I’m Pretty Sure Tucker is Not Running in 2024 - Andrew Anglin

submitted by send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist from self.debatealtright

I enjoyed this article from Anglin this morning.

https://stormer-daily.rw/tucker-carlson-just-gave-a-political-speech-in-iowa-like-hes-running-for-president/

He did a good job of exposing Tucker for the 90's liberal he is. He didn't need to resort to the 'tucker is a kabbalist cia agent' schtick that many in the dissident sphere lean towards. (Which might be true but that's besides the point).

I liked these two paragraphs.

We have an ancient Western tradition, and part of that is our ethnic heritage. There’s nothing wrong or evil about saying that. It doesn’t mean you want to kill other people. It means that you believe there is spiritual meaning to the blood, to the shared blood, and to the history of the blood. There is no nation that survived for very long without a fundamental basis in shared genetics.

That doesn’t mean that every single nonwhite person has to be kicked out of America, or that America won’t remain “pluralistic,” but it does mean that as a nation, we are white Europeans, that this is fundamental to our identity, and that for America to continue to exist, that has to be acknowledged, and we have to preserve it.

For me those two paragraphs are nice guy national socialism. I think if we ever have an explicit pro white party in North America it's going to have to look like those two paragraphs not hard clerical or hard Germanic fascism. As Hitler said the people of america are too negrofied to every embrace a pure racial hierachy. However, if we embrace Anglin's 2 paragraph platform here we might just be able to get enough Trumpers, libertarians and conservatives on board with having a real 3rd party. Unfortunately Tucker won't be the guy to lead it. If they don't allow us to peaceful oppose global homo with a nice guy national socialism type approach then there's always the backup plan...

all 19 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (14 children)

I never understood clerical "fascism" because fascism was always anti-clerical to begin with.

[–]YJaewedwqewqClerical Fascist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Even if that's true of Italian Fascism, fascism and a religious focus are definitely not mutually exclusive; communism or anarchism are completely incompatible with religion (especially Christianity) since they are founded on murder, glorified piracy, and "destroying hierarchy" (..and replacing it with their own).

Fascism is, in the most general and abstract sense, an attempt to repair and undo the damage of the "Enlightenment" and subsequent political disasters that led to the current Jewish hegemony over the planet while still being forced to act within the ideological framework the Pandora's Box of the Enlightenment unleashed upon the world; while Fascism cannot completely undo the Enlightenment, it can attempt to stitch the wound by removing the most harmful elements it introduced such as democracy, individualism, etc. while keeping the nation sustainable and competitive by enforcing the correct values and utilizing the now-sanitized tools the Enlightenment unleashed on the world to fight off attacks from globohomo.

In this sense, both fascism and Christianity have the end goal of eliminating evil or at least creating a bastion for good among evil.

So when you understand fascism as a typical, specific "political ideology" that just happens to be correct, I can see where you see conflict. But when you understand it as I (and I would say at least some others) do, as a more fluid guiding principle or framework that is in many ways objectively correct, it's only natural that it be combined with religion.

tl;dr: Fascism is right and anti-Enlightenment and so is Christianity so it's natural that they'd work together/be combined.

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

tl;dr: Fascism is right and anti-Enlightenment and so is Christianity so it's natural that they'd work together/be combined.

Not according to the H-Man.

You see, it's been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn't we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion too would have been more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?

https://libquotes.com/adolf-hitler/quote/lbp0t4b

Christianity has always been the weakest and worst religion. The main character Jesus literally gets himself crucified but then disappears forever.

That right there should tell you the belief system is suicidal. There have been other Gods throughout history who are nowhere near as pathetic or self defeating who should be worshipped instead.

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

Hitler was a master shitposter. One should be careful not to take things he said out of context. I will refer you to this speech: https://archive.ph/MtiaL

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Hitler was surrounded by other self-professed Christians who wanted him dead. Even before Hitler was born, millions of Europeans had already killed each other in Christian based wars.

It was never a belief system worth preserving, and Fascism between 1920 ~ 1945 was meant to be that hard reset to get away from it.

It could have been Thor, the Roman deities, or even Hitler himself. Anything would have felt more natural than worshipping a dead desert Man from the Middle East whose only achievement in life was dying.

But to run a successful state, you don't need religion. National Socialism was ahead of its time and pointed out biological evolution is more important.

[–]YJaewedwqewqClerical Fascist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Are you ever not a homosexual? I genuinely hope this comment is trolling/satire or something, holy shit

Whites should be mudslimes instead

You mean the religion that codifies raping small children and shares many other religious perversions with Judaism, especially murderous hatred for Whites?

Christianity has always been the weakest and worst religion.

Pagans who had societies based around pederasty, homosexuality, and paleolithic-tier human sacrifice and nature worship were better? If so, why did Christianity cause them to crumble immediately? If Christianity is so weak, why did White Christians conquer the world at large while White pagans (not to mention pagans of other races) were often the ones being conquered and were made better for it? Surely if pagans were so strong, they wouldn't have been humiliated and converted in short order.

The main character Jesus literally gets himself crucified but then disappears forever.

This is the understanding I'd expect from a particularly edgy 6 year old. That means your reading level is getting better, if nothing else, but not only does this not address anything about my argument but is also completely false. Christ died for our sins, an act of self-sacrifice for the greater good, and continues to subtly influence those who truly follow and believe in Him to do good and resist the evils of the Jew and Satanist.

That right there should tell you the belief system is suicidal

If self sacrifice is anathema to you, why not go fuck off and play with the commies who share your soy worldview of anti-responsibility? If you consider subsuming the will, and even very life of the individual to that of the wider community, to be "suicidal and weak", then you literally fundamentally disagree with fascism and indeed Third Positionism as a whole.

There have been other Gods throughout history who are nowhere near as pathetic or self defeating who should be worshipped instead

Ah yes, why not worship Zeus or Odin, cunts who in their respective theologies do little else but fuck with and impede the progress of the cultures that worshipped them, except of course for fucking animals, fucking mortals as animals, being homosexuals, and other such degenerate acts.

Of course none of this really matters because, unlike Christ, who even secular historians agree was almost certainly a real individual at the very least, Odin and Zeus are not real and never have been, and the societies that worshipped them collapsed.

Despite the (funnily enough mostly Amerimutt) worship of the Vikings and Romans, the former were barbarians who did nothing but rape, enslave and murder their fellow Whites and then mere decades after doing so were quickly converted (and immediately after their conversion launched a crusade against the Muslims invading the Holy Land), and the latter were a decadent, cosmopolitan empire where race-mixing wasn't unheard of and political corruption was literally the norm. Only after centuries of enslaving and terrorizing did they convert to Christianity and finally start solving some of those issues.

In short, post nose

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

You mean the religion that codifies raping small children and shares many other religious perversions with Judaism, especially murderous hatred for Whites?

It's another Desert cult I consider too foreign for Europeans, but in context, I can still see why it's an upgrade over Christianity. Muslims put up with a lot shit in Palestine, or even when Afghanistan was invaded by both the U.S and USSR, but at least their belief in jihad makes it impossible to conquer them without putting up a fight. And Muslims still basically unite when an outside group wants them dead.

Pagans who had societies based around pederasty, homosexuality, and paleolithic-tier human sacrifice and nature worship were better? If so, why did Christianity cause them to crumble immediately? If Christianity is so weak, why did White Christians conquer the world at large while White pagans (not to mention pagans of other races) were often the ones being conquered and were made better for it? Surely if pagans were so strong, they wouldn't have been humiliated and converted in short order.

It was not because they were Christian, lol. Ethiopia is one of the oldest Christian countries and they never left Africa.

And even when the Christians went around the world "conquering" what they left behind was a disgusting mess. Take a look at this map and you'll see exactly like what I mean:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Prevailing_religious_population_by_country_percentage.svg

All of Central/South America looks this way because Catholics had converted the Natives and ended up race mixing with them. Similarly, in Africa, it's Christians who set up charities that either feed Blacks or try to bring them back to their own countries. Proof of why Christianity is weak. There is no loyalty to race, it was the original globohomo that taught all humans are equal and we all must worship the same god.

This is the understanding I'd expect from a particularly edgy 6 year old. That means your reading level is getting better, if nothing else, but not only does this not address anything about my argument but is also completely false. Christ died for our sins, an act of self-sacrifice for the greater good, and continues to subtly influence those who truly follow and believe in Him to do good and resist the evils of the Jew and Satanist.

Jesus is the crypto-Karl Marx.

Why would I care about sins? You must mean White guilt.

https://files.catbox.moe/kkk266.jpg

There is nothing heroic about sacrificing yourself while claiming that we're all cursed.

If self sacrifice is anathema to you, why not go fuck off and play with the commies who share your soy worldview of anti-responsibility? If you consider subsuming the will, and even very life of the individual to that of the wider community, to be "suicidal and weak", then you literally fundamentally disagree with fascism and indeed Third Positionism as a whole.

The Vikings had a belief of dying in the battlefield will send you to Valhalla. Japan similarly had the same thing during WW2. Both religions are more closer to defending their bloodline, whereas Christianity only wants you to imagine life on Earth is temporary, and everyone is suppose to go to heaven regardless if they contributed nothing in life.

Ah yes, why not worship Zeus or Odin, cunts who in their respective theologies do little else but fuck with and impede the progress of the cultures that worshipped them, except of course for fucking animals, fucking mortals as animals, being homosexuals, and other such degenerate acts. Of course none of this really matters because, unlike Christ, who even secular historians agree was almost certainly a real individual at the very least, Odin and Zeus are not real and never have been, and the societies that worshipped them collapsed. Despite the (funnily enough mostly Amerimutt) worship of the Vikings and Romans, the former were barbarians who did nothing but rape, enslave and murder their fellow Whites and then mere decades after doing so were quickly converted (and immediately after their conversion launched a crusade against the Muslims invading the Holy Land), and the latter were a decadent, cosmopolitan empire where race-mixing wasn't unheard of and political corruption was literally the norm. Only after centuries of enslaving and terrorizing did they convert to Christianity and finally start solving some of those issues. In short, post nose

So you think Jesus actually walked on water or revived people from dead? If the Man was real, then clearly he was a bullshitter or had his followers exaggerate his stories. And that only makes it worse. If nearly all parts of his life are lies, why believe anything he says or does?

Ultimately though, any National Socialist society would have eventually moved past religion. As I had explained to another user, the state has a responsibility to look after its population and that requires seeing humans as biological products of evolution. We can't put all our trust in divine beings who can't cure cancer or prevent us from going extinct.

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

It's another Desert cult I consider too foreign for Europeans, but in context, I can still see why it's an upgrade over Christianity. Muslims put up with a lot shit in Palestine, or even when Afghanistan was invaded by both the U.S and USSR, but at least their belief in jihad makes it impossible to conquer them without putting up a fight. And Muslims still basically unite when an outside group wants them dead.

I hope you realize that the Middle East was more or less White before the Muslims flooded in and took over. Are you gonna try and tell me that the Byzantines were Turks because they existed largely in Asia Minor? And there's a HUGE difference between military invasion and subtle subterfuge. Afghanistan in the 80s, before the Taliban took over, was a degenerate cesspit that emulated Western nations. It took a Soviet invasion for a force to rise up and overthrow the subterfuge of Judaic influence.

If Christians are so evil and bad, why did Christians massively support Hitler? Mussolini? etc. and heavily resist Communists and other direct Jewish military intervention?

And why is the onus to rise up against ZOG on Christians alone? If Pagans and gaytheists are so based and redpilled why haven't they risen up and done what you imply Christians should be doing if they're so based? And btw, Christians ARE doing such things; groups like the Amish are direct slaps in the face to the WEF and UN and their kike agenda.

It was not because they were Christian, lol. Ethiopia is one of the oldest Christian countries and they never left Africa.

They literally couldn't because they were blockaded in by rampaging Pisslamic empires. Not to mention, just because they were Christian, they still had the limitations of Africa and being Africans; They had inferior technology to Europe.

All of Central/South America looks this way because Catholics had converted the Natives and ended up race mixing with them. Similarly, in Africa, it's Christians who set up charities that either feed Blacks or try to bring them back to their own countries. Proof of why Christianity is weak. There is no loyalty to race, it was the original globohomo that taught all humans are equal and we all must worship the same god.

"South America and Africa being Christian is bad because... it just is okay!!!" If Christians are so weak shouldn't you be celebrating the inferior races being "weaker"? And no Christian groups I'm aware of wanted to import Africans en masse to Europe.

it was the original globohomo that taught all humans are equal and we all must worship the same god.

Are you fucking retarded or something? The Greeks and Romans didn't give a shit about race either. They didn't care if Blacks or Muslims lived in their empire or race mixed.

Jesus is the crypto-Karl Marx.

This is a meaningless statement that you didn't even bother to back up.

Why would I care about sins? You must mean White guilt.

So you think degeneracy is okay? You think holding people accountable for morally reprehensible actions or motives is "LITERALLY JUST LIKE WHITE GUILT!"? "White Guilt" is built off the premise that White people are bad because we did things everyone else does, or better yet that we committed fictional crimes that never happened.

Original Sin is the idea that humans will always be imperfect and fall short of God, because we are inherently flawed. It has nothing to do with "ancestral crimes" despite the constant connections made by dipshits like yourself.

There is nothing heroic about sacrificing yourself while claiming that we're all cursed.

Another quite meaningless statement, that not only ignores 90% of what I said but also betrays your childlike understanding of Christianity yet again.

whereas Christianity only wants you to imagine life on Earth is temporary, and everyone is suppose to go to heaven regardless if they contributed nothing in life.

This is untrue and retarded on a number of levels. Firstly, you said Christianity is suicidal then immediately praise a religion, and a specific idea within that religion, that inspires suicide bombers and other terrorists, as well as a doctrine that states that the afterlife is only for those who die in battle. How do you not see that as "suicidal"?

Secondly, only those saved through belief, action, etc. (depending on the sectarian understanding of salvation) are saved and go to Heaven. Not to mention, those terrorists and viking raiders you praised earlier in your "point" didn't contribute much in life, not to Whites anyway, considering those actions directly harm(ed) Whites.

So you think Jesus actually walked on water or revived people from dead? If the Man was real, then clearly he was a bullshitter or had his followers exaggerate his stories. And that only makes it worse. If nearly all parts of his life are lies, why believe anything he says or does?

Well, first off, unironically yes. And if you throw a shitfit, Muslims literally believe that Allah told Mohammed to rape little girls. Hellenists literally believed that the Gods literally lived on a mountain and did shit like fuck mortals and mess with crops and shit. Norse pagans literally believed a fuckhuge snake and a fuckhuge wolf would fight and end the world.

Ironic that you praise these religions that are/were far more superstitious and illogical than Christianity while chastising Christianity for being "not credible", lmao.

Ultimately though, any National Socialist society would have eventually moved past religion.

According to whom? Your ass? This is quite a bold assumption considering even through decades of fascism and even subsequent communist and/or globohomo control Germany, Italy, etc. stayed a vast majority Christian.

As I had explained to another user, the state has a responsibility to look after its population and that requires seeing humans as biological products of evolution.

How so? Seeing your citizenry as worthless clumps of cells, akin to living robots whose only purpose is to reproduce is completely antithetical to "looking after" the population. The Soviets did the whole antitheism thing and as a more or less direct result genocided their citizens en masse and treated them as prisoners or livestock.

We can't put all our trust in divine beings who can't cure cancer or prevent us from going extinct.

We haven't gone extinct yet. And cures for cancer likely exist, but are being suppressed by der Jude.

All in all you've managed to do nothing productive, aside form exposing the ideological core of your beliefs, based in liberalism and Marxism. Your ideology is wholly materialist and nothing like National Socialism in any regard. You unironically come across as a leftoid LARPing as a facsist/NatSoc.

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I hope you realize that the Middle East was more or less White before the Muslims flooded in and took over. Are you gonna try and tell me that the Byzantines were Turks because they existed largely in Asia Minor?

I would rather get back to you on this one.

And there's a HUGE difference between military invasion and subtle subterfuge. Afghanistan in the 80s, before the Taliban took over, was a degenerate cesspit that emulated Western nations. It took a Soviet invasion for a force to rise up and overthrow the subterfuge of Judaic influence.

Sure, but why is it Islam in particular that drives these people to clean up their own house and unite against their oppressors' so much? Iran underwent the same thing with the revolution of the 1970s. Or Lebanon and Syria. They're always been more fanatical and hostile against letting foreigners take over.

If Christians are so evil and bad, why did Christians massively support Hitler? Mussolini? etc. and heavily resist Communists and other direct Jewish military intervention?

Not all of them did, and if the July plot is taken at face value, then these same people who initially liked Hitler would have also turned on him when it was convenient.

Hitler was at least very smart to recognize that the state needs to give all power to someone who actually cares more about race & nationalism, then risk it on sharing it with rivals who are corruptible or have weak emotions.

True Fascism is literally "facts don't care about your feelings", and if I was Fuhrer, why would I trust someone who believes a book about talking snakes or burning bushes to be real? My first instinct is that they are schizo or hear voices in their head.

And why is the onus to rise up against ZOG on Christians alone? If Pagans and gaytheists are so based and redpilled why haven't they risen up and done what you imply Christians should be doing if they're so based? And btw, Christians ARE doing such things; groups like the Amish are direct slaps in the face to the WEF and UN and their kike agenda.

Atheists have if we use China as a benchmark, and to a lesser extent, Japan.

And lol at the Amish. On one hand, they're actually the only group of Christian I respect for living the lo-fi life and minding their own business. But it's also a double edge sword against them. They reject technology which keeps them in a dumbed down state.

When China pumps out genetically engineered Gigachads en masse, the poor Amish Farmer wont have anything to resist them with.

"South America and Africa being Christian is bad because... it just is okay!!!" If Christians are so weak shouldn't you be celebrating the inferior races being "weaker"? And no Christian groups I'm aware of wanted to import Africans en masse to Europe.

I actually feel pity for the lesser races. I think an African or an Indian should stick to their native shamanism instead of being forced to wear crosses or read bibles.

And you can't think of a major Christian group who supports importing Blacks? Um... how about the Pope?

https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2019/09/29/pope-francis-reminds-christians-migrants-and-refugees-should-be-welcomed-around

Now contrast the Pope's comments with that of the Buddhist Dalai Lama?

https://www.france24.com/en/20180912-dalai-lama-says-europe-belongs-europeans

Are you fucking retarded or something? The Greeks and Romans didn't give a shit about race either. They didn't care if Blacks or Muslims lived in their empire or race mixed.

This is a topic I would personally want to research. Because they did care if both Empires didn't actually end up being completely mixed race in the end.

This is a meaningless statement that you didn't even bother to back up.

It's actually on point. What did both Marx and Jesus do? They both changed the world forever, by coming up with teachings that would go on to destroy millions of lives, even longer after they're death.

Had both Men not existed, Humanity would have been in Space by now.

So you think degeneracy is okay? You think holding people accountable for morally reprehensible actions or motives is "LITERALLY JUST LIKE WHITE GUILT!"? "White Guilt" is built off the premise that White people are bad because we did things everyone else does, or better yet that we committed fictional crimes that never happened. Original Sin is the idea that humans will always be imperfect and fall short of God, because we are inherently flawed. It has nothing to do with "ancestral crimes" despite the constant connections made by dipshits like yourself

Why would I be born with degeneracy? And why does worshipping a dead desert man somehow hold all the solutions to this?

It's far from having any scientific weight, and it instead, it makes humans fearful. Like if anyone doesn't believe in Jesus, they're automatically going to Hell right? Regardless if nothing about their original sins stopped them from being a good or even contributing person on Earth.

Another quite meaningless statement, that not only ignores 90% of what I said but also betrays your childlike understanding of Christianity yet again.

Everything you say about Christianity hinges on this idea that Jesus self-sacrifice is actually worth anything. It's not. I have no valid reason to believe I'm a sinner and even more bizarre, why worship a god who cursed his own creations when they were born? I actually can't think of any other religion with such resentment for its own followers.

This is untrue and retarded on a number of levels. Firstly, you said Christianity is suicidal then immediately praise a religion, and a specific idea within that religion, that inspires suicide bombers and other terrorists, as well as a doctrine that states that the afterlife is only for those who die in battle. How do you not see that as "suicidal"?

Because the suicide bomber is still dying for something that affects us in real life and can result in actual political change. Whereas someone dying in the name of Jesus only removes themselves from existence. Like the Jim Jones Kool-Aid cult.

Secondly, only those saved through belief, action, etc. (depending on the sectarian understanding of salvation) are saved and go to Heaven. Not to mention, those terrorists and viking raiders you praised earlier in your "point" didn't contribute much in life, not to Whites anyway, considering those actions directly harm(ed) Whites.

Oh cool. So some murderer or rapist could say praise Jesus on their death bed and go to heaven. But a Scientist who lived a life of moving humanity forward is going to hell because he just didn't see any evidence for any god? Pathetic.

Well, first off, unironically yes. And if you throw a shitfit, Muslims literally believe that Allah told Mohammed to rape little girls. Hellenists literally believed that the Gods literally lived on a mountain and did shit like fuck mortals and mess with crops and shit. Norse pagans literally believed a fuckhuge snake and a fuckhuge wolf would fight and end the world. Ironic that you praise these religions that are/were far more superstitious and illogical than Christianity while chastising Christianity for being "not credible", lmao.

As long as Christians believe their bible is god inspired, while also claiming only their god exists, they deserve the ridicule. Because just like the criticism of the original sin, there is no scientific way to evaluate this religion, yet it's still being treated as fact for some reason.

According to whom? Your ass? This is quite a bold assumption considering even through decades of fascism and even subsequent communist and/or globohomo control Germany, Italy, etc. stayed a vast majority Christian.

The only religion I could see sticking around, is possibly a cult dedicated to Adolf Hitler. And that's because he was actually a real person who came and did all the things he wanted with facts to back it up.

If someone still believes in Jesus or Muhammad despite never personally answering any calls in a thousand years, the joke is on them.

How so? Seeing your citizenry as worthless clumps of cells, akin to living robots whose only purpose is to reproduce is completely antithetical to "looking after" the population. The Soviets did the whole antitheism thing and as a more or less direct result genocided their citizens en masse and treated them as prisoners or livestock.

Not true, and in fact, the Soviet model staunchly rejected evolution in favor of their own pseudoscience.

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

And even for the times they may have gotten Science right, they were still true believers in equality, which meant they would never elevate themselves past poverty.

National Socialism wanted to breed better humans, which is only possible when you realize that inferior and superior populations exist. When you have super human beings, your nation can only keep going up in terms of healthcare, intelligence, physical prowess, wealth etc.

We haven't gone extinct yet. And cures for cancer likely exist, but are being suppressed by der Jude. All in all you've managed to do nothing productive, aside form exposing the ideological core of your beliefs, based in liberalism and Marxism. Your ideology is wholly materialist and nothing like National Socialism in any regard. You unironically come across as a leftoid LARPing as a facsist/NatSoc.

It makes no sense to believe in a god who has shown to never intervene whenever a race is in trouble.

Fascism only ever made great strides because there was smart Men in the past who could read current events, and understand no divine help was ever going to rescue humanity.

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

radicalcentrist becoming anti-christian might just get me to convert

[–]ifuckredditsnitches_Resident Pajeet 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

communism or anarchism are[...]founded on murder, glorified piracy, and "destroying hierarchy" (..and replacing it with their own).

probably the best advertisement of leftism I've ever seen lmfao

Fascism is right and anti-Enlightenment and so is Christianity

Many would disagree on either or both counts.

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

Just imagine instead of a government the church structure is now also the government structure. Instead of the government providing social services, roads, military structure. The church bureaucracy now does all that. It's still a nation with fascist goals (defeating an enemy, growing, surviving an economic downturn). Think of militarized clergy. Think of the Pope/Emperor as the CEO, President, Prime Minister, Supreme military leader, etc. Japan under the Emperor was clerical fascism. Peak Holy Roman Empire was clerical fascism. Putin today is running Russia the exact opposite of clerical fascism. The Church stays totally out of state affairs and the state allows the church to have a monopoly of 'spiritual' matters. It's a form or pluralism. Clerical fascists do have a lot in common with other fascists groups though. Both hate party systems or pluralism. (Anglo Fascists really like 'local committees' though but that's different than parties.)

"fascism" because fascism was always anti-clerical to begin with.

You're thinking of 20th century interpretations of fascism. 20th century Italian and German Fascism aren't the only types of fascism. Although I'm sure someone is going to come in here and disagree with me on this! For me fascism is above all like a hive mind approach to government, culture, and nationalism. Fascism is structuring society more like a hive (I know that sounds terrible for modern highly individualized people but it's really not). Each bee is valuable but not more valuable than the hive. That's the bottom line. That doesn't necessarily have to be racial (Mussolini famous downplayed the racial side) but it makes sense for it to be semi-racial because in order for a 'hive' to work the bees need to have similar IQ, disposition, history, goals, culture, spirit, language, families, blood, etc. Spanish, Italian, Anglo, and German Fascism all look different because they are different types of bees. Han Chinese fascism looks WAAY different than Euro fascism though because they are VERY different types of bees (maybe more like ants?). I think Hitler ultimately wanted Contentential Euro fascism but over a thousand years and not by force. He was mainly just concerned with saving the German volk first and then working on the cousins and brothers of Germans (the European race). For Hitler Europe was a family but Germans were like the nuclear family.

This is kind of an contentious topic though so hopefully we get some healthy conversation about it going on.

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

It's a funny name, which always makes me think of an RPG class. It just seems to refer to fascist movements that are heavily informed by religious traditions, usually Catholicism. The gnostic, self-sacrificial ideology of the Iron Guard is probably the best example.

[–]Rakean93Identitarian socialist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think clerical fascism historically are the Romanian and Slovenian cases, the first lead by a fervent hortodox, the latter by a Catholic priest.

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

I'm confused. The article actually states the opposite of this title, does it not? It seems to imply that Carlson probably is going to run depending on how a Trump run plays out.

I'm all for it. Tucker might not be completely based or whatever, but he is as based as you can possibly be and have even the slightest chance of running for President. In fact I think he probably is too based. Jews hate his guts, and unlike Trump, not even right wing Zionists like him. They all hate his guts. A Carlson run would cause them to freak out like nothing you've ever seen before, and if he won? They would try to organize nationwide riots and god knows what else. It would be gasoline on the accelerationist bon fire. I would love to see it just to watch the shitlibs and the establishment absolutely lose their fucking minds, it would be epic.

Even if he is a grifter, you guys dont seem to understand how badly they hate him. It's so bad I honestly dont think he'd be able to run. They would find a way to sabotage him, probably using Trump. As sure as I was that Jews would never let Musk buy Twitter(I was right in the end), they'd try to find a way to prevent a Carlson presidential run, even if it just meant intimidating him into not running like they intimidated Musk into ditching his Twitter buy.

[–]Fitter_HappierWhite Nationalist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Tucker did a big piece on Hart-Celler this week but of course blamed it on Ted Kennedy and Dems just wanting compliant voters. He kind of went there but didn't go there. i.e. He talked about demographic replacement but only to win elections, which is fucking ludicrous because you can win elections by changing your policies, you don't have to import chinese, pajeets, nogs and aztecs.

Just once I want to see a Network (movie) tier rant where someone holds up Culture of Critique chapter 7 and rants, I mean explains, about Jews wanting to kill all potential Nazis, i.e. White people.

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

Just once I want to see a Network (movie) tier rant where someone holds up Culture of Critique chapter 7 and rants, I mean explains, about Jews wanting to kill all potential Nazis, i.e. White people.

You'd think these types of rants would be happening more, but they don't.

I did like a few of his turns of phrase in that Hart-Celler piece he did. He dropped some hints that a nation is it's founding stock and would function much differently without it's founding stock. We should take this one as a win. It's the closest thing to implicit white nationalism as we're going to get from anyone in the MSM right now.

[–]JuliusCaesar225Nationalist + Socialist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

His narrative is nonsense about immigration. All the immigration changes have had bipartisan support, some of them even lead by Republicans. The only thing that has changed is that Democrats have now become more lax because progressive activists think any form of border control is fascism, while Republicans have kept the status quo, meaning they talk tough about illegal immigration while supporting mass legal immigration.

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

He literally cannot say the truth and has to frame the issue in dumbass kosher sandwich partisan terms or he would be taken off the air. He knows that, the Murdochs know that, and the Jewish elite know that. So this is the little game they play, and there is already a ton of kvetching about Carlson by media Jews who know he knows and know what game he's playing. Carlson is moving the overton window on the subject slowly but surely though.