/fascist/ - Surf the Kali Yuga

Fascist and Third Position Discussion


[Hide]
Posting Mode: Reply Return
Säge
Name
Subject
Message

Max message length: 5000

Files
E-mail
Password

(used to delete files and postings)

Misc

  • Supported file types: GIF, JPG, PNG, WebM, OGG, and more
  • Max files: 5
  • Max file size: 50.00 MB
  • Read the global rules before you post, as well as the board rules found in the sticky.


04/08/21 New logo contest is now open for the upcoming site update! Submit your entry here.
08/28/20 Come and join our Matrix/IRC servers, the info can be found here.
02/09/20 /ausneets/ has been added!
11/23/19 Donations can now be made via PayPal, thank you for all of your support!
11/21/19 We have successfully migrated to LynxChan 2.3.0, to see all of the changes to 16chan, click here.


[Index] [Catalog] [Archive] [Bottom] [Refresh]

The Joy Of Mechanical Force - Futurism General Blackshirt 03/21/2021 (Sun) 23:29:33 ID:43560e No. 273
BE A CHEMICAL REACTIONARY Does anyone remember a few years ago when the Bagger 288 became a meme? I came across it, and it turns out that it was built by Krupp, the same Krupp that gave Uncle all of his Tanks, Ships, and AA guns. Investigating the matter further, we discover that it was the far right that gave the world dozens of the innovations we take for granted today: >A far-righter named Henry Ford gave the world the automobile and assembly line. >A far-righter named Konrad Zuse made the world's first programmable computer. >A far-righter named Otto Ambros was the best chemist in the third reich and invented a new type of rubber. >A far-righter named Werner Heisenberg discovered quantum mechanics. >Two far-righters named Francis Crick and James Watson discovered the structure of DNA. >A far-righter named Wernher Von Braun got us to the moon. >A far righter named William Shockley put the sillicon in the valley. >Pierce himself interned at Los Alamos, got a PhD in Physics, and lead an R&D team at Pratt & Whitney. The left on the other hand, contrary to what they'd have you believe, are the ones holding technology back: <Leftists created the anti-nuclear movement. <Leftists created the anti-gmo movement. <Leftists got animal testing banned. <Leftists ridicule space travel. In this thread we will discuss: >All the ways the right moves mankind further. >All the ways the left keeps us in the past. >White Scientists >White Engineers >White Mathematicians >Italian Futurism >Filippo Marinetti
I'm at a bit of an impasse with whether I am pro- or anti-tech. On the one hand, tech is likely the best way forward for the liberation of nations and the onset of fascism - neo-luddites simply can't outmatch a technologically superior enemy and in the best case scenario will live in "hidden" societies, eternally escaping from the tech crowd until it collapses in on itself. While that sounds decent to some it will take longer than many think for this to happen and it will probably be too late for Earth by that point as despite all their talk leftists prefer to continue exploiting finite resources if it means living in comfort. Of course, the pro-tech side faces its own set of issues, namely where the line is drawn in terms of technological advancement (or if there is a line at all) and how we can bring technology back to sustainable levels and divert destructive energies expended there to generative or at least useful end goals after all is said and done. There is also the question of whether it is necessary to one day leave Earth, but I think part of that will depend on how well she is taken care of in the meantime and how far we advance in terms of challenging her wrath (and the enmity of the stars). After all, the slightest event could mean complete destruction in the worst case. Assuming even the best case, however, we'll still need to expand beyond this star some day or face the end of our kind. I guess the ultimate question is, would interstellar expansion be an imperative or is it feasible at all? Without that as the end goal, is further advancement worth it?
>>278 It's not even entirely clear whether we've been to the moon or not. It's been nearly 50 years since we've been allegedly been on the moon and no one has done a single thing more there in-person. We can't even get a base there, or attempting to have anyone live there on a semi-long term basis. NASA has even declared that they've flat-out 'lost' the technology to get to the moon. This is in regards to the closest celestial body to this planet, yet people are still harboring Star Trek dreams of literally changing entire planets into 'new Earths' and other nonsense. We can't even keep this Earth clean. It's turning into a shithole, yet we have people with infinite trust in the current scientific paradigm exclaiming that science is going to make us into virtual gods exploring the stars. Any day now. Space exploration, by and large, is the ultimate form of surrogate activity. 99.99% of people receive no direct benefit from knowing that a rocket was blasted into an infinite void, yet they get a little dopamine boost from seeing it, especially the Reddit demographic. They get a vague feeling of "wow, humanity is so great!" and then go on with their miserable lives. Media reinforces this through science fiction movies and futurist propaganda. The 'muh human survival' is another meme that can be focused on once other problems are fixed. Several billion years is literally longer than Earth has existed if we are to believe the ages given by modern science. Ecofascism is the best solution before us right now. It is against rampant technology, and involves constriction of many types of technology by the state. Read Pentti Linkola to see what I am talking about. Kaczynski and Ellul's diagnoses are correct, but unfortunately what Kaczynski says can only lead to blackpill if he is right
>>282 Those points are all well and good but they don't address the immediate problems facing us, namely our present enemies. They simply have superior firepower thanks to tech, and I think discarding it outright is putting the cart before the horse given where our problems lie these days.
>>290 Lol and how are you going to use their own firepower agaisnt them? You don't have a solution either, because the jews have nukes and bombs, while no one on this board except for the glowies do. What you should be focusing on is how to win without technology or getting access to it without some imaginary LARP in your head that you will easily emerge victorious. You're worried about the lack of tech when you should be worried on how you can combat it.
>>308 I'm worried about combatting it because of the lack of it, anon. If we didn't have to fight it it wouldn't be a problem, but as the world stands if a fascist government appeared tomorrow and rejected tech they would be a smear on zog's boot from the word go. Keep your buzzwords away from this discussion, they are not helpful and have nothing to do with what is being asked here (is anti-tech worth the risk)?
>>290 Personally I think our enemies need combatted with any means that are available. Ultimately might makes right, and might does not mean just strength and numbers, it means technology and organization. Outside of things like brute power struggles it is a negative and destructive influence.
>>278 As a person steadily learning more and more about fascism I've come to the point where tech to me is an excellent thing and one that we as humans really seem to excel at. So in general I'm pro-tech, as long as it's not used to make us a lazy, useless, degenerate bunch. It can't become a crutch. When it becomes a crutch we suffer in the worst ways possible. It's the 'Thought without action' enabler writ large. As long as we balance tech with our own physical, mental and spiritual labors and demands, I think tech has a very, very long shelf life with us.
>>282 You know what's funny? I go on telegram and see these WN groups and there's always some non-Whites in it. Lmao wait till they realise they're cannon fodder.
(104.98 KB 356x489 nazi-cartoon.png)
>>273 I don't want to defend whatever you mean by leftists, but oh well. ><Leftists created the anti-nuclear movement. Chernobyl fags destroyed the USSR. ><Leftists created the anti-gmo movement. https://thediplomat.com/2019/05/chinas-gmo-paradox/ https://www.nature.com/articles/s41538-019-0049-5 ><Leftists got animal testing banned. It was Göring. ><Leftists ridicule space travel. It was Gagarin. Technology is a tool, but it needs a will to be used. Christians will use trains to transport Negroes to fuck Aryan women - racists will use atomic weapons to exterminate the vermin.
>>315 You aren't worried about what is actually important, you're worried about what some fascists do not advocate. I'm pretty sure that most fascist will take the initiative even if it means using technology. You're should be concerned on what you lack and is actually likely to happen instead of what a bunch of anons on an image-board think. Arguing about how technology is needed to match globohomo's firepower is meaningless when you don't have what you think you need yourself and don't even know how to counter a tank or even missile that can be shit from thousands of miles away. Eco-fashs already acknowledge the need to use tech to defeat evil. >Keep your buzzwords away from this discussion There aren't any buzzwords I used and my point still stands. You and actual fashs do not have the firepower to fight agaisnt jews and should be more concerned about that instead of a bunch of randos.
>>308 >nukes and bombs Way less of a problem than you'd assume. The entire world's nuclear arsenal wouldn't be enough to disable a large-scale natsoc uprising, the main industrial and population centers that are most vulnerable and liable to this kind of attack are exactly those we'd have little use for ourselves. There's only so much you can do with lemmings, and if they're still in cities at that stage of the fight, they're beyond useless. For our industrial capacity, even if we captured the main ZOG-run facilities in our nations, we'd still be practically crippled by a lack of qualified labor and expertise. I'd wager most of us aren't experts in steel foundry management or industrial coal extraction. Forcing the existing workers to run the installations for us is also unlikely to bode well. However this conflict plays out, we'll be reliant on small-scale, relatively low-tech operations for the next 20 years. Luckily for us, that's just enough to maintain a competent military, and virtually immune to nuclear and conventional bombing. The main issues for us would be manufacturing and wearing proper particle masks following a bombing, since I'd expect the kikes to detonate anything high in the atmosphere to spread contaminants far beyond the blast zone. With proper precautions, though, we can avoid any lasting damage to ourselves and the proles gathered around us. I am a chemical reactionary, but in the coming war, it will be the gritty, low-tech kind of mechanical force that wins out. >>342 Could it be possible that both eco-fash and mechanical fetishim perfectly converge when taking reality into account?
>>353 >Ancap Opinion disregarded fuck off back to /liberty/.
>>342 >shouldn't be concerned what a bunch of anons on an "image-board" think >image-board >LARP is not a buzzword Let me tell you how I know you're new. Anyway, the point of my post is decide for myself what I think the appropriate course of action is. I guess that abstract thought is too complex for some who can't even read posts. >>353 refers to himself as "natsoc" in his post, yet you see the flag and start flying off the handle right away. That kind of nonsense is not helpful nor does it lead to fruitful discussion. >>282 I didn't mention this earlier, but I think part of staying true to the 14 words includes space travel and interstellar colonization. It's pie-in-the-sky right now but so was aviation until 100 years ago. I'll concede that it isn't the most pressing of matters until far in the future but will it not eventually be necessary?
>>366 I think the difference between building a flying machine on Earth and the concept of colonizing different planets and star-systems is pretty massive, but provided that we fix many of the problems here on Earth I don't think I would complain about necessarily trying to do things.
>>357 >doesn't know what a meme flag is >imagines total anarchy wouldn't default to fascism immediately >is this much of a faggot I've never browsed or heard of /liberty/, but I'm sure you're very familiar with the place.
Tech is neither good or bad. Technology is power. As most of humanity is scum, they use it for degenerate purposes. However it can be used for good purposes too. Humans don't need most of technology to survive though. I do not like that low IQ degenerates have access to full technology but banning high IQ from accessing that individually would be worse I guess.
>>422 >meme flag You're retarded, because using a geographical flag can also mean you are representing your idealology on a board. >imagines total anarchy wouldn't default to fascism immediately Total anarchy is an actually meme that won't ever happen. Ancap isn't total anarchy it's cucking yourself for corporations. >I've never browsed or heard of /liberty/, but I'm sure you're very familiar with the place. Yeah sure you're totally not ancap after randomly claiming that "total anarchy" leads to fascism and didn't come from one of the most popular anarchy boards on imageboards. The mere knowledge of a board also means that you browse there. Fucking moron.
>>543 >claiming that "total anarchy" leads to fascism If he meant this in the sense that the collapse of the state would lead to a power vacuum that would need a dictatorship to restore order I can at least see where he is coming from in saying this. To say that it would necessarily be fascism seems like a reach to me, though.
>>560 It would necessarily be fascism, at least in the long run. In the short term any number of ideologies might color the various warlord states popping up, but isolated of any pre-existing structure, tribal instinct will prove the strongest driver of group cohesion, just like in prison it isn't commies vs synacrhists, but niggers vs Whites.
>>562 I guess it would depend on the popularity of the regime. I tend to think Fascism necessarily has some sort of mass-appeal to it, so if a dictatorship that restored order fulfilled that and worked like you said (which I think is plausible in many circumstances) then it could definitely be rather fascistic. I guess even if it was not like this immediately it could develop in this direction too.
(1.77 MB 5100x2000 1616923951075.png)
>>969 Have you ever stopped to think that the singularity is a meme most heavily pushed by jews such as Ray Kurzweil? Transhumanism itself is an atheistic jewish religion.
>>972 We will see.
>>973 >We will see It's already obvious.
>>972 Yeah that's something I've noticed too and it's something I've never been able to gel with. Not in fiction or as an ideology. It's just disgusting to me.
(288.51 KB 1012x1200 transhumanism jews.jpg)
>>977 The entire idea of a 'singularity' is just another recasting of the same Abrahamic mythos under a new guise.People will fall for it time and time again. The jew will always promise the goyim a coming utopia, one that can only be achieved by following their ideas to the letter. Marxism was the version of this that they pushed in the late 19th and 20th centuries. Now Marxism by 2021 has taken deep root the governments of the world and through culture. Now the jews can begin pushing their utopian ideas to fire up and mobilize the goyim to support their technological schemes for the next couple of decades at minimum. Transhumanism would mean the complete enslavement of the entirety of humanity by jews, corporations and governments in the most literal of senses. The jews want to destroy everything and anything natural. They want to destroy the family, they want to destroy and pervert the very definitions of male and female, they want to destroy anything recognizably human. They have no souls, and they want everyone to be as ugly, soulless and unnatural as them.
>>982 Adding to what you said, it's no coincidence that Marxism claims that it will provide a utopia where everything is free, and then the actual result is the complete enslavement of the masses under it, with a completely jewish ruling class. This tactic has always been the tool of the jews, going back to Christianity and probably earlier. Isaiah 19:2
>>969 >wojak edits You squared the number in your url, try again.
(305.42 KB 1872x816 jews world domination.PNG)
(284.57 KB 780x826 amalek.jpg)
>>985 It's quite sad to see that the jews have been using the same tricks for all of history and people keep falling for them time and time again. They are masters of trickery and manipulation, and seem to know exactly what to push and when. Most frightening, as you point out with your quote from Isaiah, is that the jews worked all of this stuff out thousands of years ago and even today follow it to the letter, or at least in spirit.
>>969 What am I looking at?
>>1004 Delusional techie fantasies
>>1006 And here that another anon was claiming that LARP was a buzzword. Also using tech the way it is implied in the post is not only degenerate, but jewish. Imagine trying to be a fascists or spiritual, but you support making furfaggotry into a reality.
>>1021 Larp is a buzzword which has been used to make every effort from fascists into a joke. Obviously retarded shit like >>969 should be derided for being complete fiction supposing itself as reality. But "hey anon what do we do with the knowledge that humanity's time on Earth is limited" is not "larping".
>>1024 >Larp is a buzzword which has been used to make every effort from fascists into a joke. LARP as a whole isn't a buzzword, because some guy mocks what you said. LARP can be used against anyone who only thinks inside of their imagination instead of reality. Christcucks can be referred as LARPers, because their theology doesn't work and spirituality is nothing more, but a mix of judaism and paganism at the same time with a church that proclaims itself holy and does nothing of that case. Calling someone a LARPer is a perfect word for retards who think and act like children and fascists deserve to be called exactly that.
>>1026 > and fascists deserve to be called exactly that. Meant "and fascists who act this way as well deserve to be called exactly that".
>>1021 LARPing is real, but most of the time LARPing is a buzzword. This anon here >>1026 says it well. Just think about that dude from that rally a few years ago who was going "WHAT ABOUT THE MEMES?" and had all sorts of signs with Pepe and Wojack on them and a Black Sun flag draped over his shoulders. Don't be that guy.
Stop trying to proclaim fascism as "far-right" we aren't right-wing nor want anything to do with the wings at all. Only Ancaps do this shit and it's annoying as fuck, because of how they always fail to understand what fascism is whether they're against it or support it. How many times does this have to be said? >>A far righter named William Shockley put the sillicon in the valley. Again fascism isn't far-right or any of the wings, so what you meant to say that he was a racialist and supporter of eugenics, which is the only "based" thing about him if you exclude the fact he helped the United States destroy Japan and empowering America with more tech that they can use to destroy nature. >>A far-righter named Wernher Von Braun got us to the moon. Which is fake and gay. Anyone who believes that America went to the moon, because a NS helped America is "based and true" is a fool. >Leftists created the anti-nuclear movement. If you mean by anti-nuclear weapons then, I'm behind that and so should any fascist, but for a different reason. >Leftists got animal testing banned. Hey buddy, have you ever realized that leftists weren't the only ones who did not support unethical tests done on animals to fuel jewish sciences? >Leftists ridicule space travel. No they don't, leftists want a Star Trek fantasy.
>>987 It's not even just that. The only people who ascribe to "transhumanism" always, without fail, turn out to be literal techlets who don't even know how a calculator works. It's easy to ascribe some messiah role to a field you don't even know the limitations of. This applies as much to tech as it does to religion, economics, "rights," and everything else that has been used as a facade of cryptojudaism, and failed to deliver on its promise every single time. >>1028 Nice double-take, but it's too late to hide your true thoughts now, commie.
>>1039 >Make an mistake, because I wasn't paying attention to my wording. >HA! I CAUGHT YOU NOW COMMIE! Retard
>>1041 I'm pretty sure he's just fucking with you anon.
>>1043 It's hard to tell, when someone on /fash/ has been unironically acting the same way.
>>1046 I get it but it's best to take these things with a grain of salt.
(90.92 KB 233x300 young savitri devi.png)
(74.24 KB 1024x680 direction brain.jpg)
Reject the left-right paradigm. Everything should be judged off whether it is conducive to the flourishing of White societies and whether it is in harmony with the Natural Order. This is why retards see what Savitri Devi believed and can't understand why she isn't a leftist. <anti-nuclear movement. Nothing wrong here in principle. <anti-gmo movement This is good. <animal testing banned. National Socialists pioneered in getting vivisection banned and banned many types of animal cruelty. Based as far as I'm concerned. <ridicule space travel. Space travel is a meme
(83.47 KB 662x552 vril-7.jpg)
>>1059 >space travel is a meme Vril-Thule in their vimana machines would beg to differ.
>>1077 The question is whether those are moving through space or not though
>>1077 Space travel is not important until we fixed shit on Earth first. The fact that fascist are already setting their sights on space travel always makes me cringe, because I couldn't give two shits about space when our planet is dying and facing the issue with the jew. Until the Aryans/nature rules our planet again, then we should ever consider space travel if it is ever possible, until then it's not important.
>>1079 >not having long term goals We won't be able to realize those long term goals until we stop our ethnic replacement and cleanse the invaders though, that's true.
>>1143 >>1143 That won't happen until you actually secure the future of the White race. Again it's not important shouldn't be talked about until we actually accomplish what's more important. I'm sick of hearing muh "Fascists in space!!!". It's getting annoying and we had a really cringe argument I want to forget about on the last board where anons were claiming to unironically wanting a Stark Trek utopia.
>>1163 > I want to forget about on the last board where anons were claiming to unironically wanting a Stark Trek utopia. Why would anyone want such a degenerate and impossible future?
>>1163 >i'm sick of hearing about fascists in space Then don't read the futurism thread lmao
(157.67 KB 406x395 TED KACZYNSKI WARNING LISTEN.png)
>>1178 You don't understand, anon. Futurism is a deluded and false path. It needs to be refuted and exposed.
>>1163 This, we can only conquer the stars after we conquer our planet. Right now we don't even have control of our own homelands, and we can't even prevent the worst parts of our race from destroying this planet in the name of profit, and comfort. In the future, when we have purged the world of shitskins, and have embraced a renewable, and stable civilization, then we can worry about conquering the stars. Focusing on space travel, over the task at hand now, is escapism at best.
>>1196 >>1079 Shit I just realized my point was pretty much exactly the same as the above post, whatever.
>>1079 Shit, anon cringed. Time to pack it up and never talk about it again. >>1179 >it's false, someone just has to prove it wrong Anon. Come on.
>>1200 >it's false, someone just has to prove it wrong Yes. It's important to make sure that Fascists and pro-Whites in general are not led down false paths that are either fruitless or will lead to their destruction (or even more vitally, that of our people). We often see people talking about reshaping entire planets and their atmospheres for humans to live on when we can't even clean up the air on our own planet, or can't even get people on the moon. We can't even keep the apes out of our societies right now. It's plain delusional and the ideas of 'futurists' are pulled right out of jewish-written sci-fi books and movies. Progress is a false meme as well.
>>1037 >>1204 >Denying the moon landing. >Denying the single greatest accomplishment that Europeans have ever achieved. Why are imageboards like this.
>>1223 For me at least it’s not that I set out wanting to deny it but the whole thing is so suspicious that one can’t help but wonder if the whole thing was a hoax. For example there is the fact that they claim to have lost both the technology to even go to the moon, and the original footage of the moon-landing. And then there is the fact of the camera filming the lander as it took off, and just in general how fake the whole thing looks. In general anything from NASA has proven to be deceptive in general. I can’t trust a word they say, especially nowadays with good CGI and Photoshop
<Leftists created the anti-nuclear movement. <Leftists created the anti-gmo movement. <Leftists got animal testing banned. <Leftists ridicule space travel. Hello ancap it seems you have lost your on here. You seem to think that fascism is right-wing or something, which confirms that you don't understand it at all outside of what leftists claim and delude themselves.
>>1223 >>Denying the single greatest accomplishment that Europeans have ever achieved. >Willing to reinforce (((American))) and (((Soviet))) lies just to claim how great White people are. This isn't stupidity, this pure skepticism for how America and it's jews uses Apollo 11 to shill their atheist/Judaic materalism to le debunk what the old age religions said about how the universe works. People like yourself can be massive retards and are willing to proof the "racist liberal" strawman true.
I'm starting to think people on this board would rather live a comfortable and ignorant lifestyle than one that breeds and generates strong men. Himmler, Nitschze, and Plato all warned us of the coming issue that are easy times and some on here want technology to solve all our issues. https://gainweightjournal.com/prehistoric-men-and-the-ancients-were-better-faster-stronger/ https://blog.everythingdinosaur.co.uk/blog/_archives/2012/08/06/is-usain-bolt-the-fastest-man-on-the-planet-of-all-time.html https://www.discovermagazine.com/planet-earth/how-strong-were-ancient-humans-modern-day-athletes-are-a-window-to-the-past
(609.82 KB 513x946 arno breker statue.png)
>>1696 Realizing that the ancients were better in literally all respects is a very profound redpill to swallow. Physically, spiritually, intellectually, etc. they were all superior in almost every way. Especially with philosophy, the Greeks discussed and BTFO everything worth discussing millennia ago, including things people today see as modern, such as materialism, atheism, skepticism, etc. Ancient man was also much less soft and effeminate. He was perfect. A beautiful savage perfectly in-tune with his instincts and nature. An Aryan from the past would seem like a god before the pathetic faggots who call themselves men today
>>1699 >An Aryan from the past would seem like a god before the pathetic faggots who call themselves men today Pretty much, this is the problem I have with anyone who fear the lack of technology will result in loss. If there's anything fascist should be focusing on and concerned about is their and others Whites' diet, mentality, spirit and physicality. I could care less for how much ak47s we have because what's more important is the condition and state of ourselves and seeking to reverse the effects of modernity to a state of making the Aryan man as strong or stronger than before. The jew always kvetch when you seek to improve yourself and stop thinking inside of individualistic bullshit, which some anons on this board has shown several times. A fat White dude with a diet of twinkies and fighting with assault rifle while fighting the jew is what you should be worried about. Nitschze and Hitler wanted body and mental improvement and you should too.
>>1475 >(((American))) and (((Soviet))) lies >Whites did not actually do the greatest thing Whites ever did. Imageboards. Not even once. >what the old age religions said about how the universe works. I'm going to trust how Heisenberg and Von Braun said the universe works. >>1696 I think that the core problem here is that everyone is conflating technology with computers. Those words aren't synonymous. Who would you say is stronger: A man in the woods with nothing but the clothes on his back, or a man in the woods with a knife, a hatchet, and a shovel?
>>1746 >Who would you say is stronger: A man in the woods with nothing but the clothes on his back, or a man in the woods with a knife, a hatchet, and a shovel? The problem is that no one tech-critical is criticizing this form of technology. Ted Kaczynski doesn’t care about it, neither does Jacques Ellul, and neither do people like Pentti Linkola. What is realized is that technology is fundamentally of two varieties, those which are dependent on large-scale societal organization and complex social systems, and technology that is not, i.e. stuff like shovels and knives. Obviously a man will be able to survive better with a knife and a hatchet. Humans naturally create technology / tools. The problem is an over-accumulation of means to such an extent that it enslaves and dehumanizes man. >I'm going to trust how Heisenberg and Von Braun said the universe works. Keep digging. People have it all wrong today. (((Materialism))) is on its last limbs.
>>1746 >Imageboards. Not even once. Nice non-speaking point retard. You are the problem with imageboards and what's said is that we always have the type of guys who constantly go around thinking by merely posting they have something intelligent to say and you fit the bill. >I'm going to trust how Heisenberg and Von Braun said the universe works Which they didn't say anything, you aren't trusting anything of worthwhile. Apparently the mere association with NS means that they must be correct lol. >Who would you say is stronger: A man in the woods with nothing but the clothes on his back, or a man in the woods with a knife, a hatchet, and a shovel? This is a brain-let question, because you aren't stronger because you have a tool. A tool is what helps you get a task done and how it should be used. A naked man in the woods fighting a man with hatchet can win depending on how strong and smart he is to outmaneuver and disarm or counter the man with hatchet. There are many ways to go about winning with a guy who has a slight advantage than you, a guy with the hatchet is not invisible. For example, the man with the tool could a moron and physically weak, than the guy who has more experience being within the woods and martial training, which can lead to the naked man to victory in several ways. You are still missing the point. You shouldn't be worried about technology and the lack of it you should be worried about your current mental and physical state, so technology won't be so dependant it makes you weak. A hatchet is nothing without a man, but a man is more than a hatchet. Technics is supposed to be a tool not something you require to win a battle.
>>1749 It is in the interests of our survival to only rely on technology achievable on a small scale. Having megaprojects and large industries is cool, but should be kept around as a novelty as best. The moment we depend on them we forget how to survive without them, and we risk disappearing ourselves should they ever cease to be. The future of technological development is adapting already-known tech for small scale production and use, ideally at an individual or family level. Once we can sustain ourselves at this level reliably, we can once again think about developing more advanced tools and contraptions, though only at that established, local level.
>>1696 >want technology to solve our issues No one said this, I said technology is a necessary tool for dealing with some issues.
>>1908 >No one said this But a shit-ton of you niggers think and sort of implied this line of thinking.
>>1910 >you may not have said it but you think it! Are you serious with this?
>>1911 >Are you serious right now? We had a debate on the last board where some retard thought that the lack of weapons or not using technology was going to lead to defeat of some kind. You guys are indeed implying that they ard more than a tools, because your mind is set on something that shouldn't be important at the moment.
>>1911 Way to miss the point! It's the fact that you guys imply and think of it that way and won't shut up about how you need tanks and other machineries. What tools will be necessary for a race war or a war against the jew that is more important than self-mastery? Machines like tanks can be handy, but they aren't necessary for victory, it's just makes it somewhat easier to defeat our oppositions, although a tank can be easily disabled.
>>1923 Tanks are a bad meme anyway. What we really need, beyond the all-important self mastery, is every brother to have a good understanding of chemistry, alchemy, and how to obtain the materials for both with just an axe, pan, and flint. You can absolutely produce an incendiary bomb in an off-grid log cabin or even a temporary camp, which will do a tank in pretty quickly. Hardest things to obtain are the oxidizing agents in stuff like gunpowder, but even that's possible with just one person. The greatest tech is that which is available to you at all times, under any conditions, everything else is bloat and weakness.
>>1920 You're probably right that I'm concerned about things that are too far into the future, but I think destroying the ideological foundation for what we will likely need eventually is stupidity. Obviously I'm not arguing for industry on a grand scale or a technocracy or whatever, but I think there is a place for technology in a successful fascist state which wishes to preserve White people beyond the lifespan of planet Earth. >>1923 >tanks can be disabled <people cannot Anon I think you are retarded.
What is going on in this futurism thread? Anons saying we don't need guns or bullets or bombs or blades or vehicles to win? And if you are not saying that, what the hell are you trying to say?
>>1957 People are merely criticizing crypto-progressives and those who have infinite faith in technology. All methods should be used to destroy our enemies, do not get me wrong.
>>1945 >>tanks can be disabled <people cannot >Anon I think you are retarded. No you're the retard here. A tank requires numerous resources to build and upkeep, while infantrymen are dirt cheap and cost little depending how you doctrinate them. A man can lose a limb, but he doesn't lose his mind, which can still be helpful even after being useless in combat. Your IQ is being exposed to being at most 75 not understanding this obvious point. I'm starting to think niggerist don't really understand the tech they shill or worry so much about like retards.
>>1963 Anon the effort required to disable a tank is dramatically greater than that required to disable a man, and an equally greater effort than that required to kill him. Besides that, men also require resources to upkeep and recruit, outfit, supply, and so on - or do you intend to just send a bunch of men with empty stomachs and no weapons into battle? I can tell you how well that will go. I'm not even a futurist. I said I'm on the fence about it because the negative consequences of technology are apparent. However, arguing against people like you is really starting to push me toward tech as an answer, as your only arguments are thoughtless drivel like "just disable the tanks."
(322.41 KB 612x540 follow the jewish science.png)
>>1963 >I'm starting to think niggerist don't really understand the tech they shill or worry so much about like retards. Bingo. This is the exactly the same as with most people who constantly praise and worship science. They just know factoids but know nothing in itself about what the labcoats tell them
>>1978 >Anon the effort required to disable a tank is dramatically greater than that required to disable a man, No it isn't, again you're retarded. You can create homemade bombs that are strong enough to blow a house down, the Taliban and Vietcong are examples. Tanks are machines that are easy to spot and much easier to shoot at than a man. Men can blend into environments and find ways to make themselves harder to shoot, while it usually requires men to build an environment around the machine. You're again missing the point and failing to recognize why infantry still dominates the battlefield. Soliders can eat a diet of a small plate of meat and yogurt and still be highly effective on the field. The idea that you need to feed soliders so much is a myth. The Romans and Mongolians worked this out hundreds of years ago.
>>1978 Tech isn't really "the answer" anyways. It's just something that exists and that we use, and we should use responsibly. Plus there are varying levels of tech so to classify it all in the same bucket is stupid. People say they are anti tech but they are happy to use knives and plumbing as if they weren't technology too. We also can't not use technology otherwise you get gunboat diplomacy'd. I wish the low effort "anti tech" fags would fuck off out of this thread or step it up because they are bringing low quality arguments and distracting from interesting conversations that could be had.
>>1986 Combined arms warfare is nigh-unbeatable if you have the industrial based to feed it and want to completely annihilate a population and take over their land and repopulate it with your own people. If you are just world policing then it gets beat by guerilla warfare though. So it's a dumb comparison to say that tank > man or man > tank as some absolute because it's completely situational.
>>1978 >Anon the effort required to disable a tank is dramatically greater than that required to disable a man, and an equally greater effort than that required to kill him Tell that to Vietnam, the Afghanis who fought the Soviets, and the Taliban. All of them are poor armies who were able to make their own bombs and destroy hundreds of American and Soviet tanks using destroyed urban environments and rural grounds. It doesn't require much to take out a tank it's almost like your forgetting that mines, satchel charges, and rpgs don't exist. >Besides that, men also require resources to upkeep and recruit, outfit, supply, and so on - or do you intend to just send a bunch of men with empty stomachs and no weapons into battle? No shit, but what makes you think that this is more costly than making sure your war machine isn't malfunctioning and ready for battle? It cost gallons of oil just to keep a simple jeep running, while it can only cost a snack, ammo and some sleep to keep your soliders fighting which I should inform you does is not as expensive as you think. >However, arguing against people like you is really starting to push me toward tech as an answer, as your only arguments are thoughtless drivel like "just disable the tanks." This isn't my argument not even my point, this is your brain rotting into nigger levels of not understanding anything about fighting. It's not about "just disabling a tank" it's how the complexity and usefulness of a man is greater than any machine or tool.
>>1988 >Combined arms warfare is nigh-unbeatable *Cough* vietnam *cough* *cough* Afghanistan-Soviet War *cough*
>>1988 >Combined arms warfare is nigh-unbeatable Then America has no problem defeating /fascist/ and fedchan's imaginary hyper chad army of White militias agaisnt globohomo. Combined arms isn't neigh unbeatable especially when your army is disorganized and full of retards.
(92.82 KB 490x500 bell curve tech.jpg)
>>1987 >I wish the low effort "anti tech" fags would fuck off out of this thread or step it up because they are bringing low quality arguments and distracting from interesting conversations that could be had. This is funny, because you clearly cannot understand the contentions of anti-tech posters, as is shown when you say: >People say they are anti tech but they are happy to use knives and plumbing as if they weren't technology too. Knives? Who is against knives? Basic plumbing too has existed for millennia. I refer you to the first part of >>1749
>>1987 I'm sick of you faggots strawmanning anti-tech and tech skeptics. We aren't agaisnt using tools and all technology, we're agaisnt using tech that destroys our humanity and nature. No one is asking to go back to the stone age, which is impossible unless we conquer/destroy the world. Every tech skeptic acknowledges that we must use technics to fight the jew, we just don't want the industrial and neolithic revolutions harmful impact to continue. I'm putting this in the simplest terms for you to understand. Will you get it this time or will you continue to pretend that we are a caveman movement?
(90.92 KB 233x300 young savitri devi.png)
Savitri Devi on Technology >Accelerated technical progress is, along with accelerated human degeneracy, an all-important feature of the advanced Dark Age >It is — or seems to be — the “triumph of man” over Nature. And it is interpreted and exalted as such by the sub-men, all the more proud of it that they have nothing else — no real, living culture; no disinterested work or knowledge-to be proud of. It is — or seems to be — the “proof” of man’s superiority over all other sentient beings; the “proof” of his superiority en bloc, regardless of race, for... a Negro can drive a motorcar, can’t he? And there are very clever jewish doctors. It forwards or strengthens the age-old superstition of “man,” which lies at the root of all decay. It is, or seems to be, the way to universal “happiness”; the ideal of those increasing millions — and soon, milliards — who have no ideal. In fact, it helps the ruling powers of the Dark Age, the skilful agents of the forces of disintegration, to keep the millions under their control. For, paradoxical as this may sound, masses who can read and write are easier to enslave than masses who cannot, and nothing is so easy to subdue and to keep down as masses who consider their wireless and television sets and cinema shows as indispensable necessities of life. (The modern men “against Time” know that, as well as the men “in Time.” Only they do not dispose of the inexhaustible financial resources of the latter.) >Technical progress, in all fields in which it does not automatically imply cruelty towards man or beast (or plant), is not a bad thing in itself. Actually, it is not it that makes the Dark Age. What makes the Dark Age is the fall of all but an extreme minority of men to the level of a brainless (and heartless) herd, and, at the same time, their endless increase in number. And technical progress is a curse only inasmuch as it is the most powerful instrument in the hands of all those who, directly or indirectly, encourage that indiscriminate increase and, consequently, forward that herd-mentality (even if they do not explicitly intend to); in the hands of the doctors who keep the weak and deficient and mongrels alive, and do nothing to prevent further such ones from being born: in the hands of the politicians “in Time” who, precisely because they all share — like the doctors — the age-old superstition of “man” and of man’s individual “happiness” at any cost, are opposed to any systematic selection in view of the survival and welfare of the healthiest, let alone to systematic racial selection also, in view of the survival and rule of an all-round biological human aristocracy >As I said above, technical progress and its wonders could just as easily be put to the service of a decidedly “life-centred” philosophy “against Time”; of an aristocratic doctrine of personal and racial quality, such as National Socialism, if only the exponents of such a doctrine could maintain themselves in power in this advanced Age of Gloom — which they cannot. >It is not — surely not! — technical progress as such which so deeply shocks Kalki’s future compagnons at arms (or the fathers of such ones), those natural aristocrats of the youngest human race, whom I have described as “the Best.” It is the glaring disparity between the perfection of modern technical achievements considered as “means” and the worthlessness of the ends to the service of which they are put; it is the contrast between that wonderful Aryan intelligence, which stands and shines behind practically every discovery of modern science, every invention of modern technique, and the steadily increasing degeneracy of the sub-human multitudes who enjoy the products of its creative ingenuity in daily life, as a matter of course, nay, who, through their misuse of them, are sinking lower and lower into that brainless and soulless “happiness” — I repeat: that pig-like “happiness” — which is the ideal of our times.
>>1989 I never said infantry wasn't useful in the first place (or anything about tanks for that matter). I was arguing against anon saying "tanks aren't even a big deal they can be disabled" as if that's an argument against their utility when men can more easily be disabled. Anything can be beaten - that is not an argument against its effectiveness. But, again, I'm not saying we just need tanks and all our problems will be solved. I was speaking about the future. Perhaps this is too complex for you lot to discuss or you're not concerned with it right now, but I think it's important to determine how to deal with problems that will face us later on.
>>2016 >I never said infantry wasn't useful in the first place No shit I know you never said, but emphasis on the word "useful", infantry isn't useful it's fucking necessary to fight a war, so again you're not understanding what I'm saying. >I was arguing against anon saying "tanks aren't even a big deal they can be disabled" And you're wrong, tanks are indeed not that big of a deal. They are definitely something you don't want to see and they can indeed be a force to be reckon with if you don't have the right equipment and organized force that knows what to do when faced with one, but they're going to be one of the least things you're going to worry about. Artillery, machine guns, and mines are much deadlier and useful than tanks and things you're more likely to see and be hit with than some heavily armored vehicle. Tanks are generally vulnerable without protection from infantry and being within the range of anti-tank guns and mines especially when they're in urban areas, which is why the Wehrmacht and Soviets made it vital for infantrymen to fight alongside their tanks due to the risk of losing the tank. Just merely one good hit can set one on fire and/or kill the crewmen inside, which would be a diaster.
>>2006 >you clearly cannot understand the contentions of anti-tech posters Thanks for referring me to the other post. That is about the only substance I've seen so far, surrounded mostly by chaff so it's been easy to miss. So you are only against technology which requires an industrial based to create? I can see the appeal, certainly. The problem is you become the bitch of anyone who has an industrial base and are ripe for conquering. I don't see futurism/technology usage or whatever you want to call it as some glorified end upon itself. Rather that it's inevitable that high technology with an industrial base is required to compete in the eternal struggle. If that's the case, the question becomes how to utilize it in the most healthy and advantageous way for your volk. >>1991 >>1992 Did you read the rest of my post before firing off your one liners? >>2010 You aren't being strawmanned. You just aren't generally providing a cohesive set of arguments. You are against some tech, but not others. But can't clearly delineate between which tech is OK and which is not. Or if you do clearly delineate and say that only tech which requires an industrial base is bad, or only tech that is "new", then you fail to address a number of contradictions that arise. Are guns and bombs OK tech? If so why, since they require an industrial base and are fairly new. You will certainly need them to compete in the global struggle against other civilizations. Same with modern communications and travel technology which absolutely require an industrial base, and you will be conquered by any civilization who has them when you don't.
>>2022 >tanks are indeed not that big of a deal >Tanks are generally vulnerable without protection from infantry But tanks are almost always deployed with infantry in combined warfare roles, so they are in fact a big deal if the rules of engagement allow them to be used to annihilate their enemy (not talking about modern police action wars). Only desert slimes who got them handed to them without any training would make the mistake of using tanks by themselves outside the context of combined arms. So to say tanks are not a big deal because they are vulnerable without infantry is like saying they are not a big deal without gas, or shells. Of course. Because they are part of a larger package. Just like a gun is useless without bullets, but you always expect to see them together.
>>2024 >Did you read the rest of my post before firing off your one liners? Yes and I don't need to respond to every little thing you say. So I don't know why you're complaining. >But tanks are almost always deployed with infantry in combined warfare roles That's for anyone who uses combined warfare, I'm talking about warfare in general no matter the doctrine. Combined arms isn't the most powerful doctrine. And it has many weakness and exploits to it, especially when it's in the works of the wrong hands. Combined arms works perfectly agaisnt stupid armies. >Only desert slimes who got them handed to them without any training would make the mistake of using tanks by themselves outside the context of combined arms Which is they don't use them or care for them at all. The reason why sandniggers lose wars is because they are disorganized and become have become weak centuries afterwords. >So to say tanks are not a big deal because they are vulnerable without infantry is like saying they are not a big deal without gas, or shells. This makes no sense. Again tanks exist to support infantry and are nothing without them. While soliders don't require them to fight.
>>2024 Basically if we read Kaczynski’s ISAIF we see him make a distinction between two forms of technology, organization-dependent forms, and small-scale technology. Organization-dependent technology is what requires large-scale social organization, so you’re essentially right when you say “So you are only against technology which requires an industrial based to create”. The reasons why people are critical of this is several: <humans are increasingly controlled / enslaved by large-scale social organization and reduced to cogs in a machine <such large-scale organization is increasingly controlled by tinier and tinier numbers of faceless giga-kikes <industrial society is unsustainable and has led to an acceleration of deforestation, pollution, overpopulation, consumerism and more and more artificial lifestyles <humans are ill-suited for this lifestyle and rising rates of obesity, depression, anxiety, neurosis and suicides show this Instead of something as nebulous as technology, it’s more accurate to focus on the concept of “technique”. Technique is basically any sort of efficient process done in pursuit of a specific end, or as Jacques Ellul makes much clearer: <technique is the totality of methods rationally arrived at and having absolute efficiency (for a given stage of de­velopment ) in every field of human activity. The keyword here is “absolute efficiency”. This is what the system is all about. It’s about doing things with as little effort and obstacles as possible, typically regardless of human needs. It is forced down our throats. What was optional becomes obligatory. This sort of technical rationalization of literally everything leads to a more and more artificial and inhuman society which treats people like cattle or slaves. You work at the system’s rythm, not at natural human rythms. In the drive for absolute efficiency we see automation forcing people out of work, we see more and more efficient and impersonal methods of governing, we see hyper-efficient policing methods which make wrongdoing almost impossible, we see the population put under mass-surveillance (panopticon society), we see nature increasingly pushed back, destroyed and replaced with rationalized city streets, concrete hellscapes and artificial environments. Any “irrational” human beliefs are attacked and undermined via propaganda. The only beliefs that matter to the system are what furthers the system. It is morality itself in modernity. Having almost dissolved the power of all religions and countervailing forces it, there’s no system of morality which can constrain the technical tumor from growing and taking over the entire society as it continues to do. Leftists are the foot-soldiers for technique. We see how with a focus on technique above all the differences between capitalism and communism fade away. They are two sides of one shekel — they are one technical phenomenon with two guises. And I have sounded rather impersonal, but the jews quite obviously play a massive role in all of this, so do not get me wrong. >The problem is you become the bitch of anyone who has an industrial base and are ripe for conquering. Yes, that is the biggest problem and tragedy, because it is is all unsustainable, yet to stop is to perish. Collapse is inevitable, in truth, but anyone telling us to just wait for it is a shill
>>2029 >Yes and I don't need to respond to every little thing you say. So I don't know why you're complaining. You mentioned Vietnam/Afghanistan as if it were a counterpoint to combined arms warfare being useful, when I specifically said in the context of total warfare as opposed to police action. Step it up or stop shitting up the thread. >I'm talking about warfare in general no matter the doctrine. You can't separate warfare from the constraint of doctrine. The tools that you can use and their effectiveness is directly bounded by your rules of engagement. If you can't differentiate total warfare from police action and guerilla warfare then you will always have tunne vision. And limited insight. For example if you wanted to depopulate all of brown South America and had an industrial base then you wouldn't just send in infantry. You would use tools like bombs, offshore shelling, air strikes, and other mechanized warfare to raze their largest population centers, arms repos, and strategic infrastructure, and then mop up with infantry. It seems you are only thinking in the context of guerilla warfare, where obviously tanks have very limited effectiveness.
Any technological gap can be overcome and overwhelmed with sufficient amounts of violence.
>>2036 Great post I agree with it all. So the question we are faced with is if we are forced to use technology/technique and forced to maintain an industrial base to survive despite its downsides, how can we do so in a way that secures our racial preservation and also promotes a healthy society to the greatest extent possible? To make it concrete with a couple examples of low hanging fruit, we could ban online dating and porn websites. Don't allow women in the workplace, and promote work from home for men so they aren't forced to go to an office and can stay on their homestead more often. We could promote more local distributed economies that value the health and happiness of the volk and environment equally or more than raw economic output. I know this is only scratching the surface and is also abstract, so we'll need to dig in to flesh out workable ideas. We're also going to be limited in how far we can go until we've eliminated our greatest racial enemies and can prioritize sustainable well-being of the volk and environment over constant industrial war.
>>2050 >So the question we are faced with is if we are forced to use technology/technique and forced to maintain an industrial base to survive despite its downsides, how can we do so in a way that secures our racial preservation and also promotes a healthy society to the greatest extent possible? Yes, essentially. Because we can't deny the reality of eternal struggle. And the fact is with eternal struggle, he who uses his resources more recklessly and in pursuit of short term gains will more often than not emerge triumphant than the one who is holding themselves back and looking towards the future. Here's the example that Kaczynski gives: <For example, suppose a forested region is occupied by a number of small, rival kingdoms. Those kingdoms that clear the most land for agricultural use can plant more crops and therefore can support a larger population than other kingdoms. This gives them a military advantage over their rivals. If any kingdom restrains itself from excessive forest-clearance out of concern for the long-term consequences, then that kingdom places itself at a military disadvantage and is eliminated by the more powerful kingdoms. Thus the region comes to be dominated by kingdoms that cut down their forests reckles sly. The resulting deforestation leads eventually to ecological disaster and therefore to the collapse of all the kingdoms. Here a trait that is advantageous or even indispensable for a kingdom's short-term survival-recklessness in cutting trees-leads in the long term to the demise of the same kingdom <This example illustrates the fact that, where a self-prop system exer­cises foresight, in the sense that concern for its own long-term survival and propagation leads it to place limitations on its efforts for short-term survival and propagation, the system puts itself at a competitive disadvantage relative to those self-prop systems that pursue short-term survival and propagation without restraint. This is the biggest problem I am aware of with this, not in the sense that "therefore critical attitudes towards tech should be abandoned" - because I think it is onto something for sure - but in the sense that I am unable to see a way out of the problem. This is especially bad with any types of extreme degeneracy in the future that we can hardly imagine such as genetic engineering, AI, transhumanist kikery, etc. Some of the potential tweaks you oppose I definitely can't disagree with, but whether it fixes the core problem, I don't know.
>>2048 >You mentioned Vietnam/Afghanistan as if it were a counterpoint to combined arms warfare being useful No I used it as a courner-point that it isn't the best doctrine and it isn't powerful. You keep shilling it like a turbo retard. >Step it up or stop shitting up the thread. >N-no! Argumentation is shitting up the thread! Either suck it up or shut the fuck up. You are as sensitive as a woman and shitskin combined. >You can't separate warfare from the constraint of doctrine Yeah you can retard, bit everyone has the same mindset or the resources to fight a war the same way as everyone else. The NS are example for why they made heavy tanks rather than focusing on lighter vehicles and it was because they didn't have that many resources and wanted to hit the Soviets hard and steady. >The tools that you can use and their effectiveness is directly bounded by your rules of engagement And not everyone is going to have the same engagement. What part so you not understand you brain-let? Do you think every country on the planet can and will fight similarly to how the US and Soviets did?
>>2078 >You keep shilling it like a turbo retard. No one ever shilled it. We're arguing against you because you keep bringing it up, when we shouldn't be, because you are braindead and not worth replying to.
>>2078 I'm not shilling combined arms warfare. I specifically said it was mostly useful in the context of total warfare and has limited value in guerilla warfare. I don't even disagree with you. You simply lack reading comprehension so instead of reading my entire post for context you fire off at the first part that catches your attention and ignore the rest.
>>2068 Has kaczynski ever approve of eco-facism? >>2082 >We There's been only one guy who's arguing with him. Who is we, you mean your samefag?
>>2082 >No one ever shilled it. We're arguing against you because you keep bringing it up Thanks for bitting into a conversation that you don't understand retard. He's the one who brought it up. >>2083 >I'm not shilling combined arms warfare. I just think it's the best form of warfare that exists compared to the others. Dumbass >You simply lack reading comprehension so instead of reading my entire post I read your entire faggy post, and I don't need to respond to every single pont. You're the only here being a literal tribal nigger. No one is missing what you're saying retard.
>>2085 his endorsement of a label doesn't matter when his views have greatly shaped ecofascist ideology.
>>2087 I'm guessing the answer is no then?
>>2089 i don't recall ever reading that specific word from him, no, but my memory is shit.
>>2085 >Has kaczynski ever approve of eco-facism? I don't think he would approve of it. See pic related, it's got a point, really. For me I borrow much of Kaczynski's critique (which is really Ellul's critique with some additions and elaborations) but don't reach the same conclusions as Kaczynski. There will never be any sort of anti-tech revolution like he's talking about. It's the weakest part of his work, and I believe he feels the same deep down. True ecofascism is Pentti Linkola and Savitri Devi really. Though much of the basic critique is applicable regardless. Also this: >>2087
>>2085 There are at least two anons arguing with him about it.
>>2086 >I'm not shilling combined arms warfare. I just think it's the best form of warfare that exists compared to the others. I never said this. You argue like a fucking kike.
The problem with technology isn't that it is necissarily bad; it's that it cannot exist in a world run by immoral, psychotic inbred jews. Technology is a tool that can be used for any purpose and in the jew's hands it means the enslavement of mankind and eternal servitude.
(402.42 KB 508x657 CoverTRS80News.jpg)
>>2036 The main issue I have with tech is: who controls it? With older tech from the 1980's and ealier, the control was often in the hands of the user. This includes everything from appliances, to car engines, telecom, and even microcomputers. The machines were simple enough for one man to fully understand and fix all by himself (provided he had access to spare parts). Now just a few decades later, the situation is completely different. The tech has become too complicated for its own good and nearly impossible to understand or fix yourself. Almost nobody fixes their car anymore. Almost nobody writes their own software completely from scratch, without relying on OS kernel, compilers, libraries, frameworks, and other dubious layers of dependencies that amount to 100 Million lines of code (whereas in the 80's it was common to write in assembly language, programming directly on the bare metal). Almost nobody fixes their communications devices anymore (which largely used to be simple analog circuits). And so on. But it gets even worse when you add the fact that many modern devices are connected to the IoT botnet or otherwise subverted. Now you've got a spyware and surveillance grid that's hidden deep, and sometimes you've even got outright backdoors. Intel CPUs have these for over a decade now (look up Christopher Domas' White papers and videos). And it gets even worse when you consider that some car computers can be remotely controlled. So who's really in control? That's the question you need to ask.
>>2186 Good post. Power is highly centralized now due to economies of scale and vertical efficiencies. Think Amazon/AWS/Alexa, Apple/custom ARM chipset/iPhone, Windows/Azure/Office365, Google/Analytics/Gmail/Google Docs/Android. Facebook/Instagram/Facebook ads. Due to their unlimited global reach and no accountability to any government or race, it favors snowballed efficiencies. To harness technology in our favor the firms will have to be accountable to and work in favor of the state and race, and the state will have to be accountable and work in favor of the race. No easy task and quite possibly not even fully solvable, but perhaps it's partially or mostly solvable if we are smart about it and give it an honest, measured shot. Our every attempt in a breakaway ethnostate will certainly be sabotaged at every turn by the multinational corporations and their shabbos state actors. That much is certain.
If we were to gain power in a country how would we control technology usage? Personal computers and all other IOT devices should not be available in my opinion, but right now I don't think it's possible to take such things away from the average citizen.
>>2251 I agree that computer access of any kind should be severely limited as compared to now, but I think having some form of computing available to the general populace could be beneficial. The Internet, or any sort of connectivity, can be ruled out from the get-go, as it will inevitable turn into a time-waster, with even the simplest facilities. Simple computers (think Commodore 64/TempleOS) should be available for selected elite families, i.e. a man in the pseudo-SS might request a home computer, then teach his sons how to program on it. It should be considered a teaching aid both for children and the adults, the former can better learn math and formal logic with practical applications, while the latter can expand on their auxiliary skills they can be expected to use as a member of the Elite™. Depending on how much we wish to centralize education (I'm leaning towards complete homeschooling), you may have computers at schools, or at the youth center. In either case you want the environment they'll be used in to be supervised, so the kids can be instructed and guided along in healthy, fun, and productive hobbies with their friends and peers. A connotation of computer=entertainment should never arise, people must think of computers strictly as "a box that performs logical instructions." For the control question, I really doubt we'll have to impose any actual restrictions for a long while. Under any conceivable scenario, our industry will more or less have to be rebuilt from the ground up. Integrated circuit production is pretty hard to do from scratch, so we can assume that the few boxes made in the coming decades will all be purchased and managed by the government. They simply won't be available on the market due to the prohibitive cost and low production volume. After that, we can mostly rely on cultural norms to prevent degenerate usage. Private networks between a handful of computers can be allowed, anything larger should be closely scrutinized and anything approaching the Internet rapidly destroyed. Public networks must be tightly controlled, ideally with cryptographic access keys to prevent unauthorized computers from interacting with the network in any way at all. A museum of the Internet should be opened, offering a comprehensive view of all the degeneracy that can arise from such a place. Special attention should be paid to showing how any based enclaves are absolutely dwarfed by jewish conglomerates and normie social media hiveminds. Show them what the zoomers had to go through, and how we should never let society degenerate this way again.
>>2252 I think the problem with such approach would be that the general public would not accept it. Zoomers would not allow their phones to be taken away from them and the same with their social mediums. How would we be able to prove that it is harmful, and only some people should be allowed to use it?
(222.62 KB 1200x1200 swasa.jpg)
>>2252 >>2251 I hate reading stuff pertaining to ban and direct retardation and and think it's pretty uninspired, I think eliminating computers is a misguided assessment, our inventions were a force to be used for good and the creative, like television it was not envisioned for evil, television especially was appropriated into this by almost immediately by m jews. IOT devices however are a part of technologies that shouldn't exist and that really are just damaging, terribly maladjusted unadaptable like smart phones. Computing especially should have never have this low entry bar set making it too easy, terry davis comes to mind where he talks about "niggercattle herders" and that's what mainstream news sites M$, twitter, facebook, reddit are, herding a bunch normally too stupid and/or unthinking, incredulous people into these controlled environments because they're too dumb to even explore and too jaded to challenge their own preconceived indoctrinated viewpoints opposed to in the past where interest and the bar was higher, having more high intelligence and directly contributive users as the influx of retards really have almost totally changed the online landscape into a fucking noxious landfill with millions of consumers and old surfers can attest to this. The problem with most technology today is application and intentionally pushed to be as ADDICTIVE as possible(see mobile smart phones) and even directly DAMAGING to the human psyche SEE Tinder, Thumbs/rating system, targeted ads/suggestions and many other small things that have a big impact people take totally for granted. >>2251 >>2253 The obvious solution would be some small limitation perhaps but keeping positive incorporation and it would be very easy to stray away from bad by supplanting the jewish with a healthy and positive culture but again this is future shit we dont have the power to do.
>>2253 The way I see it, directly and forcefully taking away the masses gadgets would make us unnecessarily unpopular, making it even harder to enact much more important, and vital changes to society. We should start with education showing rampant electronic use's negative effects, alongside the encouragement of the social stigmatization of people who waste their time on social media, and porn, alongside prohibitive taxes on the purchase and manufacture of smart phones, and pcs. This, alongside the censorship of the most degenerate sites on the internet including social media sites like 4chan, twitter, facebook, ect and porn sites, The way I see it, as people become less and less degenerate under our rule, with computers far less accessible, and less desirable, the problems associated with prolonged internet use will slowly disappear. Eventually i believe we will make a society where the internet will be only used for productive purposes, without even needing government intervention, because our people's character has been so improved. In such a world, perhaps the restrictions can go away, but only in such a world.
>>2254 >the problem is ease of access Absolutely. Any nigger with a welfare check has access to every other human being's thoughts, and it's natural for normalfags to homogenize everything (or accept the most homogenized option available i.e. twitter, faceberg) as niche interests and hobbies are too complex for them to understand. Then start pumping propaganda into their minds almost directly (I hate the smart phone) and it's no small wonder that human autonomy has begun to dwindle in recent years. Never mind that they don't bother exploring the web - they don't even explore outside of three websites and the first google search result.
>>2255 >>2253 Anons, if we were in a position to do any of this, we would be in a position to false flag any attack on the lemming's toys onto somebody else, and then bring it back in a "limited" capacity and simply say "oops Faceberg/Twitter/etc is gone now, sorry we tried, really". There is no reason to opticsfag ever, if the jews have shown us anything its that the cattle will accept everything. I only see them as seedbeds, not actual humans worth telling the truth to.
>>2251 >Personal computers and all other IOT devices should not be available in my opinion, but right now I don't think it's possible to take such things away from the average citizen. You don't literally take it away from the citizens, you make it so that they are about as useful as a paper weight for the average person. Shut off the Internet and there will be literally no use for these devices except for local, offline tasks. The other anon I respond to below has some good ideas concerning a controlled Internet. >>2252 I agree with you overall, however complete homeschooling may not be feasible immediately. We are recovering from a time of engineered, type-down degenerative education, and the opposite will need to be put into place to counteract such things. Luckily for us, we are not working 'against the grain', i.e. we are working in harmony with Nature, what the jews brought about is actually not that hard to fix, but it will take some time. While it may be desirable to do away with certain aspects of the current education system, I think it will be necessary to 'brainwash' much of the population in the opposite generation before anything like this is to happen. I do certainly favor smaller schools that feel less like oppressive, boring institutions, however. >>2265 This. Everyone needs to think of Pentti Linkola here. We know that normalfags aren't going to accept this shit. That's part of the problem. It's just like the problem of how they can't stop shitting up the planet. Because of this, they are going to be forced to.
(145.80 KB 625x900 ALICE.jpg)
The problem can just be summed up in one word: jews. They're the ones who are the driving force to twist good things like technology and corrupt them. In the 80's, tons of people in the US and western Europe had budget 8-bit microcomputers of some sort. They were mainly a hobby back then, and they were cool because they were both educational and fun. They were designed to make it easy for kids to learn to program in BASIC, and in fact most of them had BASIC in ROM, so you didn't even need a fancy OS like Windows or even a simple one like MS-DOS. You turned on the computer, it booted up in one second flat, and was immediately ready to program (quite often literally giving you a prompt on screen that said "Ready"). In one of his videos, Terry Davis laments that computers went wrong when they made them for niggers. He's talking about command prompts vs. GUIs, and I agree 100% with him. The GUI removed the basic literacy necessary to operate computers, and turned them into another boring, mind-numbing appliance that today is mostly used to stream propaganda and porn, plus collect surveillance data. Even the Linux scene has been affected by this. It used to be largely a hobbyist *nix OS, but in the late 90's, some "well-meaning" individuals decided to start projects like Gnome and KDE because they wanted Linux to compete with Microsoft. Now just a couple decades later, Linux is almost as pozzed as Windows itself. Not that Linux was ever that great, since it's a nanny OS that shoves the user into a safe compartment where he can't access the entire hardware "for his own good". That's not exactly condusive to learning. That's really only good for shit like running public multiuser servers. From my POV, it's not worth jack shit compared to the 80's home computers that actively encourated the user to explore and do everything and anything he could, because there wasn't any way to harm the computer and you would just be back at the "Ready" prompt after hitting the Reset button if your code fucked up. So yeah, fuck Unix and Linux, 8-bit systems is all I really care about, after that shit got really lame! Too bad I'm forced to have a Firefox shitbox to do some necessary banking and government tasks, when a simple text interface would have done the trick. Fucking jews, man.
(346.60 KB 1280x993 1523670047531.jpg)
(2.38 MB 1468x7317 LyMxXD7.png)
>>2265 Isn't that a little contrary to National Socialist values? The truth is of inherent worth in my book, our goals should be to bring people up, and make them strong, and free, like our ancestors, Not manipulate them with propaganda bullshit like the kikes. >There is no reason to opticsfag ever I agree, trying to portray ourselves as something we're not, or lying for PR, or compromising our worldview in any way is unacceptable. However, sometimes smaller, gradual, changes over time, can be far more effective, and longer lasting than massive changes that appear out of nowhere. The way leftists and kikes have slowly changed our culture is a testament to this fact. Now for some things, they're either so offensive "faggotry, race mixing" or so threatening to our continued existence "our society's current leadership, non White immigration, environmental decay" that drastic action will have to be taken immediately. But for lesser problems, such as internet addiction, we can be much more gradual. Though I agree faceberg, and twitter do need to go, that will simply happen as a byproduct of the destruction of all the kike owned corporations in our countries. There will be no need to lie to the public in such a scenario, as presumably we'll have already gotten them on our side by being the "strong horse" as the victors in a revolution against a failed society. However it would be in our best interest to keep the internet in existence, and accessible to most people "if they really, really want to" while censoring the worst parts of it. >if the jews have shown us anything its that the cattle will accept everything I agree to some extent, lemmings don't care about everything that they unconsciously see as "superficial" i.e doesn't have any direct bearing on the personal comfort, and pursuit of pleasure. They don't really care about ideology, or politics, or race, or if child molesters get to mutilate, and rape child legally. They only care about their basic needs, and their pleasures. They only support radical movements when they feel like they're not getting what's warranted, and while this can change relative to country to country, varying due to culture, technological level, the economy, genetics, ect. All lemmings except their basic needs to be met, and they expect the ability to be able to pursue some manner of pleasure. When they feel as though they can't take care of their basic needs, and they can't pursue pleasure, that's when they're open to outsiders coming in, and making a new order, in a bloody revolution. It's a sad reality that any order that wants to remain in power has to placate the lemmings, unless they want to be replaced by the next band of upstarts anyway. However our goals should be to direct the basic lemming's urges into productive pursuits. Not all pleasures are bad after all, the feeling of joy you receive when you're victorious in a sporting competition, the feeling of pride gotten from having a a respected superior officer give you a medal for heroism, seeing your children grow into fine adults, all of these are pleasures which are wonderful, and should be used as motivators, and rewards for the majority of the population. To make them want to excel, and be better. Although I sadly don't think these good pleasures will be enough, though obviously they should be encouraged as much as possible. I think we'll just have to accept, and allow, but always discourage, a small amount of minor degeneracy, in the interests of placating the lemmings. For the moment, not everyone can live as a Spartan warrior, only finding joy in productivity. And even the NSDAP accepted small, yet unhealthy, degeneracy, such as smoking, alcohol, sugary drinks, and modern art, in the interests of public order, even if they brought down the users of such products as low as they could, all the same. You need to use the carrot, and the stick. Many lemmings will avoid certain pleasure seeking behavior if the net gain from pursuing a specific act, is not worth the societal disapproval, and social shaming arranging from it, or in extreme cases, punishment by the state. There needs to be a balancing act in this manner however, else we may turn the people against us, and become some retarded caricature of fascists from Hollywood. Ideally, over many generations, we can create a people superior to our people as they are now in every way. Creating a people who can look past their basic animal instincts, look at the world in a rational, and thoughtful way, and work to better themselves, and their nations. Eugenics, and education will be extremely important in this respect. But you have to play with the cards you're dealt at the moment, only after we've completely won on every level, can we make a people like that. For now, we need to be both idealistic, and realistic, idealistic about our end goals, and realistic about the pursuit of them.
(254.53 KB 526x525 holocoaster.png)
>>2277 I dislike ethnoglobe-tier posts that pretend we will somehow be in the opposite situation we are in without first actually planning to get there. I also disagree that we have the luxury to utilize lemming theory, carrot/stick and similar concepts because we do not control the means of repetition, and that is literally all that matters to cattle (women and feminized/liberal men (including modern conservatives)). I had a much longer reply, but I deep six'd it because this is the technology thread. >The truth is of inherent worth in my book, our goals should be to bring people up, and make them strong, and free, like our ancestors, Not manipulate them with propaganda bullshit like the kikes. No, it's to bring the next generation up to be those things, and it's a pipe dream until we have total control of what media they ingest. The current generations, they get cajoled, manipulated, lied to, like Hitler and Goebbels did when they occasionally biblethumped, to fool them into actually doing something in their own interest for once. And if we did get power, with the current level of technology it would be oh so easy to profile and select someone worthy of truth out of said cattle in order to advance their careers against the institutionalized masses, have them join us, or whatever. But the point is, fuck the lemmings and we don't have that power because fuck the lemmings. >we can be much more gradual The main problem with gradual changes is that we don't have the luxury of time nor can we compete with their primary method of indoctrination: constant repetition in lockstep via nearly every form of media. Attempting to remain on topic, I believe that the more forms of media delivery you add, the more saturated the cattle's brains become. They go from TV in the morning to the internet at work and radio in the car to TV in the evening and internet before bed and TV as background noise when they sleep, it never ends, they never give themselves quiet to think, at this point they dread that quiet, and they're actually scared of thinking. I think you can do anything that you want to them, and with the slightest plausible deniability delivered from a position of authority they will swallow it hook line and sinker, and if we get that position of authority it won't be with their help anyway. They're walking pinatas and we'd be doing a lot better if we looked at how to simply take what is needed from them before the jews and their pets do. I guess I should've said they're a seedbed in enemy territory. >There needs to be a balancing act in this manner however, else we may turn the people against us, and become some retarded caricature of fascists from Hollywood. You're still thinking of optics. Optics really don't matter, just build the Holocauster, and do it out of jew soap and shrunken heads, they'll media blackout you and bring in Nigel Farage again as controlled opposition anyway, it doesn't matter. I followed Gamergate and it was the most cut and dry expose on corrupt shit I'd ever seen, absolutely did not matter because the gaming jews have the power of repetition. Just drink fresh baby blood in broad daylight, the same percentage of peoples will like/dislike you because of preconceived bias and buzzwords. It's the show where everything is made up and the points don't matter, anon. I know all about lemming theory, but probably the only way we will ever get to apply any of it is to seize power is through a period of extreme ruthlessness and reserving any notion of virtue for the awake, as we confiscate Jimbo's gun safe (supplies 10 people and hasn't been opened in as many years!) and three daughters because we went through his mail and caught him donating to Trump. There will be no mass awakening, there is no political solution, more Lightning, less Sun.
>>2272 It's not just the jews retard, it's normalfaggotry and cucks being retarded as well. Everything that has happened up to here is also the fault of White people no matter how much you blame the jew. You can argue that jews changed much of Western culture through subversion all you want, but White Americans and Europeans have also been retarded for allowing the jew to get in power in the first place and the state of the world getting fucked over was also because of the stupidity of White people with rationality, hyper-materialism. I swear American NatSoc are no different than negro ethno-narcissism. This is going to rustle /fash/'s jimmies, but blaming every single thing on the jew and pretending Whites are perfect and can do anything is utterly retarded an actual larp.
>>2313 You're definitely right when it comes to our current predicament, we'll need to be as ruthless as possible to save our race, and the opinions of the lemmings don't matter in that respect. Though I think after we have the powers of repetition, after all the kikes have been gassed, we've created a new, stable government, control the media, ect that is when my above post matters, and we can start using carrot and stick methods, which would be better in the long run in the pursuit of stability in my opinion. But you're absolutely right that for the moment we need to be bastards in order to win. and I'm fine with that. Sorry if you expected a longer post, though don't feel like your points aren't being addressed, as I mostly agree with you, and don't have much else to say.
>>2314 But the source of the problem is the jews, and that's what I mean by driving force. Yeah they brainwashed a lot of people, but that's a symptom of jewry. That's why they keep getting btfo of everywhere they go throughout history. I guarantee you it will happen again, it's just a matter of time. Because they have not learned to change their behavior from their prior experiences, and instead decided to try and double down on it and try to fuck the entire world. And this time they won't have anywhere left to go.
>>2326 >but the source of the problem is the jews, and that's what I mean by driving force. Yeah they brainwashed a lot of people, but that's a symptom of jewry White people put jews in power in the first place which wasn't done because they were brainwashed. jews would of never gotten this far if Whites did not ignorantly convert to Christianity, betray their pagan ancestors, and so heavily depending on them for economic successes. It only got worst when Europeans decided to create the enlightenment era where liberals religiously wanted to destroy hierarchy, collectivism, and the traditional family and used racism to excuse their lies. The idea that Whites can do no wrong is what lead up to this point and the refusal to acknowledge that Whites were partially at fault for what's going on today only leads to repeated cycle of Whites shooting themselves in the foot being retards like the Anglos have done.
I seriously hope that people here don't think any idealology is acceptable as long as it is "pro-White".
>>2329 Aren't you basically making my point here? Christianity comes from jews. But I don't particularly care about christians, pagans, or religion in general. In fact, I don't even care about systems in general. For me, they're only tools, and not something to enlave yourself to. You use the one that best fits for the job at hand, that's it. Or at least the one you believe is best, since our human capacity is limited and we do much on faith and what we're able to perceive intuitively. >>2330 I'm not pro-White so much as I'm anti-jew and anti-corruption in general. Of course I'm generally pro-White, since I'm european. Birds of a feather flock together and all that. This feels normal and natural to me.
>>2314 >This is going to rustle /fash/'s jimmies, but blaming every single thing on the jew and pretending Whites are perfect and can do anything is utterly retarded an actual larp. Most White people are subhumans, albeit to a much lesser degree than ever lower varieties of subhumans like niggers. This is just a plain truth, and all it takes to verify it is a look around at our society. I’m not saying this as a blow against Whites, but just as a statement of fact. It shouldn’t be hard to accept either, because as long as we deny it we’re operating of a false worldview. The vast majority (95%+) of the population has always been lemmings, NPCs, normalfags, etc. Whites are the highest race because over history we have produced the greatest civilization, the most power, the greatest works of art, literature, architecture, the greatest spiritual works and figures (Eddas, Iliad and Odyssey, Bhagavad Gita, Upanishads, the Buddha, Zoroaster, etc). These were necessarily works of the few, not the many. Hitler discusses this truth in Mein Kampf. That it is the few who drive history, not the many. The few are the great inventors, leaders, writers, generals, etc., not the many. The many are led by the few actually great ones, who are themselves White, but the pinnacle of the White race, what makes the White race worth preserving. The importance of the principle of leadership is very obvious seeing as how the jews subverted our societies from the top-down, not the bottom-up. Whites today are being turned into betas, trannies, fags, and racemixers, but just as easily under the correct leadership could be transformed in a matter of years into a racially-conscious community as was seen in the Third Reich. Such is the nature of normalcattle. t. American NatSoc
>>2331 >Aren't you basically making my point here? No I'm not making your point, because my point here is that Whites allowed themselves to be converted and subverted into jewry. >But I don't particularly care about christians, pagans, or religion in general. Not caring about religion is bluepilled and is proving my point that you will be okay with anything as long as it claims it is pro-White. >In fact, I don't even care about systems in general. For me, they're only tools, and not something to enlave yourself to. This again proves my point and concern once again. If you don't care about what system you're using and idealology you fight behind and go by, then you really don't care about fascism, but just a race idolator who's willing to even right behind false ideas that will lead to further decadence. You hold the same beliefs and perspective as the classical liberals and secular socialists before they became cucks, where they saw that only the race/ethnicity was important and nothing else, which is why Whites became degenerate in the first place. >>2334 >Whites are the highest race because over history we have produced the greatest civilization, the most power, the greatest works of art, literature, architecture, the greatest spiritual works and figures (Eddas, Iliad and Odyssey, Bhagavad Gita, Upanishads, the Buddha, Zoroaster, etc). I think you mean the Aryans have made this accomplishment, this has nothing to do with White people today who aren't the same. The reason why reason were able to make this accomplishments simply because they're White, but more-so of the fact that they understood and followed the cosmic truth and order. When I see people here talking about how much they want the Star Trek fantasy and other sci-fi nonsense this makes think that there are people on this board who don't give shit about National Socialism and the way of life at all, but just want to take credit for something they haven't done and act as ethno-narcisst proclaiming they are great simply for being White.
>>2345 >they saw that only the race/ethnicity was important and nothing else, which is why Whites became degenerate in the first place You really think that's why Whites became degenerate?
>>2345 >I think you mean the Aryans have made this accomplishment, this has nothing to do with White people today who aren't the same. The reason why reason were able to make this accomplishments simply because they're White, but more-so of the fact that they understood and followed the cosmic truth and order Yes, I was referring to Aryans more than anything. The vast majority of Whites today do not deserve this term, even if they could be worthy of it under certain conditions. In the conditions that you describe, i.e. following the cosmic truth and order is when we see Aryans at their peak. >>2347 If placed in a larger context of (((modernism))) and (((materialism))) he might be onto something, though as a sole factor I would be raising eyebrows.
>>2347 Yes for it's half the reason other than just subversion. As the jew was their master and lead everything in their respective nations, they allowed this to happen as long as they would be under the illusion that they were in control and dominant of everything. Only caring for materalism has always lead to decadence and one of the major reasons why we're in the mess of a present in the first place. I've also seen "fascists" and White nationalists who uphold the idea that all is material as well and are also revealed to be degenerates and willing to accept evils such as homosexuality, transsexuality, limited race-mixing, and ideas that originate from the jew, because they unironically believe it will only work for Whites, which is quite delusional.
>>2345 >No I'm not making your point, because my point here is that Whites allowed themselves to be converted and subverted into jewry. Whites didn't "allow" themselves, they were brainwashed. You forget how artful the jew is in his methods of subversion and mental poison. They pioneered psychology for this reason, to manipulate people into doing things they otherwise would not do.
>>2354 Can you not deduce that the reason Whites value race/ethnicity over all is from millennia of being poisoned by the jew? Strict racial hierarchy was the evolutionary solution to the jewish trojan horse. They could not blend in and emit their disease when Whites were all racially conscious and could smell an imposter a mile away. This is/was our defense mechanism, which is why it was one of the first things the jew targeted to destroy - Why do you think countries like England came to be? It was the first "melting pot" of various Nordic, Celtic, and assorted European ethnicites. This lead to the destruction of racial identity and it being replaced with the "nation" instead. America, Canada, Australia took this step even further my literally mixing all different kinds of Europeans together until they were a culture-less, rootless mash of White. When you take a step back to think about it, Nationalism (as in flags, state controlled) was the first step on the road to Globalism, it allowed anyone who resided in the "nation" to be accepted regardless of racial stock quality. The concept was easily subverted by jew cryptos andtheir shabbos goy who climbed the social hierarchies within the nation and poisoned from the top down, this would have been impossible in a tribal situation with strong racial identity. Where we are today was a slow process of degradation, a death by a thousand paper cuts.
>>2369 >Whites didn't "allow" themselves, they were brainwashed. If they are brainwashed, then why were the pagan Saxons willing follow behind Charlemagne even though he was an Israeli? Why did the Romans accept Christianity for a social change and constantly betray their racial stock for slavery? You keep using brainwash as an excuse, they weren't brainwashed they cucked out, because they thought it would lead to betterment and were cowardly/weak. Whites in Europe before the so-called brainwashing were able to revolt and oppose Christianity with their lives and yet it prevailed anyway, because the pagan priests betrayed their own faith switched over to Christianity for the promise for salvation, money and other rewards that will have a man switch sides. Blaming the jew for everything is cute and all, but it doesn't work when you realize that the history of White survival have always resulted in failure due to betrayal. Unless you have proof that it was only mental poisons that ruined White people, I don't think you have a solid ground that ridding of brainwash will lead to a better future of Whites. Sooner or later you will have to realize that some Whites have to be killed and not reasoned with.
(33.81 KB 644x389 ClipboardImage.png)
(22.80 KB 605x272 ClipboardImage.png)
(12.70 KB 510x224 ClipboardImage.png)
>>2354 > I've also seen "fascists" and White nationalists who uphold the idea that all is material as well Reminds me of something I was looking at just yesterday on National Vanguard. Not the article itself, but the comment section was full of fedora-tipping retards. Even if one doesn't believe in a God, the fact that they believe that (((science))) disproves the existence and similar things proves that they've had their minds corrupted by jewish science and materialism Article in question: https://nationalvanguard.org/2021/04/saint-hitler-was-a-man-of-god-doing-gods-work/
>>2372 >Can you not deduce that the reason Whites value race/ethnicity over all is from millennia of being poisoned by the jew Can you truly have a realistic and less of a coping opinion that it was not all the jew, but the foolish minds of White people listening to them in the first place? >Strict racial hierarchy was the evolutionary solution to the jewish trojan horse You do realize that Europe has always had this for centuries and yet the jew still thrived? Even in Christian Europe, some of the catholic were straight up racist and knew that niggers and kikes had no place in their homelands. England has had a strict racial hierarchy and yet the kikes still persisted and thrive in England because all they had to do was suck off the Anglo Whites and pretend to be them instead of the Anglo being more cautionary about foreign and self-castrating ideas were they are no longer their own masters.
>>2374 I despise White atheists as much as I despise black Christians. Reminder that these people in the post would probably be okay with their son being a faggot.
>>2373 >If they are brainwashed, then why were the pagan Saxons willing follow behind Charlemagne even though he was an Israeli? Like I stated in my above post, once the racial consciousness of Whites was destroyed they could easily be duped by cryptos, case in point. >Why did the Romans accept Christianity for a social change and constantly betray their racial stock for slavery? The Romans "accepted" Christianity on the verge of the collapse of their civilization. You honestly think the people in control of Rome at the time were of pure Roman stock? Christianity was proto-Bolshevism; designed to brainwash people into believing infantile gibberish about "equality" much in the same fashion as it's secular counterpart. It's obvious that what the Romans went through was similar to what we are going through today only with Christianity replaced with neo-marxism as it's doctrine. I'm not suggesting that there aren't traitors, ofcourse there are. Just look at all the White shabbos cunts who willingly work for the FBIniggers, who know everything we know and yet choose money over morals and honor; or the pig enforcers themselves who've become nothing more than mercenaries at this point. Betrayal plays a part in it, but the rot that allowed the weakening came first from the jew and his poison.
>>2374 I don't understand atheists being smug and definitely know that god doesn't exist. It seems a lot more reasonable to at least admit you don't know much about the universe or phenomena beyond Earth. Strikes me as raw hubris.
>>2377 >Can you truly have a realistic and less of a coping opinion that it was not all the jew, but the foolish minds of White people listening to them in the first place How did those people become that way? What time period are we talking about? If it was post-Christianity the answer is in the religion itself, and the damage it did to mental state of the person brainwashed by it. Christianity was designed to create goyim; cattle who forgive their enemies and are easily bamboozled by them.
>>2378 I used to be like these people, admittedly, but when I approached the topic with an open mind I realized how I literally knew nothing about philosophy and religion and that I was just making myself look like a massive retard. And then once one looks into the intellectual history of atheism, it is quite clear that it is not Aryan in the slightest, or conducive to White interests in any sense. >>2380 >Strikes me as raw hubris. It is. They are so locked into their naturalist / materialist paradigm that they think that God is some material entity existing within the universe, just like you, me, and any other object or living being, when this has never been what people meant by God. This is why they think that stuff like Russel's Teapot or the Flying Spaghetti Monster is so clever. Agnosticism like you say is at least somewhat respectable.
>>2379 >Like I stated in my above post, once the racial consciousness of Whites was destroyed they could easily be duped by cryptos, case in point. You're just repeating yourself and making excuses not really arguing. >The Romans "accepted" Christianity on the verge of the collapse of their civilization. You honestly think the people in control of Rome at the time were of pure Roman stock? The Romans weren't on the verge of collapse, they were coming to a steady collapse that would of resulted in society becoming something similar to Weimerica. Before the Romans turned to Christianity may I remind you it was the Aristocrats who have control of the college and handle all of Romans political and religious institutions who had made the change for Rome to become Christian. The aristocratic class were less mixed blood than the commoners. >>2381 >How did those people become that way? Like I said in >>2354, they were fed promises and lies and did not think that these were things said by a foreign group. The saxons followed Charlemagne because they told they were promised privileges and salvation, despite their own faith warning them agaisnt false ideas. >What time period are we talking about? All the way from when Christianity first got into Greece and then into Rome. >it was post-Christianity the answer is in the religion itself, and the damage it did to mental state of the person brainwashed by it. Christianity was designed to create goyim And like I said over and over again, this would of never happened if White people were not cowardly and foolish to realize this and continue to fight to the last man.
>>2380 >I don't understand atheists being smug and definitely know that god doesn't exist. It seems a lot more reasonable to at least admit you don't know much about the universe or phenomena beyond Earth. Strikes me as raw hubris. Atheist are egoists who see that acknowledgment of science is what makes them smart and know it all. Atheism is nothing more, but apart of the branch that is Abrahamicism.
>>2374 Only the first post exhibits the problem you speak of, what's wrong with the other two?
>>2389 >Only the first post exhibits the problem you speak of, what's wrong with the other two? Talking like a jew to own the jews is not something you want to do at all. The insult "sky-daddy" includes the mockery of paganism and the idea that a great father has birthed all nations and its customs.
>>2385 > White people were not cowardly and foolish to realize this and continue to fight to the last man. Every race has cowards, but the brave ones always do and did in Germany and Russia in WW2. Whites were never cowardly, we were the bravest of all. The jew and his shabbos created wars that killed off most of our best, and the cowards left over flocked to the jew like women.
>>2392 >Whites were never cowardly, we were the bravest of all Then why did the White allies refuse to fight behind Hitler are you going to say it's subversion as well, despite the fact that the British royals and politicians were pretty fond of Hitler and almost sided with him until Churchill arrived? Hell why are boomers refusing to do anything about the death of the country they claim to love so much? Please get real, I agree that Whites are some of the bravest, but to say they are nothing but brave is quite ignorant and the type of ethno-narcissism I'm referring to.
>>2391 I suppose so, even though they both qualified it as Christianity. I've never taken it to mean anything else.
>>2393 >Then why did the White allies refuse to fight behind Hitler are you going to say it's subversion as well, despite the fact that the British royals and politicians were pretty fond of Hitler and almost sided with him until Churchill arrived? Hell why are boomers refusing to do anything about the death of the country they claim to love so much? Please get real, I agree that Whites are some of the bravest, but to say they are nothing but brave is quite ignorant and the type of ethno-narcissism I'm referring to. They refused to fight behind Hitler because they were already controlled by the jew. Did you forget this? FDR was a jew, Churchill supported jews, Stalin was put into power by a gang of criminal jews. It should tell you that the British Royals are nothing but powerless cucks, if anything. There were splinter factions of various nations, both White and non-White that DID fight with Hitler. Russians, French, Croats, Romanians etc. Even Chinamen. The fact of the matter is that the "allies" already had ZOG'd governments and sought nothing but to crush Hitler. The average person had no idea about what Hitler was even about, only fed bullshit lies from the jew controlled press, just like now. The jew used materialism to bribe people into compliance, again it comes back to human psychology. If you and all your neighbors were provided what the boomers were, would you think twice about anything else? Even if you didn't fall for it, the chance of the average man taking that bribe is far to high to discount.
>>2374 It's okay to have disagreements, the only religion I could get behind is something like Cosmotheism really it's not very well endowed though, should be expanded or something like it should be made. >>2380 Atheist ≠ Agnostic Also we need to understand the retarded abrahamist kikefairy crap turned a lot of White people off religion altogether, because that's really been all that's available.
>>2399 >They refused to fight behind Hitler because they were already controlled by the jew. Did you forget this? Lol do you not understand that you don't have to allow yourself to be controlled by the jew? Are you seriously acceptable of cuckoldry as long as it is White? If the jew controls you, then it's either do or die, nothing was stopping from the royals from fighting back other than their cowardice. >The jew used materialism to bribe people into compliance, When you say bribes this implies and reinforces my point that Whites were indeed allowing themselves to submit to the dollar over race and spirit. You don't need human psychology to understand that material promises is another form of control, especially if you're rich and influential.
>>2389 The second one is stupid because in light of the article it should be clear that the author wasn't referring to the jewish / Christian God. Equating the concept of God with jewish origins alone is just ignorance. In fact the god of the jews was merely some Semitic storm god before Aryan philosophy and spiritual experiences, either from Europe or India, reached the jews. For the second, I mostly posted it due to the term "Sky Daddy". It's always funny to read because it exposes them as the retards despite their attempted mockery
>>2401 I was on board the Cosmotheist train at one point, but I came across some Nietzsche quote that destroyed all of my confidence in it. On top of that, there was an anon back on the old board playing devil's advocate who pointed out that Cosmotheism could be used to subvert our race with transhumanism and other types of ideas. Since then I have been unable to hold to it, but I still very much respect Pierce and his idea more or less.
>>2378 You despise White atheists, but from reading your other posts, you also hate christians. Interesting. So what exactly do you like, or do you even like anything whatsoever. Because from my POV, it looks like your only purpose in this thread is to shift blame away from the jews as the root cause of all the problems we're experiencing today.
>>2416 Christianity and atheism are not the only options here. Both are obviously unworkable, so both are being rightfully criticized by that anon
>>2416 I didn't shift the blame away from the jew and their poisons, I'm also bringing the fact that Whites are partially responsible for everything that has happened as well as a word of caution that we shouldn't repeat any stupid mistakes we have done in the past such as Hitler inviting traitors into his party. >So what exactly do you like, or do you even like anything whatsoever. It seems that you're trying to make a dichotomy between (((atheism))) and Christcuckery. I don't support either and find them both dreadful. My faith is one of the cosmic truth and order aka Dharmic/pagsnism. I believe in White supremacy and be willing to do what it takes to bring a future where nature and the restore the Aryan order. It's bluepilled that you think I should choose between White atheist or Christian when they're both unnatural.
>>2424 No I'm not making a dichotomy, I specifically asked about other option. You're already lying before even addressing what I asked about. But at least you finally answered my question after your stupid antics. So here's the million dollar question. If paganism is so fucking perfect, then why the fuck did they convert to christianity instead of resisting the jewish subversion? Clearly if the pagan system was worth a damn, then most of the pagans would have fought to the last man as you said here >>2385, and the fact that they didn't is proof that paganism doesn't stand up to a real world subversion test.
>>2402 >When you say bribes this implies and reinforces my point that Whites were indeed allowing themselves to submit to the dollar over race and spirit Why is it so hard for you to grasp that without the jew, the traitors would not be empowered to do anything? The jew is the root problem, the traitors are a symptom of said problem.
>>2402 >nothing was stopping from the royals from fighting back other than their cowardice. Did you know England has been under the thumb of jewry since at least 1591? The royal bloodline has been poisoned long ago, not that it matters. Look at the features of todays "royals"; they look nothing like a Briton. The only reason they "sided" with Hitler at first I reckon, is because Hitler conned them all into thinking he was one of them.
>>2430 >Clearly if the pagan system was worth a damn, then most of the pagans would have fought to the last man as you said here >>2385, and the fact that they didn't is proof that paganism doesn't stand up to a real world subversion test. Because the (((pope))) or vatican funded vast international execution and torture missions, even conspiracies by bribing pagan lords and hiring literal armies of mercenaries??? Don't you know this? Don't you know that the first pope became legally the successor of Constantine: that is, the heir to the Roman Empire? (that alone should tell you something about how jewish christcucks are because clearly as history shows ultimate power was their talmudic mission) I didn't coin the term proto-ideology for no reason and of course it's semitic, people in Europe on the other hand didn't believe this because of 'proto-ideology' reasons they believed because of traditional, racial and supplementary reasons, not kike ultimatums like "This super nice dude called Yaweh is super kind...... but he and his son will torture you in a pot of fire for eternity if you don't like him!!!"(also us great christian learders will pay thousnds of crazy mercenary traitors to kill you if you dont like him, because ur a sinnner for not believing this!!!) lmao Also do you seriously think that people genuinely believed there were some sick fucking jews out there who were literally salivating, plotting relentlessly, to control and enslave their (distant people's) minds with some slave religion of all things so they weren't ready. But see the vatican bribed so many kings and lords to betray or just start (((converting))) it's insane. Because of the (((roman takeover))) Vatican/popes were like the medieval billionaires. And at that time news beyong word of mouth never got out so all those insane clandestine conspiracies like the christcucks committed were hundred times more effective.
>>2434 >The only reason they "sided" with Hitler at first I reckon, is because Hitler conned them all into thinking he was one of them. Well actually Chamberlain didn't want another WW1 and frequently held talks with Germany to avoid war, so they staged a coup and threw him out, because the jews wanted war. And of course Churchill the indebted gambler alchoholic and tranny crossdresser bankrolled by them(Intimate familial relationship with Rothschild) was the perfect puppet to put in place and to control.
>>2430 >No I'm not making a dichotomy, I specifically asked about other option. You just did retard. >You despise White atheists, but from reading your other posts, you also hate christians. Interesting. So what exactly do you like, or do you even like anything whatsoever. You should clearly see in my previous posts that I'm clearly attacking atheists and christians, which makes it obvious that I'm a pagan. I also never implied anything that the jew isn't evil or at fault I'm specifically staring and proving that White people aren't perfect to avoid the same mistakes we have done in the past like I said. >You're already lying before even addressing what I asked about. Then next time chose your words correctly and don't make yourself out to be an idiot. I know you're trying to be all high IQ and everything pretending to be speculative and all, but it's quite clear that I'm pagan and see things more realistically. Yes I'm agaisnt ethno-narcissism, but it doesn't mean I don't see race and understand the jew must be eliminated at all cost. >So here's the million dollar question. If paganism is so fucking perfect, then why the fuck did they convert to christianity instead of resisting the jewish subversion? Genius! Ebin question! I've been owned libtard style! You're a fucking moron, I never implied paganism was perfect or something that would of stopped jewry in an instant again, paganism isn't some magical faith that will stop all that is evil in an instant, it's the recognition and way of life and understanding of the universe. Whites upheld the cosmic order and fell of the order, proving that we aren't a perfect people. I've specifically said that the pagan priest and aristocrats cucked out which lead to the switch in the first place, but go off. >Clearly if the pagan system was worth a damn, then most of the pagans would have fought to the last man as you said here I can also play this game you're playing. If technology is so White, then why did White cuck themselves out using it? If technology and futurism is so great, then why hasn't it defeated Judaism and improve White people If National Socialism and fascism are so great, then why didn't it defeat jewry? Do you get it now? You aren't making a point, just asking stupid questions and pretending to not understand why the jews got what they wanted in the end. >>2433 >>2434 >Muh jews this muh jews that Argue any time.
>>2434 >The only reason they "sided" with Hitler at first I reckon, is because Hitler conned them all into thinking he was one of them. No they sided with Hitler, because they knew that shit was getting bad for Britain and that they were losing control of their own country. Hitler issued that they could keep the empire and monarchy if they sided with him, but instead the royals still sided with the jews.
>>2430 >Clearly if the pagan system was worth a damn, then most of the pagans would have fought to the last man as you said here Because the pagans saw constant betrayal and their own men getting bribed into conversion, which lead to the Saxons being disorganized and left off with fewer numbers. Pagans during the fight with Charlemagne did resist and fight, but failed because the kikes had way more resources and devoted men to win against the Saxons. Although the fight and ferocity was so great that in the end some pagan traditions that you see in Catholicism had to be kept in order to prevent constant uprisings. This similarly happened with the Eastern Orthodox church where they hired pagan priests to convert the Slavs.
>>2430 > If paganism is so fucking perfect, then why the fuck did they convert to christianity instead of resisting the jewish subversion? You can ask this same question about everything today. Christianity was imposed on the people of Europe from the top-down, just like globohomo and leftism is today - there is ample evidence of this. Paganism is the truth, though in an organized form it was destroyed by the willing ages of jews / Church >paganism doesn't stand up to a real world subversion test. Anything is subvertable with some effort.
>>2448 >willing ages *agents
>>2439 Why do you have to make your points with such dramatic fluff and emotion, constantly flinging shit? It's a waste of everyone's time.
>>2452 >Why do you have to make your points with such dramatic fluff and emotion, constantly flinging shit? None of my points show an indication of that, I think you're just upset. >It's a waste of everyone's time Who is everyone gorillanigger? The two retards I've been arguing with have been a waste of time with their moronic responses and refusal to accept reality.
>>2452 He's JIDF, and his purpose here isn't to argue in good faith. >>2448 Today globalhomo is imposed on the entire world by jews, no matter what religious or government system they have. Once they got everyone (except a few like Syria and Iran) into the central banking system, it was all pretty much in the bag. Every single religion claims to be the truth, but that doesn't make it so. They are simply paths that one can follow. All can be subverted, but some resist better than others. For example, islam has a better track record than paganism. They actually conquered a good chunk of christian Europe, after all. There's been talk about reforming islam, but that's not realistically possible, because unlike christianity there's no central control. The community imams have the most power, it's decentralized. And their religious texts can't be altered, they're set in stone. So that's where Bill Gates comes in. He's got this "funvax" (did a presentation about it to the Pentagon in 2005) that's designed to alter the brain structure and remove peoples' disposition for "religious fundamentalism". So anyway that's the edge you get with technology. Learn to use it, or learn to handle it, or else die.
>>2532 >N-no you're J-jidf This board really is /nigger/. Did you know that calling everything you don't like a shill, jew, Mossad is also a CIA tactic to call division and invalidate argumentation that holds truth? Or is /nigger/ is filled with as many feds as /K/ was?
>>2536 Sounds like you are trying to stir shit by extrapolating one anon to the entire board. Never seen it called /nigger/ before either so I'm guessing you're pretty new here.
>>2562 He's just mad that we aren't accepting his geneticsfagging, see: >>>/fascist/2460
>>2562 >Sounds like you are trying to stir shit by extrapolating one anon to the entire board. Look at this thread and the autism in the theory into practice thread and understand why I'm calling this board retarded. If you cry jew and JIDF because your fee fees were hurt, then you're already doing willing to stir shit like glowniggers do all the time on /pol/ boards. >>2565 Yeah not the same guy for I don't believe in Reich's bullshit, but thanks for proving my point.
>>2567 >If you cry jew and JIDF because your fee fees were hurt Nothing to do with "fee fees", but everything to do with you posting MSM jew garbage and claiming it as a reliable source to the origins of a European sub-race. Come back when you have a better, non-jewed source pal - until then don't let the door hit you.
>>2663 >>2663 >Nothing to do with "fee fees", but everything to do with you posting MSM jew garbage and claiming it as a reliable source to the origins of a European sub-race I'm not the same person take your meds, schizo posting isn't healthy. Again /nigger/ is getting more of proper title for this board. >Come back when you have a better, non-jewed source pal - until then don't let the door hit you. Cringe....
Futurism is gay and so is this thread. I'm betting the type of fascists who shill it are the ones who are usually mutts particularly half-jews, tolerant of race-mixing, furfags and queer. I'm going to tell you right here and right now, technology won't turn you into a White man nor is the idea of accelerating technology into a White utopia is realistic one. Your waifu won't be made into reality, nor are you going to be able become the furry you always dreamed of becoming. Futurism is just sci-fi turned into an idealology and the artwork made by niggerists is an example that their minds weren't right. Just like the anons within this thread.
>>2690 >I'm not samefagging bro, trust me bro! >take your meds >schizo >cringe >>>/cuckchan/ Back where you belong, filthy jew.
>>2694 At least we know that cuckchan would have more IQ points than (you) do.
>>2691 Futurism was more of an art movement than a scientific one or an ideology. Technology isn't something that will turn everything into a utopia. It's an inevitability and something we have to wield responsibly.
>>2702 >Futurism was more of an art movement than a scientific one or an ideology Then, there's no purpose for this thread for it hasn't been very "scientific" in the first place other than back and forth arguments and the ancap shill not heading back to reddit. The futurist because, art movement was and still is garbage and it should have nothing to do with fascism. >It's an inevitability and something we have to wield responsibly. >Inevitability Yeah I'm doubting that, it's not inevitable it's half the reason of something this board wants and the other half is because certain technics is useful for a fascist movement to rise and succeed. >wield responsibly Easier said than done. Most of the nimrods here are just NEETs and /fascist/ already discourage anyone from getting a degree or some form of knowledge and experience on how to use vital technology against the jew. I don't know how you're going to hold and hoard tech when the le holy race war comes if you don't know how to use it.
>>2703 >doing a degree in programming Well I'm fucked. I just like coding stuff.
>>2704 Well you should continue and not listen to some of the retards who cry nay. Anything that can help us our revolution would be great, although if you feel there will be subversion or it would be waste of time while learning it, then give up or find a way around it.
>>2703 >there's no purpose for this thread for it hasn't been very "scientific" in the first place other than back and forth arguments The thread keeps getting derailed by people arguing against technology in one form or another. That's fine, but it would be more fruitful to keep that to an anti-technology thread, or a thread specifically about debating the merits of technology. Right now it's like having a thread about paganism and getting spammed nonstop by christcucks. >Yeah I'm doubting that, it's not inevitable The use of science and engineering is inevitable or you will be crushed by other civilizations who wield it. This seems obvious enough, and has already been discussed. National Socialist Germany also utilized science and engineering. >Most of the nimrods here are just NEETs and /fascist/ already discourage anyone from getting a degree or some form of knowledge and experience on how to use vital technology against the jew A lot of people here have advanced knowledge of technology. We have engineers, architects, programmers, networking specialists, system admins, and even the occassional people in academia doing research.
>>2707 >A lot of people here have advanced knowledge of technology. We have engineers, architects, programmers, networking specialists, system admins, and even the occassional people in academia doing research. I know this is going to sound glowie, but can you confirm this indirectly or in a way that proves that there are people in our field who understands this.
(729.63 KB 514x662 wanderer 2.PNG)
>>2691 I've never liked Futurism either, really. I have always felt that Romanticism as an art movement was always truer to Fascism, but perhaps I say this because of my own leanings towards Nature, anti-Industrialism and paganism, all of which are associated in greater or lesser degrees with Romanticism. Romanticism also has close associations with the awakening of nationalism in Europe, particularly of the Völkisch variety, and of course study into the past of one's nation, and its folklore.
>>2712 Not sure how it could be proven. But lurking over the years there are people who claimed to be professionals in these fields and discussed the topics in credible enough ways to seem likely. I'm a programmer and have seen a good amount of detailed discussion about computer science and IT related topics. It's not like it's a super power to have one of these careers you just need an above average IQ and/or a good work/study ethic.

Delete
Report


no cookies?