazing for these people: killing two birds with one stone. A Russo-American War would truly be their greatest wish second to a total 'mayocide'. This is why we must be fervently anti-war at the present time. And if America really wants to play 'world policeman' one more time, expending it's last strength to really harm Europe before it itself descends into the third-world shithole we have long foreseen, well, let motherfuckin' Tyrone from Chicago; Shitavious from Atlanta; Kike (yes, an actual Hispanic nickname, related to the name 'Enrique') from Mexico, who is only in it to pick up skills to pass on to his street gang; Ngubu; Emma with the two mothers from that woke advertisement; and all of these other dipshits sort it out. The Russians can at least bag plenty of them before their country falls.

Furthermore, Russia is the perfect opponent for America. Republicans hate Russia because they view them as neo-Soviets living under a tyranny. Democrats hate Russia because they're the rival 'White power' and taking them down would greatly boost POC supremacy. This is why Russiagate is such a successful conspiracy theory: both anti-Trump Republicans and Democrats can feasibly believe in this senseless drivel in which there is supposedly some great crime that has been committed and yet no conclusive evidence has ever been produced. Which is why Trump is still walking around a free man rather than in jail like they desperately desire. If 'Russiagate' could be conclusively proven, does anyone seriously think that they'd allow Trump to walk free? The same guy that they want deader than dead? The same guy whose death they'll be publicly celebrating, and been desperately wishing for since 2015? And who, most mysteriously, 'unrigged' the election such that the 2020 election was the 'most secure election in American history'? And why did Trumputin raise sanctions on Russia if he really was Agent Orange? Nothing adds up. Russiagate is simply Left-wing QAnon. It's wishful thinking by those 'progressives' and others who desperately want to believe that Trump could never be fairly elected because "we're better than that".

Now, let us compare China to Russia. One notices that China simply can't compete: Republicans will hate China for much the same reasons they hate Russia (pinko commies who need to learn to become liberal), but there is no serious reason for which Democrats will hate China. Hating China simply doesn't serve Democrat psychology: being anti-China is just about trying to keep POC down, it's about 'White supremacy' trying to preserve itself. Thus China as bogeyman makes them highly uncomfortable to say the least, whilst Russia as bogeyman simply doesn't. Russia as bogeyman simply makes total sense from our enemies' viewpoints: having one lot of Whites hate another lot gets us closer to being rid of Whites entirely.

The true oddity of this war is that it is perhaps the very first in which both sides have totally been framed by mediatization, filter bubbles, fake news and so forth. People everywhere are saying that this is 'World War II' again. But it isn't: World War II was actually fought by peoples with different ideologies. This here is far more analogous to the Spanish Civil War; that is, if we took that war and rendered it fully retarded.

Notice that Zelensky's 'international brigade' composed of foreign volunteers—Zelensky, who fancies himself the Republican leader here, complete with his own little 'International Brigades' like those that went from countries like the Ukraine to Spain—and whatever Putin calls his foreign fighters are actually there for the exact same purpose. Namely, killing everyone's favourite bogeymen: the 'Far-Right', 'fascists', 'neo-Nazis' etc. It is really unfolding into a global 'anti-Far-Right', 'anti-fascist', 'anti-neo-Nazi' crusade.

But here's the kicker. There are simply no fascists to kill. The only difference between them is that the anti-fascists on each side hilariously think that the anti-fascists on the other are themselves fascists, leading to wholesale anti-fascist on anti-fascist violence. Think about it: Ukrainian 'liberal' and 'Leftist' anti-fascists and their allies like all of the American, Canadian, Chilean and South Korean 'Special Forces' soyboys who are being decimated in airstrikes are fighting... just who exactly? Yep, Russian 'conservative' anti-fascists like Putin and their allies like the Sovok or 'tankie' anti-fascists. It's wholesale anti-fascist on anti-fascist violence. These people are traveling to hunt down and kill 'fascists', but the howler is that they're only shooting and being shot by anti-fascists.

This is where I reveal the sheer retardation of this whole affair. Both sides see themselves as the 'real' Republicans and the other as Nationalists. This is what I mean by the 'Spanish Civil War', but rendered retarded. There are simply two Republican factions. Both have the same goal: to kill the 'Nationalists'. But there is no Nationalist faction; no Franco. There are only Republican leaders. It would be as if Azana declared Caballero the 'real Franco' and Caballero declared Azana the 'real Franco'. Thus Franco, the Falange, the Nationalists, they all exist only in the minds of the Republicans. The Republican anti-fascists on both sides are, hilariously, killing each other over delusions and lies.

Some, like Baudrillard, had observed much less severe versions of this phenomenon. But Baudrillard did not live to see this: a whole war in which the entire narrative for fighting—we are the true Republicans, the enemy are Nationalists—is essentially fake.

Richard Spencer goes full globohomo by Ethnocrat in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I suppose there is Sean Last and a few other people, but they seem to me to be massively outnumbered by the philosophers like Greg Johnson (doctorate followed by a teaching role during the 1990s, and I think even going into the 2000s), Apollonian Germ, Keith Woods, Joel Davis, all of the other EBL people like Tyler Hamilton (doctorate). I think Spencer himself is also a philosophy doctorate? I remember some article, a clear hit-piece on him, in which the writer tried to get a copy of Spencer's doctorate but was rejected by the university. Also, if I remember rightly, Dutton himself is a philosophy graduate even though his videos give the impression that he's either a psychologist or biologist by training. I suppose that E. Michael Jones is another prominent example if people consider him as fitting into the big tent.

Then you also have those who may not necessarily have a degree in philosophy that are still overwhelmingly more philosophical than scientific, like Philosophicat (heavily Evolian), Daughter of Albion (clearly familiar with Nietzsche), Frodi Midjord (also clearly familiar with Nietzsche), and some might also include Academic Agent (who some months ago also dived heavily into Evola).

But when I think of just who is heavily science-leaning, isn't it really just Sean Last? I can't think of any PoliSci or sociology graduates even though both fields are useful to us when the 'woke' shit (admittedly, a very large and ever-growing chunk of it) is removed. No biologists, either, despite the large interest in it where IQ, race and genes are concerned. I suppose there are a few people who are deeply into history like 'Asha Logos'.

I agree that if we include commenters rather than judging the DR solely by content creators, there are a lot of people interested in both HBD and IQ science. But I don't think we actually have many people who are trained in these fields; or, if so, I can't name any.

Richard Spencer goes full globohomo by Ethnocrat in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I never liked either of them. I've been in this scene for around eight years. Spencer was someone that I always heard about and saw clips of embedded in other people's videos—none of which made him seem endearing—but I still haven't watched any of his videos. Over the past few years, I haven't heard a single good thing about him. I'm always amused at the notion that 'Richard Spencer is the head of the Alt-Right', although not quite as much as the notion that 'Milo' or 'Donald Trump' are the head of the 'Alt-Right'.

I have never considered any of these three as being the leader of any social movement in which I have any interest whatsoever. They were never the 'heads' of the 'Alt-Right'. Furthermore, I never liked Spencer; I never liked the G(ay)reek Milo, who last I heard seems to be larping as a heterosexual Christian convert. Trump explicitly disavowed the 'Alt-Right' shortly after the mass media started using it as a pejorative around 2016, a trend which thankfully seems to have largely died off since then.

The way I remember it, 'Alt-Right' went from being the self-label of an internet-based social movement to a pejorative encompassing the whole Republican Party practically over night. There was a time when even standard Republican dipshits were calling themselves 'Alt-Right' consequent of the media using that term to attack Trump and some of his supporters reinterpreting it in an empowering way. They were effectively saying that we'll take your insult and wear it with pride, exactly like queers and faggots do with the terms... yep... 'queer' and 'faggot'. So now there are people who self-label as 'proud queers' and 'proud faggots'. It's the same thing with 'nigger' having became an empowering term or badge of honour in the form of 'nigga'. I think it's an IQ thing. You never see Whites call themselves 'proud honkeys' or 'proud crackers' in any serious sense; East Asians never call themselves 'proud chinks' or any such nonsense either. Stupid people seem to like appropriating the labels their enemies stick on them.

When Trump disavowed the 'Alt-Right', I remember that these people dumped that term just as fast as they embraced it, and thus it returned to being the self-label of a fairly big tent social movement united by several core, shared concerns and otherwise having a wide range of political diversity. Hence the infighting over religion and economics, in particular. Of course, a few years later we also started dumping that term ourselves.

Unlike Spencer, Dutton—a sort of classical liberal, rather Tory-ish chap who strikes me as someone who probably loves Churchill and hates 'fascism', 3P, 'Far-Right', etc.—from the get-go applied a scientistic twist to things that was lacking in the 'Alt-Right' because of its preponderance of philosophy graduates. I have for some years felt that there is too much philosophizing and not enough scientizing, but the 'Alt-Right' evidently appeals far more to humanities graduates rather than natural or social science graduates. Regardless, after a while it has seemed to me that Dutton tries to shoehorn everything into his preconceived biological, seemingly rather (Herbert) Spencerian, Social Darwinian framework. Talk about 'Natural Selection' and 'spiteful mutants' is merely one angle from which problems can be approached. But what about sociobiological, social-neuroscientific and even certain psychological and sociological approaches (while sifting through the garbage and avoiding Freudian psychoanalysis, Labeling, Foucauldianism and other rubbish paradigms)? Dutton simply does not want to leave his comfort zone.

At this point I think they're just trying to remain relevant by being contrarian and provocative. It's all about who has the 'hottest takes' and 'most superchats' and whatever. They have to come up with things that are increasingly wild and unique whilst being careful not to go too far and have everyone claim that they're full of shit.

57% of black men in America do not have children. That means that the 80% of women who are giving birth to these children are having sex with the same Black men and non-black men by [deleted] in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

That guy's a strange one. He almost never comments except where a post or comment of this nature is made, at which point he is almost absolutely guaranteed to comment.

Based Iranian General by LGBTQIAIDS in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I'm not personally familiar with the website, but I immediately got the impression that it's the typical 'Right-liberal' nonsense which passes for the pathetic 'American Right'. I, of course, cannot really see these people as anything other than 'less Left-liberal'.

One notices that there are a few characteristics of people of that nature, who fit on the Right-Libertarian quadrant of the political spectrum (where the likes of Friedman, Nozick, and Rothbard are the intellectual influences). For example, the 'state' effectively plays the same role as the 'bourgeoisie' in Marxism, as the sort of arch-nemesis which all ideologies have to varying degrees. However, this anti-authoritarianism is so extreme that it even extends even to things like mere taxation ('taxation is theft!'), and often even to the sort of 'ACAB', 'F12', 'Fuck The Police' attitude which is where they laughably share something in common with the very same Antifa they proclaim to hate so much. They often conflate Communism, less individualistic forms of conservatism and Fascism, which they tie in with 'despotism', 'statism' and 'tyranny'.

In addition, they also share blatantly contradictory views, for example, their belief in the primacy of the individual clearly clashes with their belief in 'family values'. I would love to have these people answer a simple question: What are the building blocks of society? Individuals? Or families? They'd all be squirming, realizing that they've been cornered, but because they're actually liberal at heart, they'd obviously answer with the former and thus seriously damage their 'conservative' credentials. After all, their answer would be exactly the same as that of their supposed enemies, the 'progressives', who are actually far closer to them than they are willing to admit.

Vox lost on a climate change denying ticket by Ethnocrat in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Poor example of rationalization, i.e. 'Vox did poorly but they would have done better if they followed my public policy preferences'. Typical 'silent majority' theory.

It seems remarkably clear that people for whom climate change and abortion 'rights' are deal-breakers aren't prospective 'Far-Right' voters. I doubt that anyone out there really thinks: 'I'm Far-Right on everything except on abortion "rights" which are so important to me that they outweigh all of my other preferences combined such that I'll now have to vote for some other party with which I disagree with on practically everything else.'

Likewise, imagine someone reasoning: 'I'm Far-Right on everything, but climate change is so important to me that it outweighs everything else, so now I'm going to vote for [insert other party].'

Let's face the obvious fact here: Spain is just another of many (possibly all given time) countries lost to degeneracy. Spain is particularly egregious on feminism. Now, degenerates aren't going to vote for remoralization of any kind because they stand to lose from it, hence the constant fearmongering about the 'Far-Right' (codeword for 'revitalization' or 'those who might force us to be better people') coming from the Western media in this election. They do, however, benefit from further degeneration all round, since the more that all types of degeneracy are entrenched, the less likely that remoralization will ever target the types of degeneracy that they personally engage in. (Hence, for instance, the Left openly pushes for child trannies because this obviously helps to safeguard battles that they've already won on like homosexuality: those who otherwise might attack homosexuality are fully preoccupied with investing energy into child trannies, who are serving as a sort of 'shield' absorbing the impact from attacks that would otherwise be directed at less extreme degenerates.)

As for the actual results, people went back to the two-party duopoly. The main factor is that the almost defunct 'centrist' (but also centralist/anti-secessionist) Cs party's voters overwhelmingly went to PP because it is the closest to the Cs, with some going in the other direction to PSOE. One factor might be the departure of Cs leader Albert Rivera from politics, with Cs being a personalist, poorly institutionalized party going through the usual troubles that such groups go through when their leaders are gone.

Likewise, regional parties lost voters to the two-party duopoly. Those voters overwhelmingly would have gone back to PSOE, probably because of fears that the election would be too close for third-party voting to be a good idea. This is especially so because PSOE is also centralist/anti-secessionist, meaning that regional party voters can't trust that their third-party vote would lead to the PSOE+regional parties coalition that they otherwise desire, and thus settle with the hope of a PSOE majority government.

This would also explain the losses in Sumar's (Podemos plus some other loony-Left parties) voter share which, again, would also explain the rise in PSOE's voter share, except that it's scared Far-Left voters rather than scared regional Leftist voters who are fearing that a PSOE-dominated coalition is unlikely and therefore have settled with the hope of a PSOE majority.

Vox voters would have undergone the same reasoning but from the opposite direction. Seeing that Feijoo is dragging the PP to the Left, making the possibility of a PP-Vox coalition less and less likely, and yet preferring a PP majority over a PSOE majority, they have simply settled on the idea of giving PP a majority so as to avoid the problems that might come out of cobbling together a PP-run coalition. This was probably exacerbated by the fact that Feijoo keeps ruling out the possibility of a coalition with Vox, naturally driving into Vox voters the fear that if the PP doesn't get a majority it will mean a PSOE-dominated government.

In short, elections expected to be close lead people to re-embrace two-party duopolies. The end results are completely disastrous and unavoidably so. The regional parties won't support Feijoo and want a wildly disproportionate level of influence in return for supporting Sanchez. More than what he can give them. My final guess: Sanchez's position is weakened but he stays on as Prime Minister in charge of a highly chaotic minority government over which regional/secessionist parties have great influence. To reach 50%, Sanchez would need all of the following on side: Sumar, ERC, Junts, EH Bildu, and EAJ. That's practically impossible, since Sanchez continues to rule out the possibility of serious referendums on independence, and, if he allowed them, they would win. PSOE would go down in history as the party that destroyed Spain, and they are too centralist to accept that. But Junts is particularly insistent that it will not support anyone without a referendum. Meanwhile, Feijoo/PP have no path to 50% whatsoever. A new election also won't solve the problem unless more regional voters switch their vote to the two-party duopoly.

Is nationwide E-Verify a good policy? by 8thmonitor in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's basically also my view on these authority dilemmas. The answer has to be situational: you don't support any such measures unless your side is in power.

Once your side is firmly in power, then you completely U-Turn and support totalitarianism.

Notice how when one does those political compass quizzes, the answer on some questions is totally situational? Are we living in an ideal society? Or are we living in some degenerate society? I wouldn't care much for free speech, say, in the ideal society, but it is clearly of more value when the people running the show are your enemies who think that everything that you say should be banned.

Bringing this back to e-Verify, the answer to me seems almost deceptively simple: so long as Tweedledum and Tweedledee remain in power, nothing good can come of it, and so there is no rational reason to support it.

What are the arguments for segregation? by KimiORabu in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

control people as little as possible

Because you're unfit for civilization: for instance, you would be inept at controlling your children or students if you had any, and thus will only ever be a further contributor to social rot. What fools like you are remarkably adept at doing is taking the failures of people in late-modern societies and declaring them the failures of said societies full stop, rather than realizing that these failures only come about when individuals fail at being social. These problems are resolved by more society, not less.

You're in the position of someone who, experiencing adverse side effects of a medication, decide that those adverse side effects will subside if you take more of it. 'Let us solve social rot by taking it to its natural conclusion, that is, let us dissolve society itself', says Vulptex.

The inability for people to perform their social roles is part and parcel with today's civilizational decline and the growing social disharmony: people whinge and complain because of failed parents, failed teachers, failed law enforcement, failures all across the board. Instead of wishing to increase sociality, you further add to them by wishing to decrease sociality, in which case these failures will only further abound.

in a world that fully controls us

Nonsense. You can find the freedom from society that you seek out in the middle of nowhere. Who would be controlling you there? Out there, only natural forces will control you. Now your kind will, of course, feel that you are enslaved by them too. But there is nothing that you nor anyone else can do about them, and, ironically for your kind, society itself is what has freed Man the most from them. What you mean, of course, is that you wish not to be truly separated from society, but only to engage with it only on your own terms, that is, to become a parasite.

All people can agree that they do not wish to be controlled

Nonsense, and it is absolutely important for all the survival of all collectivities that certain individuals are adept at obeying, and that certain others are adept at controlling. Countless social problems are reducible to people failing to obey those who should control (e.g. children insisting that they know better than their parents, people rejecting medical advice), failing to control those who should obey (e.g. weak parents who pamper their own children), or obeying the wrong authority figures (e.g. idiots taking obvious anti-role models like Andrew Tate or 'Vaush' as role models). Nor is abolishing social groups, as you so desire, possible, since the existence of individuals is impossible without them. An individual only exists as a component of social groups, indeed, he owes his very existence to them, having no education, food nor much of anything else in their absence.

Wanting to arbitrarily control how people live their lives is Palpatine levels of evil.

This mindset is why you idiot Leftists (yes, you libe[retard]ians are absolutely part of the Left) are simply neo-barbarian, caveman types who crave the radical freedom that civilized men rightly discarded when they entered into societies. You're the most regressive people imaginable: you want to undo civilization itself, and all in the name of how nice it would be to experience something as worthless as an unprecedented level of equality and freedom. Neither of which matter to well-adjusted people who do not need anything more than the bare basics of freedom and who despise it when taken beyond them, and who despise equality in particular because the human detritus of the world gain from it wholly at their expense. Adherence to radical freedom and practically any form of equality is always a tacit admission of degeneracy.

My final goal is to

Destroy civilization and return Man to his natural state. Anything else that you might come up with is simply a rationalization of this obvious truth: namely, that you romanticize the hypothetical period in which Man had yet to subject himself to the authority of tribal chiefs and other authority figures, and wish to find some way to synthesize that negative freedom with those modern amenities that people of your ilk have become irreversibly reliant on, that is, to essentially be a high-tech savage. But that will never happen, since Man sacrificing much of his natural freedom to enter into society was necessary for the manufacture of all modern amenities, none of which would nor could exist without society.

Moral men will always seek power, and there is no such thing as morality in power's absence. And if we get control of you, we will issue to your kind an ultimatum: obey us or begone. You had better hope thus that the immoral continue their rule over us all, as seems most likely, or else you will be on the losing end of a societal remoralization that will totally eradicate your worldview: the works of Rand, Rothbard and the rest of your kind will be as if they were never written. They will meet the fate that awaited most of Hirschfeld's.

The Danish Elections just started by Dragonerne in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Those of us who believed that Mette wasn't really anti-immigration or pro-'remigration' were right, then?

The government that is now over appears to be comprised of:

Social Democrats, Social Liberals, Green Left and the Red-Green alliance. These last three often seem to be in an alliance with the SocDems.

That put Venstre, DPP, Conservatives, NB, Liberal Alliance, Independent Greens, The Alternative, Christian Democrats, Moderates and DD outside of the government.

Looking at the historical cabinets.

Most of the 1990s chiefly saw a combination of the SocDems and the Social Liberals in government.

Most of the 2000s chiefly saw a combination of Venstre and the Conservatives in government.

The Thorning-Schmidt cabinets essentially repeat the 1990s (Social Democrats + Social Liberals), except that we see the addition of the Green Left, until the Green Left leaves.

The government before Mette's essentially repeats the 2000s (Venstre + Conservative), except that we see the addition of the Liberal Alliance, plus support from the DPP.

It seems to me that there are essentially two major camps:

A Left to liberal camp: Dominated by SocDem, almost always allies with the Social Liberals. More recently, the Green Left and the Red-Green Alliance have become more and more a part of this camp.

A liberal to conservative camp: Dominated by Venstre, almost always allies with the Conservatives. More recently, the Liberal Alliance have become more and more a part of this camp.

Turning away from the historical cabinets and into the polling, we see that the SocDems would probably remain the kingmakers, except that it sounds to me as though the Social Liberals will not rejoin anything including the SocDems, at least for the time being.

I thus find that there is little historical precedent for such a government composed of SocDem + Venstre or SocDem + Conservative, or perhaps even Venstre + Social Liberals.

The last one of those three makes me think twice. Is it possible that the Social Liberals could flip to siding with a renewed Venstre + Conservative coalition government? That would create a three party combination slightly larger than the SocDems alone, with a Venstre Prime Minister, but I do not know who else can be added to that.

A cursory look at DD reveals it has some anti-immigration liberals from Venstre plus some people who have for some reason left the DPP. Why did some switch from the DPP? And what do you think of Messerschmidt? He sounds controversial, but for all the right reasons to me.

Nonetheless, any combination including DD (Venstre + Conservative + DD or SocDem + DD) sounds impossible.

Is SocDem + Green Left + Red-Green Alliance possible given that it seems to me that Venstre + Conservative + Liberal Alliance cannot reliably gather up enough other parties to be larger than the 40-45% that these three put together are polling.

Venstre+Conservative+Liberal Alliance would almost certainly need to add something like DD+NR or DD+Moderates or Moderates+NR+DPP to their coalition in order to form a bigger bloc than the Left.

How the Hell is nuclear war not THE trending news story, twitter hashtag, reddit post, etc.? Tucker is currently the only sane MSM source. by Fitter_Happier in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I doubt that Russia would even use a small suitcase nuke somewhere on the frontlines where they want to leave scorched earth behind, let alone nuke The Great Satan.

Sure, we've seen people place ideology and virtue signalling above self-interest in the last French election. But they were also ignorant as to the consequences of re-electing the pro-Ukrainian Macron: firstly, they did not know it would mean a very cold winter; secondly, they felt that the alternative was literally Hitler.

With this, it's different. The masses have a much better idea of the consequences. They know that the consequences will affect their lives much more so than a very cold winter. They're terrified of nuclear weapons, hence the obsession with the 'denuclearization' in particular of Iran and North Korea, viz. countries that the liberal international order cannot fully trust with such weapons. Ideally, the LIO only wants itself to be nuclear armed so that power shifts further in its favour.

Furthermore, the alternative isn't literally Hitler coming to power in their own countries, it's literally Hitler seizing the Ukraine. That's completely different, and most normies aren't going to risk losing their consumerist lifestyles just because of literal Hitler seizing some country they can't even find on an unmarked map. For White people outside of Europe, Ukraine is half way around the world. They'll forget about this war in a few years just like most people do with every war. Places like Syria used to dominate the headlines if one goes far back enough, and yet most people seem to have forgot that the war there is actually still going.

A few 'neocon' or 'war hawk' tards like David Petraeus might talk tough. But I suspect that this is only because as the United States moves closer to a third-world, non-superpower status (something which practically everyone agrees upon), they are lashing out in all directions at differing perceived causes, where there is practically total disagreement. Most people choose to drink more poison in the hope of alleviating the symptoms of the poison they have already taken, i.e. doubling down on liberalism or being radicalized into the more extreme splinters of it, like 'anarcho-communism'. Only a few go the other way, that is, to rejecting large swathes of 'Enlightenment values' and late-modernity altogether. For the 'neocon warhawk' types, it seems that the response to decline is to combine drinking more poison on the domestic level whilst acting tough with America's enemies like the imagined 'Far-Right' threat within and China/Iran/North Korea/Russia without.

Indeed, Petraeus and a few others might see a resolution to America's decline in destroying their moral superiors in Russia so that America remains a superpower relative to the world, possibly sans China, for a little while longer. But I doubt the masses of predominantly urbanized tards who decide federal election outcomes agree. Even the biggest degenerates out there know that the nukes won't be falling on the MAGA-hat wearing truckers like they wish they would, but right on top of their big cities like NY and SF. The nukes would purify America of many of its worst inhabitants, and those people by and large want to keep living even if it means taking a loss to Putler, TrumPutin or whatever else it is that they call him.

Have a small whitepill. Two foreign mercenary or volunteer types, most likely Americans, were killed in action by some hostile force, presumably in the Ukraine. These 44 seconds contain nothing visceral. Other than the swear words that come out of the second KIA's mouth in the last minute of his pathetic life, it's completely 'safe for work': https://files.catbox.moe/qy2s2r.mp4

I can't find any details on this video. I imagine a much longer GoPro footage was retrieved from his corpse, this part of it excerpted and originally uploaded to something like a Telegram channel for the purposes of sending a big 'Screw You' and 'Look, these fools we killed humiliatingly filmed their own deaths!'. From there it has been reuploaded to other websites.

If there's an afterlife, I wonder if these two have yet to realize: 'Man, did I really die... just so that Ukrainian feminists, homosexuals and transsexuals were to be judged less negatively by future generations of Ukrainians?'

Was 'muh freedumb n ekwality n libaty n sheet, n fugg Putler tha Natzee fasciss thug n sheet mang, we gunna be like our grandfathers in bringing the fight to their homeland' really worth being shot in the head for?

The sheer stupidity of young people in America by LGBTQIAIDS in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

From their perspective the only important inquiries are about trends and about themselves.

Yeah, I did notice that they seemed much more literate on trivial modern nonsense like TV show characters and celebrity figures. This comes out in his videos, since all sorts of questions about characters in modern films or TV shows, most of which I myself couldn't answer, end up being successfully answered. One man actually gets four such questions in a row correct.

One thing that was on my mind is whether or not people are actually absorbing the same (or a higher) amount of information than in the past, but that what is being absorbed is simply the banal sports, entertainment, etc. that they're being bombarded with, leaving no room for anything more important. In which case, simply removing all of this crap would force them to refocus their attention to more meaningful things, just as Man in the past did not have these interests competing with these more meaningful things. Hence why, for instance, Man seemed far more literate in times of yore, whereas any sufficiently old book—which many men could read just fine back then—seems unintelligible to many today: their vocabulary is just that dumbed down. Alternatively, perhaps they simply are objectively learning less as well, and thus depriving them of this nonsense would not make as significant an impact.

I imagine that a hypothetical regenerative ethnostate would be deprived of most of these things. It is something for its future policymakers, psychologists, &c., to investigate.

when I watch 'man on the street' styled videos I take them with a huge grain of salt.

Indeed. While we don't know how many correct responses he omits (he does share correct responses on occasion, and thus cannot be omitting all of them), there is a shred of possibility, of course, that the overwhelming number of people get them right. But if we're dealing with probability rather than possibility, I suspect that in all probability they probably are just ignorant on issues that matter, even if not quite to the extent as portrayed. After all, the content creator is clearly aiming to entertain here, even if the information he gathers does seem like material that a more serious researcher could work with insofar as these people really exist.

Spot on with the last paragraph, upon which I can't really add anything. We can see in these videos that quite a few Whites are just as clueless as the countless nonwhites that honestly look like the overwhelming majority of NYC's population, and there's not much hope that many of them will even reproduce, let alone within the race. Most, I think, are pretty much at the end of their bloodlines.

Donald Trump raided by the FBI. by radicalcentrist in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think this is the moment to reflect on how Trump these past seven years has really been one of the most bizarre characters in human history. Somehow, the man seems to survive everything: among them Comey, Mueller, Strzok, Omarosa, the Russiagate conspiracy theory... and now it looks like he'll survive the 'January 6 was a planned coup' conspiracy theory even with all of these 'deep state' hacks going after him. All the while, they're so transparently avoiding the problems of crack cocaine, the whole 'incest with his niece' thing and other problems surrounding Hunter Biden; that is, someone who clearly has been up to some illegal things.

Now, you should see the reaction to his latest speech at CPAC. Trump Derangement Syndrome is coming back in full force as we near the mid-terms. Look at the absurd conclusions that some quoted idiot reaches in this article (https://web.archive.org/web/20220809060103/https://www.newsbreak.com/news/2697558734427/trump-s-108-minute-cpac-speech-is-branded-unapologetic-fascism-with-blood-and-soil-rhetoric):

He claimed that President Joe Biden “surrendered our strength and our everything” when withdrawing US troops from Afghanistan, adding that “they surrendered our dignity”.

Texas Monthly senior editor Mr Hardy tweeted that Mr Trump’s language about the withdrawal from Afghanistan echoed “the Nazi ‘stab in the back theory’ of losing WWI”.

I simply have no idea how one could arrive at the conclusion that mere criticism of Biden or even the Democrats more broadly even remotely amounts to any broad brush that the NatSocs have been accused of painting Jews with.

“The streets of our Democrat-run cities are drenched in the blood of innocent victims,” Mr Trump went on to claim. “Bullets are killing little beautiful little children who never had a chance. Carjackers lay in wait like predators.”

"This is some literal blood-and-soil rhetoric," Mr Hardy said, referring to the Nazi slogan expressing the idea that “ethnic identity is based on only blood descent and the territory in which an individual lives”, according to CNN.

Likewise, just where exactly is the reference to 'blood-and-soil' or 'ethnic identity' in the above? At very most his words might be viewed as targeting Democrats, spree shooters and 'carjackers'—none of whom are ethnic groups, and none of whom should be above criticism. And if we use that to determine who he might not be targeting: non-Democrats, non-spree shooters and non-carjackers, again we arrive at absolutely no positive affirmation of any ethnic group.

"We need the courage to say what needs to be said and do what needs to be done," Mr Trump added.

"This is a rallying cry for street violence and worse," Mr Hardy tweeted.

Again, I have no idea how that could be interpreted as even implicitly calling for violence. This Hardy moron is simply reading all sorts of things into Trump's words in order to preserve his own delusional worldview. No amount of saying 'what needs to be said' amounts to violence, and interpreting an incredibly broad 'do[ing] what needs to be done' much more narrowly as an implicit call for violence is simply paranoid nonsense.

After calling for the relocation of the homeless from large cities, calling migrants crossing the southern border an “invasion”, and listing instances of undocumented migrants committing murder, Mr Hardy tweeted that “Trump’s rhetoric is significantly more extreme than even a few years ago. This might be [the] most frightening speech I’ve ever heard. Full-on, unapologetic fascism”.

I have no idea what is 'fascistic' about opposing illegal immigration nor about drawing attention to real cases of illegal immigrants committing murders.

Here, ignorance of real problems is being promoted merely because appreciating the problem for what it is might possibly lead some closer to 'fascism'. And, well, better to remain ignorant than to even risk moving 0.01% closer towards 'fascism', right?

Next, we go back to an ad Hitlerum. Yep, Hitler lives on in these people's deranged minds, rent free. He's still giving these clowns nightmares 77 years later.

“Trump has either been reading Mein Kampf or having someone read it to him,” Mr Hardy added.

He went on to say that “this is some seriously bloodthirsty s**t”.

Mr Hardy tweeted that Mr Trump called for “new legislation allowing [the] president to remove any government employee they deem corrupt. This is a call for a total purge of government”.

Somehow, allowing the President to remove select employees means that Trump... wants to 'purge' the entire government. Again, merely jumping at absurd conclusions. Moreover, Congress would almost certainly still have the ability to veto these kinds of orders even if this power was technically bestowed upon the Executive, just as Congress can already block practically anything (including Executive Orders) that the President signs.

tl;dr: Trump Derangement Syndrome is alive and well, the sheer desperation to find a way to imprison Trump so that the Republicans will be forced to choose a less popular candidate has led to 'deep state' spooks literally raiding Trump's home.

Thuletide should be more hated here than Richard Spencer by HeWhoGlows in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm not a Telegram user, so I don't follow whoever Thuletide is.

I don't have a problem with Martinez. For example, his owning of Destiny was easily of more value than what most people are putting out. Something like 150,000 people saw that on YouTube, most of whom would have been Destiny's cult following, and Destiny hilariously removed the video from his own YouTube channel after even the idiot YouTubers agreed that Martinez won despite Destiny being far better well known.

I've never followed Spencer, but the bits of him I've seen in other videos make him seem like a total fool. In Spencer's world, the Holodomor is justified, the Russo-Ukrainian War will force the EU to be less pozzed, the EU will become a based ethnostate, etc.

Buffalo Central by Fitter_Happier in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's easy to see how it's more active. I received 40 upvotes on one comment there, which is practically unseen on any subsaidit. https://communities.win/p/15Hv2JScv0/x/c/4OYXDXQc4w7

Hopefully we can make .win the primary place and leave Saidit as the backup. Let the libertarians, Gender Critical TERFs, and the 'transphobic' queers at LGBTdroptheT duke it out over this place. All that the latter seem to say is that trans 'erase' queers, as though one group of degens 'erasing' other degen groups really matters.

Literally none of those retarded, degenerate communities can be found on .win, which is refreshing.

Roe v Wade set to be overturn by Richard_Parker in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This news is the most thrilling I've heard this year. Every degenerate piece of shit feminist and her dog is out there having a meltdown right now, and it's uproarious. They really believe that they're back in the 'Dark Ages', that 'Handmaid's Tale' has become real. Just check out this compilation of reaction videos.

The first one had me burst out laughing, especially looking at her surname, one which she shares with numerous famous Jews. A Jewess having a literal meltdown. Someone needs to combine that clip with the female Happy Merchant. I imagine the second one is also a Jewess judging by that surname.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1521318780357386241

Basically, what's going on is that the Supreme Court has six Republicans out of nine justices, which is possibly President Trump's greatest legacy. The explicitly Leftist/Democrat judges (Kagan [Jewess] and Sotomayor [Hispanic female], with Breyer [Jew] now replaced by Judge Jumanji [the black woman who couldn't answer what a woman was]) are in a clear minority and can't do shit about what the Supreme Court does unless they convince two Republican judges to go against the Republican majority.

I imagine that this 6-3 Supreme Court majority will be maintained until Justice Thomas (the black fellow who also happens to be the most principled Right-winger on the Supreme Court judging by his voting record) passes away. Something which Democrats are desperately wishing for on Twitter and elsewhere.

So what we have is an executive (Biden) and legislative (both Democrat-controlled houses of Congress) which is Left-liberal fuxated but a judiciary which is Republican. Basically, one branch of government is essentially at war with the other two. Short of being able to acquire power ourselves, this kind of instability is basically the best thing that we can hope for in regards to macro-level politics. A Republican judiciary at war with the Democrat executive and legislature over abortion = plenty of degens out there making fools of themselves, burning cars, breaking windows, spraypainting 'F12' and 'ACAB' everywhere, sinking further into drug abuse, committing suicide, etc.

Even funnier, all this was leaked. The Supreme Court was working on this without the public having any idea about it for months, when Breyer was yet to resign. Like Ginsburg, he probably planned to resign during a Clinton Administration, only to find himself stuck in the role lest Trump decide his replacement. Thankfully Ginsburg croaked, preventing her from being replaced by a Democrat, but Breyer made it through.

I'm not conflicted about abortion at all. Abortion for Whites is unequivocally wrong. What overturning Roe v. Wade does is make abortion a state-level issue (Democrat states will still be aborting). It's the Republican, i.e. mostly White, states that will use this to be rid of abortion. Left-liberals who want liberal abortion policies will have to migrate to the already lost parts of America where abortion can keep hammering away at their population growth. Majority non-white, heavily Democratic states like California will still have their abortion policies undisturbed. The correct stance on abortion is 'abortion for thee, but not for me', just like the Jewish stance on 'diversity'.

Just look at the oceans of tears of soy on r/politics. It's glorious! Democrats in California and other blue shitholes are literally screaming in anguish over something that doesn't even affect them. How many times do I have to repeat this to the idiots on Reddit I made an account simply to make fun of today? Nobody is stopping you from having an abortion! Nobody. Is. Stopping. You. From. Having. An. Abortion! If you're in a Red state, just travel to a Blue one (and please stay there).

Return of the alt right? Elon Musk looks to take over Twitter by Dragonerne in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Why is it that the usual Left-liberal types seem to seriously both fear and hate Elon Musk, to the point that so many of them are going on right now about how want to delete their Twitter accounts? Is it just because they've become so radicalized to the extent they can't even stand being reminded of a White (?) male simply succeeding in life, a la their unending ressentiment towards Trump? Over these past few months there's been an insane level of Musk Derangement Syndrome... and the guy isn't even in politics. Imagine the tears if he one day becomes President!?

I bet he's even a Democrat voter, and would only differ in that he's much more libertarian, especially insofar as economics is concerned: he talks about lowering taxes and cutting red tape a lot when asked about his political views. Is it that they prefer the censoriousness of the existing Twitter because they can't really function outside of these massive safe spaces, in places where they're bombarded constantly with 'mansplaining', 'microaggressions', 'triggers' and so forth? That the safe space of Twitter gives a kind of psychological comfort that they feel that Musk is threatening?

I'm not exactly a Twitter user (never made a Tweet) but I do share Dragonerne's enthusiasm simply because, with the DR having been deplatformed along with Trumpism, TERFs and some other groups from the whole surface web, it does look like a potential way to get back on there. Generally, the more groups consisting of those who have been unpersoned that operate in a particular space, the more we are—as one of those groups—able to thrive by blending in with the rest of them. We're on Saidit precisely because a handful of TERFs and 'LGBdroptheT' people also are; we're on .win precisely because thousands of Trumpists also are. The presence of multiple unpersoned groups in a particular space helps to normalize each one of them.

After all, the average shithead tranny moderator out there can't tell the difference between Trumpism and the DR, it's all 'Far-Right' to xem, and so if the former becomes acceptable, the likes of Keith Woods will fit back in just fine.

I obviously agree that a hypothetical DR Twitter account with millions of followers wouldn't last, but it's not as though Keith Woods or anyone else who runs in these circles was anywhere near a million followers when they were banned in the first place.

Bleak picture for French nationalism by casparvoneverec in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

https://trad-news.blogspot.com/2022/04/french-colonies-vote-overwhelmingly-for.html

The whole 'Le Pen is Far-Right' spiel really appears laughable after realizing that:

Marine Le Pen, the loser in the run-off French Presidential election, actually won by a landslide in almost all of France's overseas colonies, which are yes indeed populated by a diverse array of Africans, Asians, and Island people.

Marine won the colonial vote in :

Guadeloupe 70% (pop. 384,239)

Martinique 61% (pop. 364,508)

French Guiana 61% (pop. 294,436)

La Réunion 60% (pop. 868,846)

Mayotte 59% (pop. 299,348)

Saint-Pierre and Miquelon 51% (pop. 5,997)

What the absolute fuck is wrong with Whites? We literally have the most mixed shithole overseas parts of France, some which have populations that are well over half black, voting for Le Pen... while the idiot mainlanders vote for Macron!? What an absolute farce that country is.

That article also claims that the 'French youth are becoming more based' narrative that I've heard from others here is essentially fake news, and that—insofar as age groups are concerned—Le Pen was actually most popular with people in their 50s (both younger and older age groups held Le Pen in less esteem).

Based Iranian General by LGBTQIAIDS in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The integration into the Right of anti government and anti authority ideology as a virtue is one of its worst corruptions.

Indeed. Whatever the dominant ideology is within any given physical space pulls all lesser ideologies also within it in its own direction. For example, nationalism in a liberal society becomes warped into a civic nationalism which compatibilizes it with less extreme forms of liberalism. And conservatism in a liberal society becomes warped into the liberalism of that society but with a few years or decades removed. In effect, everything simply becomes a branch of liberalism and lesser and less a full-fledged ideology of its own.

That particular general anti-government, anti-authority ideology has far more in common with anarchism and Marxism than with what Americans call paleoconservatism, which is why it seems senseless to call libertarianism genuinely 'Right-wing'. If we define 'Right-wing' as anti-authoritarianism itself, as libertarians are wont to do, then anarchism becomes Far-Right rather than Far-Left, and we are left with a totally nonsensical political spectrum.

For me, America has never had an actual Right-wing: after all, it was America's very Founders who came up with what now tends to be called 'libertarianism'. The term that they prior used, liberal, was simply taken from them by the far more powerful 'progressive' strand of liberalism, and hence those whose liberalism was trapped in the time of the Founders needed a new label to go by.

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants" is perhaps one of the greatest quotes of that ideology. I would add to what you have mentioned in your second paragraph, that anti-authoritarianism is for these people an end in itself. They don't see liberty as a means towards something substantive like a potentially higher level of creativity, and they do not see the lack thereof as a means towards something substantive like consolidating social structures. Instead, they dogmatically defend liberty even when it harms them, as in the case of all the 'woke' nonsense clearly being justified and enabled through liberal dogmas. It is similar to how some libertarians endlessly go on about a decline in theistic belief and how 'one nation under God' isn't really a thing anymore, woefully unable to understand that it is precisely their very own value of liberty that allowed people to choose to reject theistic belief in the first place.

The libertarian cope for the phenomenon of 'wokeness' is essentially to posit that its cause is precisely the opposite of what it is: no longer is 'wokeness' a consequence of excessive liberty; it is a consequence of some sort of Communist/Fascist tyrannical plot to destroy liberty. So, rather than accepting progressivism as being a descendant of, or innovation on, their own ideology, they predictably choose instead to lump it in with their old time enemies. Their worldview is essentially that progressivism is also right up there with Communism, Fascism, and more illiberal conservatisms like American paleoconservatism, that is, as enemies of liberty. Of the four ideologies I mentioned, they will never accept that the pursuit of liberty actually has a strong causal role in the creation of both progressivism and Communism. I think the only difference between them is that, unlike libertarians, also accord a high value to equality, and much of the 'tyranny' involved in the two is the consequence of the inherent mutual contradictions between the two ideals, i.e. of the free society and the equal society. When the latter prevails over the former as is often the case, then you indeed have a tyranny in practice: wealth redistribution and so forth necessitates a large government.

Fall of liberalism: we are doomed to Byzantium? by Rakean93 in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I take your side on the matter of the philosophers. Leftists commonly misappropriate Right-wing thought in order to repurpose it for purposes they consider 'emancipatory' or 'liberatory' or whatever. However, some feel a great deal of guilt about doing this at times.

You can see this in the way that Mouffe and Agamben (both Far-Left) misappropriate, but unapologetically so far as I know, off of Schmitt.

And in the way that Marcuse misappropriated Heidegger in the hope of fusing his ideas with the garbage of Marx. Marcuse felt exceptionally wrong in doing this and essentially discarded this project in the 1930s (probably upon realizing that Heidegger had joined the NSDAP). However, even today, some tankie morons still praise Heidegger and wish to misappropriate his ideas again.

And in the way that Horkheimer misappropriated Schopenhauer, and some might put Hegel himself on the Right as well, and thus claim that Horkheimer has misappropriated two thinkers. Furthermore, if one believes that Hegel is indeed of the Right, then they must conclude that all of Marxism has misappropriated Right-wing thought at its very base.

You're spot on about Nietzsche. If one goes back to the 1890s or so, his main supporters are essentially anarchists (indeed, one of the American anarchist leaders called him an 'honourary anarchist' or something very similar, but did admit that Nietzsche was no friend of anarchism). I have encountered the same thing in reading of Nietzsche's initial reception in Japan. There he was also again adopted by the Left. The 'Right-wing Nietzsche' seems to me a later phenomenon.

While not related to social thought per se, it is also similar to the way that Adorno felt immense guilt over liking Wagner's music, clearly believing that Wagner was an evil proto-fascist. I imagine he probably felt that in liking Wagner he was in some way complicit with fascism, connecting with it, or found that the music revealed a sort of 'fascism' within himself that he wished was not there, or something similarly silly. I think this is what happens when your artistic tastes clash with your ideology: the former tempts you to embrace the proto-fascist, but the latter tells you that you are dirtying, demeaning, lowering yourself by embracing the proto-fascist.

I agree with your second paragraph. I am also piecing things together from different thinkers and do not commit myself to any particular one. Many people who are self-proclaimed Marxists probably have far more influence from more contemporary feminist and queer 'thought' than from Marxism itself. And if they were smart enough to read and comprehend their works, they'd probably soon realize that they're closer to someone like 'Butler' or Foucault than to Marx.

However, most self-proclaimed Marxists are probably just idiots who have subscribed to some 'tankie' or 'BreadTube' video creator, have watched a few videos and thought: "Hey, this guy is pretty cool, and what he's talking about sounds pretty cool, I think I'll subscribe to him and call myself a Marxist from now on!"

The Brexit disaster: Non European immigration to Britain has dramatically increased since Brexit by JuliusCaesar225 in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Maybe for some fringe Left groups. Not for the two main parties, who are clearly 'woke':

94% of PSD voters are against leaving the EU.

97% of PS (the more Leftist of the two) voters are against leaving the EU.

84% of PSD voters support homo marriage.

93% of PS voters support homo marriage.

73% of PSD voters believe homos should have equal adoption rights.

89% of PS voters believe homos should have equal adoption rights.

74% of PSD voters believed Syrian refugees were acceptable.

85% of PS voters believed Syrian refugees were acceptable.

75% of PSD voters identify as 'pro-choice'

88% of PS voters identify as 'pro-choice'

70% of PSD voters believe that trans athletes are acceptable

88% of PS voters believe that trans athletes are acceptable

I think it's obvious that if your two main parties are the 'Socialists' and 'Social Democrats', your country is screwed. Portugal is also the poorest country in Western Europe, so I'm sure there's a correlate here between being super-woke and being the closest thing to a third-world cesspool in Western Europe.

Given that the overwhelming majority of Portuguese cast votes for one of these two awful groups, it seems to me that the average Portuguese is super-woke. We just tend not to know about it because of language barriers and the fact that Portugal is insignificant. They're European, so they don't really have the right to ever be considered victims of anything or in need of aid. But the big cities like Lisbon are well and truly screwed on the ground.

Perhaps the only good thing about Portugal is that a small party called 'Chega' (similar to Spain's 'Vox') seems to be restoring a bit of the balance. However, they are clearly considered 'Far-Right' and 'extreme' within Portugal's extremely biased Overton Window.

The religion of the future by casparvoneverec in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

An ethnie only actually needs ancestor worship and race worship, since those reinforce the rational side of ethnonationalism. Anything else, like morality, needs to be grounded in pure reason to avoid its discarding in the event that the 'religion' itself is discarded by some foolish generation at a later time. As many safeguards need to be added to the new social order to ensure that no such unraveling occurs, e.g., explicitly racial constitutions or other foundational documents of the new society. It should be assumed that future generations will quite rapidly seek to undo whatever it is that we achieve, just as the generations preceding ours and including our own have quite rapidly undone what our ancestors have achieved. We should assume that the next generations will be total idiots as these preceding ones have been, who will squander everything, and continue from this worst case scenario.

This is why the Burkean social contract is superior to the Rousseauian social contract. Burke's social contract acknowledges that there is a pact between the dead, the living and the unborn, whereas Rousseau only acknowledges one of those three: the pact between the living. It so happens that the pact between the living is the most useless one of the three for us, but not for the enemy, for whom it is the only one that matters.

The living have a pact with the dead: To ensure that the things that they created continue on and are not undone. Because the West does not acknowledge a pact with the dead, we see absolutely zero problem with handing over our ancestors' accomplishments to others despite the fact that such a handing over would to them seem to be impossible: something that in their time could only happen via coercion.

The living also have a pact with the unborn. Again, because the West does not acknowledge a pact with them, either, we see absolutely zero problem with condemning them to a third-world existence as marginalized minorities within their own homelands. Instead, we go through a number of processes: denial (it isn't really our homeland, it belongs to everyone and/or they won't actually live as marginalized minorities, etc.) or justifications (future Whites deserve it because of the real or presumed actions of past Whites, nobody I know will be around to see it so I don't really care, etc.).

Just reconstruct an explicitly racialist Paganism complete with the kind of ancestor worship that still goes on in places like Indonesia (because of how weak Islam is there: the overwhelming majority of Indonesian 'Muslims' have synthesized Islam with their indigenous beliefs in a way that Islam has been largely been wiped out in all but name) and in historical places like pre-Islamic Iran where ancestor worship went on until it became haram.

Lastly, religions that place great emphasis upon souls have the potential for great harm, simply because they are an obvious pathway to egalitarian nonsense like 'judge by the content of one's character (i.e. mind or soul) and not by colour (i.e. body or gene)'. But the belief that souls are unequal along racial lines is practically unverifiable (how can you measure what you cannot even see?), whereas the belief that bodies/genes are unequal along racial lines is very easy when egalitarianism is absent, and was indeed widely held throughout the overwhelming majority of human history. Basically, a more physicalist worldview is required (I'm a physicalist-leaning dualist, moving ever-further in the physicalist direction, far away from the kind of metaphysical idealism of the likes of Berkeley or Kastrup, that Keith Woods has dangerously entertained). It is also why NatSoc > Fascism. The Fascist (and Evolian) worldview downplays the body/gene, and thus provides an obvious pathway back to egalitarianism. Base nothing of immense importance on the metaphysical, only use the metaphysical to reinforce the rational (e.g. use ancestor worship to cement an ethnonationalism already solidly argued for using pure reason). Indeed, I call for a new culture rather than a new religion per se.

Lastly, all the Socratic stuff like Neoplatonism falls afoul of what I have said above: the necessity of the rejection of any creed that places the soul over body/metaphysical over physical. A biological 'Master Race' is far more convincing than an unverifiable notion of being 'God's Chosen' as the Jews peddle. Belief in the latter is only useful for those inferior peoples who would fail miserably if they were judged by the standards of the former, but who feels the need to argue for the supremacy of his soul if he is already superior in his gene?

Wasn't it Nietzsche who believed that that was exactly why Socratic philosophy began? Because Socrates himself was inferior in body and gene, he created the slave morality that instead prioritized souls so that those who were inferior could believe themselves equal or even superior, i.e. by simply changing the rules of the game such that appearances now mislead and the 'real' value of a person lies in something hidden and unverifiable? This is why we have egalitarianism: because we seldom judge the worth of men on anything ascriptive, we assume all men to be blank slates of equal worth... precisely because of all these wretched philosophers.

Exclusive polling: Marine Le Pen on 49 per cent of the vote for French president by Ethnocrat in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The latest polls are some of the narrowest we've yet seen. Pecresse is so far behind Macron, showing that despite seeming to have made something of a comeback, Les Republicains is also continuing its collapse in the same fashion that the Parti Socialiste/PS has collapsed even further, with its voters having drifted into a myriad of smaller Left-wing parties. LR is now practically worse off than the wretched Melenchon and his LFI, and is now about equal to Zemmour's months-old party.

I wonder what it is that has led to such a collapse of the previous PS/LR two-party duopoly? Until Macron, it seems unthinkable that this duopoly could be replaced by what exceedingly looks like a new LREM/RN duopoly.

My estimation is that LREM isn't going to be able to hold its quasi-centrist politics in which it throws bones to the Right and particularly to the Left in an attempt to satisfy everyone, and that LFI or possibly a surging EELV will eventually supplant it as the mainstream Left.

Despite plenty of seemingly counterintuitive evidence—for example, the high levels of bipartisanship continuing in the American Congress—that suggests that global polarization is in fact not increasing, it does seem that the age of parties trying to appease everyone is simply becoming evermore unfeasible. The interests of various voters are simply too mutually exclusive. The interests of Melenchon's legions of Muslims and blacks are not the same as those of the degenerate and fairly young voters of NPA and EELV, which again are not the same as those of Macron's supporters who want to hold a fragile Left-Centre alliance against the Right, which again are not the same as those of Zemmour or Le Pen supporters.

The LREM cannot make everyone happy, and the only purpose it seems to be serving is to try to shut out the furthest Rightward side of France's Overton Window.

It is the party of those who have a phobia of the Right, of those who wish to prevent a return of civilization. One in which their social attitudes and behaviours will simply have no place and in which the continuation of their sordid lives will exceedingly be impossibilized. They know that if Le Pen wins that it won't stop there, because many will keep pushing past Le Pen towards the politics of Zemmour and beyond.

Wouldn't it be such an improvement to the world if the Overton Window in all White countries had shifted to the extent that even the likes of Le Pen were considered too Left-wing? That would be almost a worldly paradise.

Richard Spencer goes full globohomo by Ethnocrat in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The same also holds true for economics, anthropology, psychology and a whole bunch of other fields. None of them are able to meet the stricter criteria of the natural sciences due to the abstract nature of their subject matters, whether polity, economy, self, law, crime, society or culture. Even physics is highly abstract, and like sociology, originated as a philosophical field.

We can hold the natural sciences to higher standards because their subject matters are objects found in the natural world. Substances, lifeforms and other natural science subjects are spatial and thus there is much less room for debate about their true nature.

Regardless, it is those social-scientific fields whose subject matters are of the most interest to us. We have aspired for decades to bring about macro-level societal change, something that cannot be achieved by tinkering with supercomputers, vials and telescopes and so forth. The DR subject matters have always been abstract, but ones with very real consequences.

We deal with anthropological problems all the time. Why is modern 'culture' so degenerate? Just how low can modern 'culture' go? Is there even such a thing as modern 'culture'? Does hyperindividualist consumerism really constitute culture? Can culture actually be revitalized, better still, can it be reconstructed from the ground up in ways that insulate from the causes of its decline today?

So too do we deal with criminological problems, ones that usually strongly suggest biocriminological explanations. Why do blacks commit so much violent crime compared to all other races?

And psychological problems. What causes 'pathological altruism'? Is 'pathological altruism' really just 'virtue signalling'? What causes 'ethnomasochism' or out-group preference?

And political and societal problems come first and foremost. What really happens in consolidated 'majority-minority' societies? Can they last, and if so, for how long? Are Brazil (the slow decline), Haiti (rapid extermination) or South Africa (rapid marginalization) good models for aiding our estimations? What exactly does it take for society to rebel? What effects have the internet, social media and OnlyFans had on society?

These fields are all useful when the crap is cut out: they need to be completely reconstructed. The problem is that the corruption of everything has predictably also corrupted education and scientific fields. Consequently, when young people enrol in sociology, they first encounter 'White privilege' (originated from a White feminist woman), 'intersectionality' (originated from a black feminist woman), 'toxic masculinity', 'hegemonic masculinity' (originated from some White M2F tranny), 'nuclear family = bad' and every other laughable garbage concept.

When drawing attention to the identity markers of those who came up with this pseudointellectual filth, it seems intuitively obvious to me that these fields aren't intrinsically prone to becoming garbage. Rather, the mass creation of degenerates and the expansion of education and science to include them—itself a sociopolitical problem, likely with some biological implications—led to their intergenerational corruption. If these feminist women, trannies and other cranks weren't in those fields, their shitty ideas wouldn't be infesting them today. But they're branching out everywhere: 'classical music is racist because it's too White', 'maths is racist', etc. We need to 'decolonize the curriculum': codewords for 'render the curriculum nig-Jew-pan-trans-fuxated beyond all recognition'.

Russian state media denounces pro putin "alt-righters". by Fourth_stage in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The overwhelming majority of the groups you mentioned are by and large composed of White people, with the exception of the Iranians and Palestinians, whose reasons for being targeted are as they are enemies of Israel. We know the latter is true because Iranians and Palestinians are only ever situationally the bad goys—if they're in Europe or America, they're suddenly among the good goys. However, Whites are universally bad goys. It is, remember, never 'okay to be White'. They hate Christians, police and even statues for the same reasons they hate Russians and Trump supporters: it's a state-sanctioned, socially acceptable, implicit dogwhistle against Whites.

The take-down of the statues, for example, was obviously a symbolic ritual, clearly sending the message: "Whitey's time is up, we run the show now and we're (literally) taking him down." White 'progressives' obviously supported these symbolic rituals, since from their perspective the closest thing to a path of redemption for any White person is to be one who attacks his own racial interest in favour of non-white racial interests at every feasible opportunity. But that only ever makes Whites 'less bad', and never 'good'. They are never actually redeemed no matter how hard they try to follow the path.

We wouldn't even need Jews for non-whites to still feel the ressentiment that drives the anti-White animus that in turn is often expressed indirectly through attacking things associated with Whites. It is pointless to claim that Iranians and Palestinians are analogous to Whites when the analogy is clearly broken by the fact that practically all members of both of those groups mysteriously become good guys all of a sudden right when they hop on a boat or plane to Europe. Whites can't be redeemed simply by migrating somewhere. Today, it is worse to be White than to be opposed to Israel.

What is your opinion on the Ghost Of Kyiv? by Edjean50 in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

By adopting an initially alarmist/defeatist view (three days), the inevitable refutation of that view (obviously Kiev wouldn't fall in three days, since it's the Zelensky regime's HQ and by far the most populous city) actually aids the current triumphalist view. The level of triumphalism right now would be less sustainable if they instead said 'one month': not enough time has surpassed to refute that claim.

Initial alarmism/defeatism reinforces overall optimistic/triumphalist narratives like this 'Ghost of Kiev' nonsense. 'The worst case scenario hasn't happened, goys, stop being downers and accept everything is going to be absolutely great!'

Now they're going to be stuck in this phase for, at the very least, several months. That being said, a new alarmist view (Ukraine is simply Putin's Sudetenland, he plans to invade more countries!) related to the contemporary obsession with reductio ad Hitlerum has been out there as well, but it doesn't necessarily contradict the other. Putin could still be 'Russian Hitler', lose in his 'Sudetenland', and later attack some other place instead. He'll be 'Russian Hitler' whether he wins or loses, of course. That's absolutely assured.

Destiny vs Mark Debate by Trab in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's more just that Far-Leftism is either intrinsically or instrumentally useful to them rather than being the product of a detachment from reality.

Vaush: Self-proclaimed communist who openly claims that CP is fine and that adult-child sexual activity can result in "positive" (his word) outcomes. He hilariously claims that this is an "empirically true fact", an obvious example of the misuse of science and of the grossness of scientism, i.e. of worshipping science to the point that you think it can even answer ethical questions and thus that science can justify pedophilia.

Destiny: Non-binary, non-heterosexual, habitual drug user if not outright drug addict, literal cuckold.

There are also miniature, budget, wannabee versions of these two, like Socialism Done Left and Xanderhal. But I do not know which identities they hold in order to comment on them more specifically.

Speaking of the instrumental usefulness of Far-Leftism to these two, in a Far-Right society, both would long have been imprisoned or executed. They understand this even if only subconsciously, and thus have every reason to oppose any potential remoralization of the society around them. The easiest way to prevent remoralization is, of course, to push society as far socioculturally Leftward as possible. When subjectivism, nihilism, hedonism, etc. are socially acceptable, such people are at their safest. Their extremism is thus to me the product of their will to survive as well as a tacit admission that they understand how degenerate they are, and fear that there will one day be repercussions inflicted upon them for the vile things they have said and done. It seems to me a mere survival strategy: in a world of abnormal, immoral degenerates, abnormal becomes the new normal. They thus become regarded as the popular and "normal" ones rather than as the outcasts and pariahs they should be. They have to corrupt the world in order to further their chances of survival.

Who is the greatest country in the world (today)? by radicalcentrist in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Your criteria for what constitutes 'something right' hold far truer for countries like Saudi Arabia than Japan, which leads you to a strange conclusion.

If I could choose where to have been born but with the caveat that it could not be in any country founded by Whites or as part of a White racial minority anywhere else, then I would clearly choose Brunei or Saudi Arabia before Japan. If we account for the fact that both countries are much smaller than Japan population-wise, and think of terms of a sort of 'goodness per capita' which, being immeasurable, we can only approximate, then both countries strike me as being vastly superior to Japan either by your criteria or by my own.

I omit Qatar and the Emirates only because they are both demographically screwed by foreign workers and have unimpressive birth rates, but both countries are vastly more 'patriarchal' and 'free'. 'Free', by which I do not mean licentious or permissive in the sense that the baizuo, in particular, mean it, but for people like me to openly moralize, or in modern parlance, simply 'be based', &c. For degenerates, Western societies are indubitably freer than any others are or ever have been—indeed, Western societies, ruled by them, are incredibly unfree for intelligent and moral people, who cannot condemn nor criticize much of anything. I assume you mean 'free' in the sense that I mean it, or else Japan is also more 'unfree' than the West.

The times in which Japan degenerates (e.g. 1860s, 1920s [that of 'Taisho democracy'], 1940s [liberalism and Marxism return in full force]) are clearly more numerous than the eras in which it regenerates, of which the last was probably the 1930s (liberals, and Marxists even more so, had to operate underground during that decade).

Midterms youth vote is overwhelmingly leftist by purelingot in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Anyone who thought the 'Red Wave' or 'Red Tsunami' was going to happen was delusional. I believed that there were only two serious options: continuation of a Democrat-leaning Congress (more likely) or a switch to a marginally Republican-leaning Congress (less likely). The other two possible options: decisive Democrat victory or decisive Republican victory were both practical impossibilities.

I have never believed that Trump 2024 (or [insert any other Republican here] 2024) is likely either. I'm sure in two years I'll be able to comment again about how the people who believed in that were also delusional. If this was Reddit I'd tell people to put that '!remindme' bot thing on this comment so that you'd be notified of it post-election.

I do think, however, that Biden 2024 does seem to be taking a serious and unnecessary risk, and that some other Democrat may defeat him in his own party presidential primary and then go on to win the presidency. One might correctly respond, however, that there is very little historical precedent for this. Then again, Biden does seem to be an exceptionally bad President/candidate (and as his cognitive state worsens, the more so as time progresses) and can easily be thrown under the bus consequent of the deep Democrat paranoia concerning how their side losing is the 'end of democracy' or some such nonsense.

Whether or not a more Left-wing Democrat like AOC would get more youth votes than Biden is debatable. I'm suspicious of the notion that someone who dislikes Biden from a Rightward position would somehow find a candidate Leftward of Biden more appealing rather than less. If anything, that 30% could only be swayed to vote Democrat by someone who appears more sane to the point of seeming almost out of place in the Democrat Party, like Manchin or Webb, but neither has (had, in Webb's case) any shot at winning the Democratic Presidential primary. As the older Democrats die off, the primary can only be won by the likes of AOC and those other morons who make Biden and the Clintons look comparatively sane.

they eventually WILL take the levers of power.

Yes, exactly. As the olds die off, this idiot generation will clearly bring America further backwards to a third-world society, certain characteristics of which we can safely predict by studying certain societies such as Brazil and South Africa; that is, countries in which liberalism and multiracialism have unfolded to a greater extent than in the West, countries which demonstrate to intelligent observers the near-future of the whole world, and to which the West has yet to regress to the levels of.

Whether some part of America can become an ethnostate and thus survive Brazilianization and thirdworldization, whilst almost impossible, isn't quite as impossible as the whole of America being 'saved'. That ship has long sailed: those degenerates won't deport or kill themselves and the remaining non-degenerate Whites lack the willpower to make the Left's biggest nightmare (i.e. the remaining normal people collectivizing to forcibly expel and/or eradicate the degenerate population) become a reality. Most of America is condemned to being inhabited by little other than impoverished brown queers and trannies.

Trump life membership by Musky in politics

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

This is obviously a scam message.

Where is this supposed "GOP HQ" from which Big Bad Trump recruits life members? Lagos, Nigeria?

Where 'Trump' happens to be a 'Nigerian Prince', 'GOP HQ' happens to be the collective name of a whole heap of 'Nigerian Princes' spamming emails from a bunch of old computers running pirated versions of Windows XP, and a 'Life Membership' happens to mean these 'Nigerian Princes' attempting to empty out the online bank account you gave them the log-in information to?

Anyone who falls for this is dumber than a Democrat.

The EU's 'Handbook of Hate Memes' by LGBTQIAIDS in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I think they're behind the times. Today, it's probably something like: Marchin' (or Marxist) Lootin' 'Wewuz' Kangz.

How is going the Russian debate in your country? by Rakean93 in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I don't watch the retard box either, so I'm going by what the internet says.

The only vaguely 'Right-wing' media channel here are totally philosemitic, pro-Zelensky losers who are siding with dumbocrazy and liberalism against 'fascism'. 'Putin is a fascTypical example of pseudo-Rightists shooting themselves in the foot by conceding that the Left-wing narrative is essentially 'correct'. It would be 100% pro-Jewkraine here as far as media go.

Other than that, it seems to have died off thankfully and already. People would be 100% pro-Ukraine if forced to make a choice but they just don't care enough about it to make it a campaign issue. I don't think they really care about it enough to want to send weapons or anything, though the government is still doing so. I'm not sure if Covid is beginning to fill the void again. However, most of the small parties are essentially libertarians, mostly just taking the 'muh freedumb' stance and making campaigning about all things Covid and downplaying everything else.

There's a lot of negative campaigning going on with these small parties attacking all of the major ones rather than aligning themselves with one against another, and people seem to understand slightly more that the major parties need to go (but nothing will change, because the mainstream Left party looks as though it will win a slight majority without even needing to enter a coalition). And while I don't like these small government libertarians either, they're obviously better than the 'progressive' lunatics that dominate the system; actually, almost anyone is and one can't really be picky about who replaces them. Anyone anti-mandatory Covid response (anti-mask-mandate, anti-vax-mandate, whatever) and anti-woke is still a clear improvement. The icing on the cake is that they make the mainstream voters furious because they're always erroneously framed as 'Far-Right' in the mainstream. That for me is a clear benefit in itself.

Actual 'Far-Right' parties don't exist here (and would probably be denied registration to run in elections even if they hypothetically received enough support). There's a whole bunch of new anti-Right laws lately. Recently, they've been going nuts about trying to ban the swastika, which is complicated by the fact that there are plenty of non-Nazi swastikas around and that the average dipshit probably can't even tell the difference between them. I guess they'll just reason that 'White person + swastika = bad' and ignore it if a bunch of 'diversity' is around.

Abortionist Riot Thread by LGBTQIAIDS in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

If you mean the link OP, it is an idiotic copypasta also doing the rounds on Reddit. I can just as easily make up my own 'argument' for the reverse.

I'm pro-Brittany who [would have realized today, were she not tragically aborted at eight weeks,] that she [would be] financially, emotionally, [and] physically [willing and able] to raise a [large family].

[insert as many similar statements as needed]

Life is fucking nuanced, unlike [the views of these] rotten [abortionists].

Go ahead. Argue back and say that I'm [anti-choice] all you want, but the truth is this.

I'm [pro-choice].

Their [choices].

[The choices that would have been made by those who would be here today if it were not for 1,500,000,000+ abortions].

So, who won the debate between Le Pen and Macron? by casparvoneverec in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

All that being said, Uncle Schlomo Joe has already self-castrated, and has started masquerading around as a literal fairy complete with fake wings and the totally bizarre name 'Auntie Shlomit Josephine'.

Rumours abound that this strange hermaphroditic transvestitist can be found only at certain times and places. The place? Childcare centers. The time? Drag Queen Story Hour.

Western leaders have indeed still been seeking him out to perform on him the act of fellatio. But they have been disappointed to find that 'he' is now a 'xe' and has a 'neo-vagina', which complicates matters quite severely.

My article got published by the Council of European Canadians by casparvoneverec in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Were there any specific rules you had to follow (word limit, citation style, etc.) for submission either to Eurocanadian or Counter-Currents?

Zemmour endorses Le Pen by Ethnocrat in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

If Zemmour was promoted unwittingly to keep Le Pen out of round two, he thankfully failed. But he almost did it: that sack of shit Mélenchon almost made it, which would have led to the disastrous Macron v. Mélenchon election that I think was what globohomo really thought was ideal. I'm glad that you were dead wrong about Zemmour, because if you weren't, that's what we'd be looking at right now. With that danger out of the way, that just leaves the Maricón.

I think RN can count on:

  • Zemmour's 7.05%
  • Dupont-Aignan's 2.07%

That would bring her to 32.53%. I think about 1/2 of Pécresse's 4.79% will probably go that way (the rest either not voting or to Macron) as well. That's about 35%.

You have said before that you read somewhere that around half or just over of Mélenchon's supporters are for Le Pen? I'll just play it safe and assume 1/3 of those who bother to do so, because I think that most of Mélenchon's supporters (including himself) seem generally indifferent between the 'fascist' and the neoliberal, who, being rather like Antifa, they think are basically the same. The ones that will come out for Macron are probably the most 'Right-phobic' ones (degenerates frightened about social radicalism being delayed or reversed, which largely won't happen, and nonwhites frightened about a 'remigration' that sadly is even less likely to happen).

We're now at 42.19%.

What we have left is the only other centrist party (Resistons!), which I think will probably be mostly for Macron and the Left-wing parties (EELV, PCF, PS, NPA, LO). I'd assume about 1/3 of most of these voters will go for Le Pen rather than close to 1/2.

That would be 46.56%. Close to my original estimation that Macron would win 55-45 rather than 66-33 as he did last time around.

Basically, I think the only thing that will save Le Pen at this point is an unusually low Left-wing turnout in round 2. If phobia of the Right brings out enough of these shitheads, then I think we can safely predict a narrow 53.5-46.5 Macron victory. That'll be unfortunate, and we'll hear constant gloating about 'fascism' has been prevented in France for weeks.

I hope instead that they simply choose to stay home. Then I'll enjoy all of their tears once they realize: "Holy fuck, Le Pen won! Because we thought Macron would win without us and I do not want to vote for him because he is a 'fascist'... but... now we have even more 'fascism'... Petain... Vichy... my life is over!"

If climate change and global warming are real, what are the most realistic and required solutions? Is globalism required to solve it? by 8thmonitor in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Indeed. If it's all that they drum it up to be, it seems that humans will just have to accept, short of some major technological breakthrough, that much of the world will become unlivable. (And that a heap of wars will probably be fought by people from unlivable areas trying to take areas that remain livable: watch as China desperately seizes Siberia from Russia.)

I don't know about India, but neighbouring Bangladesh is one part of the world that is already believed to be suffering from the alleged effects of climate change. If these effects worsen, watch as a deluge of Bangladeshi climate refugees flood into Burma, China, and India. Another place is the densely populated island of Java, where intense flooding in Indonesia's capital, Jakarta, is often blamed on climate change. Who knows where Indonesian climate refugees will go.

If climate change and global warming are real, what are the most realistic and required solutions? Is globalism required to solve it? by 8thmonitor in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Is globalism required to solve it?

That's almost funny, since it's exactly how cosmopolitan humanist types would frame it: 'Give us the global government that we want, yes, give up your cultures, ethnicities, nationalities, and so forth, and become consumerist, individualized humanists like us, and then we will "solve" this problem that we are constantly fearmongering about'.

No realistic 'solution' outside of something like carbon capture technology becoming vastly more effective. There are only hypothetical ones that will never actually happen, such as the first-world forcibly preventing the third-world from 'developing' or everyone simply accepting a big hit to their living standards. The Left would become the biggest climate change deniers almost overnight if any of those solutions were seriously entering policy agendas. 'The climate situation is not so bad that it justifies racial discrimination!' It is not the case that for every problem there are one or more solutions that are conveniently there just waiting to be implemented: that would be to make the metaphysical claim that the cosmos is structured in such a way that there can be no such things as insoluble problems, rather like how we already believe that there are no such things as causeless effects.

Do you think blacks are a bigger problem than hispanics in America? by 8thmonitor in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

But in 2060, blacks will be 15% and hispanics will be 27%.

I doubt that will happen; it'll be much closer to the reverse. Those figures are probably just projecting current population trends into the future or something. But Latino birth rates are already well below replacement level in numerous countries, such as Chile, Costa Rica, and El Salvador. Similarly, south and south-east Asians will probably far outnumber East Asians for similar reasons.

What you'll probably see instead is less Latinos and more Africans. (And less Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans; more Filipinos, Indians, and Pakistanis.) As time passes, the 'African-Americans' and Latinos will probably be submerged by massive waves of African immigration. It'll be interesting to see how that turns out: many Africans aren't fond of the 'akata', and many 'African-Americans' would look out of place in Africa. A lot of Hispanics don't like the 'mayates' either. Even though they seem to accept the mixed-mayates who regard themselves Latino, they're not fond of the much less-mixed Haitians and other blacks who are more culturally and racially distant.

Opinion of the Patriotic Socialist Front by Iphjdashnathaw in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's Heimbach, Zoltanous and a bunch of other weirdos who used to be 'Dissident Right' and who, one by one, unable to popularize their own ideas and desperate to find a way forward, began to take the crude joke of National Bolshevism seriously. I've thought about writing an article against this moronic ideology, but I don't think these people pose a genuine threat to warrant the time. Nevertheless, I already know much of what I would write. One obvious point to make in such an article is that their beloved Lenin himself explicitly condemned this idea. Another is that the original National Bolsheviks weren't nationalists at all (indeed, one of the two founders was even Jewish): they simply saw that nationalism was popular in the Weimar Republic and decided that it was good strategy to co-opt certain popular nationalist talking points about how badly done Germany was by the Versailles treaty and France's invasion of the Ruhr, and perhaps a few other things. That was it. The KPD would have none of it and expelled both men immediately, they then joined an even more radical group, the KAPD, and were swiftly expelled from there for the same reason. From there they drifted into obscurity.

If I had to rank agreements and disagreements while skimming through this pathetic 'platform' (which is practically a manifesto and of no use to anyone who just wants the gist of their ideas), I'd probably say I might 'support' their stance on ten and don't care for their stance on the other fifteen. I suspect that if I spent more time reading it, I'd assign more to the "don't care" category and possibly some into an 'oppose' category.

I think it's clear what's going on here: some of these people (particularly Zoltanous) are known degenerates, are struggling with it, and this 'platform' is simply a schizophrenic output of these inner struggles, which they're losing, which is why they're succumbing to accepting some incredibly stupid fragments of ideology, e.g. racial egalitarianism. Since sociocultural Leftism remains a bit too much for enough of them, and economic Leftism comes off as being less obnoxious by comparison, it's natural for economic Leftism to seep in to 'Far-Right' ideology first, with the sociocultural Leftism coming along later, piggybacking in on many of the same arguments that they've already accepted, especially in on those already made in favour of economic and racial equality. They'll accept sociocultural Leftism for at least two reasons: a) as they squirm about trying to increase their support base and are unable to popularize their social conservatism and cultural nationalism, in part because of the lack of charisma of people like Heimbach, to Leftists, they'll see it as necessary to simply give up on it and; b) as the more extreme degeneracy of the future makes the degeneracy of the 2020s less insufferable in comparison.

Any attempt to synthesize elements of the 'Far-Right' with the degenerate pseudoscience of Marxism is pointless. The genuine 'Far-Right' of the time knew it. Lenin and other Marxist bigwigs knew it, which poses to this lot a massive problem if and when they're confronted with the relevant quotes. Few neo-Marxists want anything to do with people with backgrounds like Heimbach (no matter how much his view has changed, he's already irredeemably tainted in their eyes); practically no one who is genuinely 'Far-Right' wants anything to do with this ideology masquerading as a science or its contemporary adherents either.

BAP(Bronze Age Pervert) drama in dissident Right scene on the internet by JuliusCaesar225 in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't know who Bronze Age Pervert is. That's just some random name that I see around these parts of the online wasteland.

As for Woods, I'm one of those who has had a long ambivalence towards him. He's hit and miss. I'm no fan of his, but I have also pushed back against those who I think unfairly label him a Marxist or 'Duginist', as though he is some kind of infiltrator. I think he is indubitably more Right than Left, whatever his detractors might allege.

Fuentes

Woods used to be feuding with Fuentes. Much more recently, he talks to him as though they were always buddy-buddy. Reflecting on that, I think it to be quite silly.

Twitter

I've never used it, but all that I have ever heard about Keith Woods on Twitter is that that is where he's at his lowest. Is his account @InternetRadical? A quick scrolling of that account reveals it to be a bit of a sewer.

Sexuality

Fuentes was the one who inadvertently revealed that he was a viewer of 'T-girl' (i.e. 'trans woman', i.e. biological male) porn. For me, that precludes him from being super straight. He's some kind of queer.

I don't have any other remarks to make either on the OP's post or to any of the comments, other than that I agree with those who have negative views of Spencer (another who, like BAP, is largely just a random name to me: I still haven't watched any of his videos, and every time I see an excerpt of his videos included in the videos of other people, I do not see why people like him) and Fuentes (the only video I have seen of his was the one softly criticizing Keith Woods). Both of these talking heads seem to me a waste of time and of no value to watch. In short, I don't want anything to do with Fuentes or Spencer, think of Woods as hit and miss, and couldn't care less who BAP is. If the supporters of BAP and Fuentes are infighting, then that is simply more detestable stupidity.

Japan’s ageing population poses urgent risk to society, says PM by Ethnocrat in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think they will open up in the next ten years, though some people are claiming that both China and Japan have seen increases in nativism consequent of Covid being attributed to outsiders (a particularly strange argument for China, given that outside of China many think that they are responsible, but the CCP seem to be blaming America and Britain).

I doubt that Japan is anywhere near 99.9% Japanese (probably not even 99.% Asian) at this point. Even if PM Kishida makes no moves towards widespread multiracial immigration, I still doubt that 1) the LDP remain in power over the next ten years and 2) Pro-immigration factions within the LDP do not select the party's next Prime Ministerial candidate over the next ten years. Only one of those two things needs to happen for Japan to open up, since most opposition parties are more pro-immigration than the LDP.

I suspect that the general incongruence between the political classes and the public on immigration (where I am, studies undertaken in the 1990s showed that the average person was significantly Rightward of both the mainstream Left and Right parties on immigration), an incongruence which could possibly be replicated in non-white societies, will mean that this brief increase in nativism will at best delay this opening up. Furthermore, the state of the Far-Right in Japan is very poor: Japan First is little better off than Western Far-Right parties and any other parties are probably worse off still, which puts them in a similar position to Europeans worldwide.

Kishida doesn't have a particularly high approval rating. Furthermore, the 'grace period' or 'honeymoon period' frequently observed in Western states is also replicated in Japan as well: polls show that Abe and Suga tended to have higher levels of approval than disapproval at the beginnings of their Prime Ministerships, whereas this situation had practically reversed by the end of them. Despite Kishida still being in his 'grace period', the Kishida Cabinet's approval rating was reported as being at a lowly 29.2% in December. The only upside for Kishida is that his chief opponent, CDP leader Kenta Izumi, is even less popular.

If Izumi was to hypothetically come to power next election, then Japan would likely see:

  • Fag marriage legalized.

  • More openness to foreign workers.

Strangely, even some Japanese sources refer to Izumi as a 'conservative', which demonstrates that at least some Japanese sources are as biased as Western ones, in that they see everything as further Rightward of where it actually is. Another sign that 'progressivism' has become deeply entrenched. In fact, the previous CDP leader, Yukio Edano, calls himself a 'conservative' despite also being in favour of fag marriage and multiracialism, wanting 'immigration reform'.

The only question is who it will be who further liberalizes Japan: will it be the LDP or will it be some other group, most likely the CDP?

Psyop? Right-wing Brazilians have invaded the Presidential Palace and Supreme Court. by radicalcentrist in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm surprised at how insignificant the reaction to Lula all is. Brazilians will kill each other almost en masse in endemic drug- and gang-related violence, and yet they're (averagely) almost as passive as Americans when it comes down to politics. Of course, a few thousand is still more than what America could muster up.

(Note, however, that Bolsonaro's government appears to have made the country somewhat more stable: 2021 saw the lowest number of murders in 14 years. 2003 is the year that Lula began his first term, and so he was in power during much of the increase. Regardless, violence of this nature goes back decades; for instance, a violent riot by over 2,000 prisoners led to the 'Carandiru massacre' in October 1992.)

Not to mention that Lula's Partido dos Trabalhadores is worse than the US Democratic Party: Did anyone see criminal gangs firing their weapons into their air in celebration when Biden won? The criminals love Lula because of his softness on crime: videos showed that the usual brown, shirtless (shirtless = tough guy behaviour in Brazil), often tatted-up (also the sign of a tough guy, especially Jesus tattoos) scum inhabiting Brazil's jails were practically partying when news arrived that he won. Instead of flashing the usual gang signs like they do when chopping off a rival gang member's head, they were flashing the 'L' sign: L for Lula. The narcogangs are absolutely partisan.

Since you made this post, Lula has declared a state of emergency till the end of January. Hundreds of arrests have been made. They want to arrest everyone involved, which means a few thousand as yet unidentified people have yet to be detained. (Edit: 1,500+ arrests have been made as of 16 hours after first composing this comment.)

The pigs are remaining loyal to Lula. I don't think these protests will succeed unless large numbers of pigs refuse to fight the Bolsonaristas. It took over a million protesters to oust the government the last time that succeeded in Brazil (1985), and it seems clear that nowhere near a million could mobilize against Lula.

I think it is the same thing in America. If you divide the public into five groups from very pro-government to very anti-government, it is only really that fifth group that will mobilize, and this group rarely ever outnumbers the other four combined. After all, people who are very pro-government, pro-government, neutral and anti-government simply won't commit to a cause like Canada's 'Freedom Convoy' or to these Bolsonaristas. You'll only get some amongst that fifth group of very anti-government people who will—everyone else either supports the government or simply isn't anti-government enough to see the risk of opposing the government as worth taking.

In 2023, almost the entire American continent is ruled by Left-Wing. by radicalcentrist in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The only countries in that region that clearly have Right-leaning or Right-wing governments are Jamaica, Guatemala (set for a third Right-wing government in a row come their June election), Uruguay, Paraguay and Ecuador.

El Salvador is a strange one: I assumed that because President Bukele split from the Marxist FMLN that the party that he formed would likely be Leftist or Left-leaning. However, after becoming aware of his Duterte-like strongman stance on corruption, drugs and gangs, I think he is better re-categorized as centrist at Leftmost (possibly even slightly Right-leaning at this point).

Bukele shares in common with Duterte and similar strongmen an abnormally high approval rating. For instance, even the most negative poll results put Duterte above 50% approval, with the most positive poll results putting him around 85-95%. Duterte was reported as having a highly unusual 87% approval rating upon leaving office in June 2022.

See, for instance, this graphic posted on the website of the Philippines' oldest mass media outlet, the Manila Times (https://cdn4.premiumread.com/?url=https://www.manilatimes.net/manilatimes/uploads/images/2022/07/21/90711.jpg).

Notice that the top four leaders (Duterte [87%], Modi [77%], Lee [71%] and Widodo [68%]) are all considered Right-wing to Far-Right from the perspective of a highly Left-biased 'Western' perspective (note that Modi and Lee are—and Duterte is now, though not until the 2010s—also considered Right-wing to a lesser extent in their own countries, Widodo is actually considered Left-wing in Indonesia). AMLO comes in as the first Left-wing leader at #5.

Notice also that the Left-leaning or Left-wing leaders of the major European/Anglosphere countries are grossly unpopular in comparison: Scholz [45%], Biden [40%] and Trudeau [38%] are all below 50%, Albanese is at 51%.

Finally, notice also that Bukele maintains levels of popularity exceeding those of Duterte: every poll puts Bukele above 80%: approval ratings that degenerate ALP, LPC, German SPD and US Democrat Party voters could only ever dream of their leaders having. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_on_the_Nayib_Bukele_presidency

In short, it is intriguing that Right-wing leaders command a great deal more popularity outside of the 'West', and that polling in these countries seems far more consistent. By contrast, 'Western' countries seem to be in the paradoxical situation of electing people whom either never polled highly to begin with, or whom rapidly fall in the polls after their election.

Of course, Latin America is going in the same direction: Castillo quickly went from President to prisoner, never having been popular in office.

Saidit users who aren't "alt-right," why aren't you? by Markimus in politics

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Huh? Civilizations are far more real than the abstraction of the 'individual', one which is only the product of your extreme Western liberalism and which isn't even believed in by Buddhists and certain other non-Western creeds that reject the concept of 'self'.

Society is vastly more important than individuals. For individuals, society is indispensable. You need society. But for society, most individuals are 100% dispensable. Society doesn't need you. Ants die within hours without their colonies; colonies, like hives—which are in no way abstract concepts denoting merely aggregated ants and bees—do not require most of their ants and bees for their continued survival.

Atomistic individualism in its myriad forms is always part and parcel in the creeds of degenerates—shared by anarchism, liberalism, communism, libertarianism—of mere human detritus, both the two or so of you on this website with 'Voluntaryist' flairs and that even more loathsome and utterly subhuman cretin 'socks'.

Hollywood celebrities demand book burn of Kyrie Irving's promoted Hebrews to Negroes by Blackbrownfreestuff in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Farrakhan and one other (Jesse Jackson, I think) are the only two blacks on the SPLC's naughty list. I can't remember what the official name of that list is.

Now, I remember reading this list and thinking that the only reason why those two are even on there is because of their 'anti-Semitism'. After all, everyone on the list were either Far-Right White and Islamist-Jihadist types (i.e. the two groups that zhids hate more than anyone else).

'White' people as the psychologically castrated eunuchs of progressive communist ideology. by rightm in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I've noticed that you seem to have a lot of guilt about harbouring views contrary to the hegemonic, dominant ideology. As though you desperately want to go back to sleep, but simply can't because you've seen too much which you can't unsee.

I have no idea why this would be the case: is there something of an intrinsic liberalism in the Dutch genome or something? Isn't living in South Africa enough to push you over the edge?

The latter question is, of course, rhetorical: I'm well aware that even in that country there are plenty of White anarchists and liberals, some of whom remain ANC voters and some of whom are so insane as to identify with the EFF (thankfully, only a handful are that crazy).

About feds and whatever: you mean that the South African state knows about you and that you're worried about them watching your online activity?

Bolsonaro projected to lose Brazil's election tonight. by radicalcentrist in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I thought Lula would win by about 51.5% v. 48.5% at the narrowest to 54.5%-45.5% at the broadest. Turns out that even my narrowest prediction wasn't conservative enough.

User 'VacaLeitera' must have been right: Bolsonaro made massive gains in the second round, with most of the PSDB/PMDB as well as, strangely, the PDT (which, ideologically, seems far closer to Lula's PT).

However, Lula has ran in almost every election since 1989. He's also been President for two terms in the past, and his faction governed Brazil for 12 years under the first and second Lula administrations, as well as the Dilma administration. Thus Brazilians already have some idea of how his incoming term will look.

I expect a massive increase in drugs and violent crime, particularly up north, where I imagine that the Cartels will be making big gains, having felt that Bolsonaro was keeping the lid on them. These people—lesser than animals, really—will feel like a pressure has been lifted come inauguration day.

It's worth mentioning that Lula isn't quite the Chavista that Maduro and Ortega are, possibly not even to the same extent as Peru's semi-Chavista Castillo. Instead, he is closer to Chile's Boric, Argentina's Fernandez and other Left-liberal and social democratic types, who have been making a comeback. At the moment, I think the general Latin American 'Right-wing' have only Ecuador (Lasso), Guatemala (Giammattei), Paraguay (Abdo Benitez) and Uruguay (Lacalle Pou), since the Left took (back) Argentina (Fernandez from Macri), Chile (Boric from Pinera), Colombia (Petro from Duque) and Honduras (Xiomara Castro from the sort of military-backed government that kept the lid for a while on semi-Chavista upsurge which is now running the country) and now Brazil.

Serious economic decline is on the table, but not quite to the extent that drug and gang violence and assorted social rot will accelerate under his regime. Expect vigilantism to increase as well—the signs of it are already there with what looks like a growing number of attacks on real and suspected criminals by civilians. Since vigilante groups often degenerate into criminal groups themselves (as is particularly the case in Mexico), expect more of the classic Brazilian gore videos that have long permeated the internet.

Fascism is awful by Dragonerne in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm not 'fascist', either, since I've always seen it as too Left-wing (especially after reading the program of March 23, 1919, which reads as libertarian socialist/Lib-Left, including republicanism and even universal suffrage at a time when many liberals and democrats would have opposed it). In 1924, the Italian Communist Party (PCI) leader even praised the fascists.

Similar things can be found in Germany between the KPD and the NSDAP at various points until 1933. The KPD was among the opposition parties driven underground that year. However, I get the impression that the NSDAP was more 'Right' (predictably, the KPD's relations were much more rocky, constantly shifting between co-opting NSDAP talking points and positions to opposition and back again, largely depending on Stalin's directives from Moscow) than the Italian Fascists were 'Right' (the PCI probably saw fascism as a step closer to what they wanted, at least for some time).

I think this is a part of the confusion surrounding the famous sociologist Pareto and why he seemed to support the early fascists, something which confuses academia. Most evidence points to Pareto being a libertarian/classical liberal (which fits nicely with the early fascists), whereas Pareto would have witnessed their Rightward shift (which fits nicely with why he clearly made anti-fascist statements later in life; for example, when it reached the stage that the fascists banned Marxism in universities, Pareto was opposed to this). Academics simply can't figure this out because they assume that the late Mussolini and early Mussolini must have been the same, but the story that I outline here is quite coherent and feasible, i.e. that fascism underwent a sort of Rightward drift from its position on the Left as a sort of synthesis of anti-Marxist Leftists, including Leftists falling out with Marxism, and certain traditionalist or reactionary types like Maurras.

The 'Mussolini/Fascists are Right-wing' narrative must have been a later development (i.e. around the time of Mussolini's association with many of the [actually] Right-wing groups that would later become the Axis), such that we end up with today's demonological Off-the-charts-Extreme-Reactionary-Far-Right Fasssccciisssuuummm that is the supposed 'antithesis' of today's Left-wing nutjobs, and which all Left-wing nutjobs gravely overestimate the threat of today. But the Italian Fascists, at least in the late 1910s and most of the 1920s, would have been closer to radical liberals and communists than to the likes of Codreanu and the Iron Guard or Szalazi and the Arrow Cross.

As for my opinion on the specific quotes that I find interesting:

1. Yes, this is thoroughly disagreeable to anyone outside of the Left-wing nutjob box. Prime de Rivera and other early fascists had the exact opposite opinion: Socialism was more agreeable until Marxism, not because of it. I should add that the pre-Marxist socialists weren't very appealing either: Fourier was a sick degenerate as well as a very early advocate for homosexuality and feminism, and some of Saint-Simon's followers were sick degenerates who promoted 'free love' and other nonsense (I'm not sure about him personally, although he promoted feminism). The Saint-Simonians essentially became a cult, especially after his death.

5. To this I only have to add that Pareto was philo-Semitic, which probably also explains his early indifference or mild support for fascism. In a personal letter, Pareto even lambasted a personal friend for sending to him an 'anti-Semitic' book.

6. The notion that one of the world's most invasive groups needs to be left 'alone' reeks of ignorance. A most obvious retort is that they plain and simply won't leave you alone. Of course, they'll be even less likely to leave you alone if they see you as a threat, but that doesn't justify meekly appeasing them, it justifies prevailing over them.

7. This one almost makes me laugh: the notion of an ultra-modernist and materialist like Marx being deified even though he was 100% opposed to such things. Just as Mussolini describes this quasi-spiritualistic attitude towards Marx, a growing number in China believe that Mao brings good luck. Both Marx and Mao would be horrified, I suspect.

Finally, Marx turned out to be wrong on countless things, so the notion of him as a sort of atheist's prophet also amuses me. The atheist's version of a false prophet he was and he remains, however.

Brazil's 2022 Election is a battle between good vs evil. by radicalcentrist in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Lula will narrowly win.

The supporters of Ciro Gomes in the first round (3.04%) are enough to get Lula over 50% alone. In 2018, Gomes did not endorse Haddad (PT) or Bolsonaro, but it can safely be assumed that his voters are aware that they are closer to Lula (PT) than to Bolsonaro.

Even if that wasn't the case, supporters of the PSDB/PMDB (both Centrist to marginally Right-leaning overall) in third place can't all be trusted to vote for Bolsonaro, especially since a sizeable number of their voters are still Left-wing or liberal nutjobs, as well as much of the party hierarchies: Tebet (PMDB) is an overt feminist and supports 50% women quotas in government. Predictably, she endorsed Lula.

Unless a whole bunch of voters who sat out in the first round vote Bolsonaro in the second, Lula will have a narrow victory (possibly as narrow as 51.5% v. 48.5%, but if even half of the first round PSDB/PMDB voters switch to Lula in the run-off, perhaps a final result such as 54.5%-45.5% might be possible). Anything higher than that, I think, is highly unlikely.

Italian election thread by Rakean93 in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Ideally, FDI-FI-Lega is what I want to see, since that eliminates the need for any Left-wing party representation in the government whatsoever. Let the Leftists cry for a few years.

A 'Centre-Right coalition' supermajority is obviously also desirable, since this means that the Left-wing can't even really do anything in the opposition.

No Left-wing parties in government or in (meaningful) opposition makes this vastly better than the first Conte government, in which M5S ruined everything.

Also good to hear that Mattarella can't realistically do anything. I think he was already very bothered by the first Conte-Salvini-Di Maio government (probably mostly because of Salvini), but now he's in a position that he would find even more disagreeable. From his point of view, Meloni-Salvini-Berlusconi are probably a far worse trio.

How is M5S doing with Di Maio having left to form the 'Civic Commitment' party which is now part of the 'Centre-Left coalition'? Is the M5S voter base staying with their party under Conte outside of that coalition, or is there a big transfer of them to Di Maio's party?

I like how M5S is in an alliance of sorts with the Gay Party. Says it all, really.

Italian election thread by Rakean93 in debatealtright

[–]LGBTQIAIDS 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

We have to consider just how bad of a coalition partner M5S is.

After the 2018 election, M5S explicitly ruled out forming a government with any of the 'Centre-Right coalition' parties. Di Maio (M5S leader) wanted to form a government with the PD, but the PD wouldn't accept joining a coalition with any of the 'Centre-Right coalition' parties either. Eventually, the government was formed, composed solely of Lega and a reluctant M5S who clearly would have preferred a government with PD and some smaller parties.

So, here's my first key point: M5S clearly doesn't even like Lega, FdI, or FI in the first place, which makes the idea of replacing FI with them in 'Centre-Right coalition' government untenable. They couldn't work with those parties the first time around, and there's no point in giving them a second chance to do what I'm about to mention, viz. literally collapse the government and give it back to the Left.

In late 2019, M5S left the government and promptly formed a new government with PD and two other garbage Left-liberal parties. The mess that this created meant that the Left ended up ruling for most of the term that Lega should have been in government for.

So here's my second key point: M5S is completely untrustworthy even if they were to accept a place in the 'Centre-Right coalition', since they gravitated back to their natural position as allies of the PD not long after the first time around.

In early 2021, this Left-wing second Conte government also collapsed because Renzi's small party (IV) left. Draghi then formed his government, which Lega and FI joined but within which they were heavily outnumbered by the Left parties (M5S, PD and four smaller ones).

M5S' refusal to work with the 'Centre-Right coalition' is the chief problem here. They had their chance to work with Lega and blew it, opting instead to work with our enemies like the PD and Renzi's splinter group of the PD. It's better not to include them so as not to repeat the sheer failures of the past four years.

The M5S isn't a serious party, which is why most of their gains have gone back to the PD. Those idiots even got the mayorship of Rome and a few other major cities only to screw up so bad that the PD took them back. Just look at them right now. They're literally in an alliance with a group called the Gay Party.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_Party

For the 2022 Italian general election, the party failed to collect the 80,000 signatures necessary to be able to register, and on 22 August they announced an agreement with the Five Star Movement to carry two candidates (Fabrizio Marrazzo and Marina Zela) on the party's lists.