United States How To Beat The Left In The Long Haul

[Jormungandr]

Appeasement doesn't work. Ironically, Germany (yes, that Germany that they shriek about every two minutes) showed us this in the early 20th.

It's getting to the point where children aren't just being groomed, assaulted, and mutilated, but being killed.

Dialogue doesn't work. Turning the other cheek, a stupid notion in itself, not only results in your other cheek being slapped but your being knifed in the kidney, too. Trying to find common ground doesn't work as they will do everything they can to destroy your life, if you're an obstacle to them.

Violence, I think, is going to be the only solution because they won't stop in their warped crusade. If they need to be violently cracked down on to save Western civilization and society, then so be it.

 

[Free-Stater 101]

Violence, I think, is going to be the only solution because they won't stop in their warped crusade. If they need to be violently cracked down on to save Western civilization and society, then so be it.

Violent crackdowns don't cause shit and only emboldent the enemy, the only way for them to truly lose is to fail and fail fucking hard.

Hoover would know all about that.

 

[DarthOne]

Violent crackdowns don't cause shit and only emboldent the enemy, the only way for them to truly lose is to fail and fail fucking hard.

Hoover would know all about that.

And how do we make them ‘fail and fail hard’?

 

[Abhorsen]

And how do we make them ‘fail and fail hard’?

Leave them to suffer separately by making your state hostile to living there for them. (Anti-abortion laws are great for this). Private schooling and vouchers to stop the spread, along with a don't teach gay bill. Move out of liberal states.

 

[DarthOne]

Leave them to suffer separately by making your state hostile to living there for them. (Anti-abortion laws are great for this). Private schooling and vouchers to stop the spread, along with a don't teach gay bill. Move out of liberal states.

Please explain to me how that’s any different from the strategy conservatives have been doing for decades…which has seen the being ten years behind the progressives on every issue instead of seemingly conserving very much and becoming increasingly irrelevant by giving up ground to the enemy.

 

[Abhorsen]

Please explain to me how that’s any different from the strategy conservatives have been doing for decades…which has seen the being ten years behind the progressives on every issue instead of seemingly conserving very much and becoming increasingly irrelevant by giving up ground to the enemy.

... They haven't been doing anything for decades, that's how. They owned the culture shortly after 9/11. What did they do with it? The Patriot Act and No Child Left Behind, both major wins for the Dems.

But recently? Roe v Wade's death looks like a major political victory to me, one that took decades to pay off. Also, congrats, conservatives are finally making some cultural in roads for the first time in forever. The anti woke stuff, Joe Rogan Podcast, etc. That's how a cultural war is won: culturally.

 

[Scottty]

Appeasement doesn't work. Ironically, Germany (yes, that Germany that they shriek about every two minutes) showed us this in the early 20th.

It's getting to the point where children aren't just being groomed, assaulted, and mutilated, but being killed.

Dialogue doesn't work. Turning the other cheek, a stupid notion in itself, not only results in your other cheek being slapped but your being knifed in the kidney, too. Trying to find common ground doesn't work as they will do everything they can to destroy your life, if you're an obstacle to them.

Violence, I think, is going to be the only solution because they won't stop in their warped crusade. If they need to be violently cracked down on to save Western civilization and society, then so be it.

"Turning the other cheek" in the Biblical sense, is a response to an insult, not to lethal violence, and presupposes that one is dealing with people who can feel shame at their wrong actions. It is not actually pacifism.

 

[Jormungandr]

"Turning the other cheek" in the Biblical sense, is a response to an insult, not to lethal violence, and presupposes that one is dealing with people who can feel shame at their wrong actions. It is not actually pacifism.

Unfortunately, people have colloquially come to see it as that, especially conservatives (and by extension Christian conservatives).

Turning the other cheek means nothing if it's going to (proverbially and literally in this day and age) get you killed.

People need to wake up and understand that taking the "high road" is meaningless if that high road ends up being a one-way swan-dive off a precipice.

 

[The Immortal Watch Dog]

Violent crackdowns don't cause shit and only emboldent the enemy, the only way for them to truly lose is to fail and fail fucking hard.

Hoover would know all about that.

Without opining on the issue. Let me just point out that half the movements empowered by Hoover's violence were movements the FBI created in the first place..specifically to ensure he had a permanent set of enemies and allies in the institutions he supposedly served.

Like they staged numerous terror attacks, sided with the Black Panthers when it suited them and killed them when it also suited them. Angela Davis, Bunchie Carter, Frank Lucas, Russell Means. All of them were paid FBI assets....

They conspired with the Soviets/CCP to hijack the counter culture movement and most of the Hayt and Ashbury Crowd were also CIA affiliated.

So you're citing a case of evil serving evil and little else.

 

[Free-Stater 101]

Without opining on the issue. Let me just point out that half the movements empowered by Hoover's violence were movements the FBI created in the first place..specifically to ensure he had a permanent set of enemies and allies in the institutions he supposedly served.

Like they staged numerous terror attacks, sided with the Black Panthers when it suited them and killed them when it also suited them. Angela Davis, Bunchie Carter, Frank Lucas, Russell Means. All of them were paid FBI assets....

They conspired with the Soviets/CCP to hijack the counter culture movement and most of the Hayt and Ashbury Crowd were also CIA affiliated.

So you're citing a case of evil serving evil and little else.

I am talking about Herber Hoover 31st President of the United States not J. Edgar Hoover former head of of the FBI what are you talking about LOL!

In any case my point stands, if the Dems of Today were to run the country into the ground to the point everyone was suffering, they would be perceived as the root of the problem and their ideology would as a result naturally fail.

 

[The Immortal Watch Dog]

I am talking about Herber Hoover 31st President of the United States not J. Edgar Hoover former head of of the FBI what are you talking about LOL!

....you think the rise of an evil cripple broughr about by a combination of inaction and over reactions. Who beat the corpse of the Repuglic into the ground, engineered a World War by sacrificing a bunch of sailors, ran wild for almost two decades and created the institutional demon that is oppressing us too this day is a good example of why normies should do nothing but complain a lot and engage in lawfare on terms dictates by the enemy?

....why!?

 

[Yinko]

In the same sense the American Empire founded on Neo-Liberalism and the World Order it formed and perpetuates won't end until it has summarily failed by it's own action.

Just as there is a lineage of men, there is a lineage of ideas.

The current order arises of a course from the previous order, it could hardly be any other way. From glorious past we beget sordid present.

Burn it all down.

 

[Captain X]

Let us just hope that the law actually does something so that people will not feel the need to take things into their own hands.

 

[Free-Stater 101]

Let us just hope that the law actually does something so that people will not feel the need to take things into their own hands.

Burn it all down.

I don't get why the conversation is taking this turn my point is we don't really need to engage dems any more than necessary and we should let them buckle under their own weight a hardcore revolutionary need not apply.

Like literally we hold the SC it doesn't matter if they hold the presidency for the next twenty years that means that unless they shamelessly pack the court a move which will only result in an unheard of backlash the results will mostly stay the same.

We don't need to beat the Dems in open politically offensive warfare merely outlast them while they gorge and die from the bloat inevitably.

 

[The Immortal Watch Dog]

Or do you think that is a wrong assessment?

People turned away from Republicanism because they remembered sitting on their grandpappy's laps listening to tales about how they were so militantly in favor of big government that they helped start a war that burned down cities and killed 650,000 people because the central Government they erected determined that states whose entire existence was owed to a violent succession from a foreign government did not have the right to secede from an agreement they spent the majority of blood and treasure backing. Then these same dudes suddenly got cold feet when the daughters of abolitionists took their centralized "We will force you to change your ways even if it means culling your population" to its logical extremes with the eugenics movement.

The architects of the first and second world War were the children and grandchildren of the Civil War. Patton himself was the grandson of a confederate general and Mac was the grandson of a Commander in blue.

No one took Republicans seriously because they saw a bunch of dudes who got the ball rolling on outrageous centralization then got cold feet then started to claim descent and ideological wardenship over minarchistic free market values from men they would have scorned as seditionistd.

What was a Repuglican but the last in a long line of cowards who preserved the values of their opposition from a generation past?

Who the hell was Herbert Hoover to fight for limited government intervention when his party funded sectarian terrorism in places like Kansas and then proceeded to kill over half a million people to protect centralized power?

Then, like now the vast majority of disgruntled Americans who actually care about freedom saw the GOP as a bunch of confused mooks. Why support a sell out and a coward when you're faced with a wheel chair bound strongman? And his successors?

And if you think I'm just projecting, yeah my family owned a newspaper down South before tbe government seized it because we called a dictator a homosexual 🤣🤣🤣 I can tell what was being reported by the foreign press vs what was reported by the successors of bastions of integrity at home lol.

My take comes from that. Seeing America's social ills as an outsider and to me the GOPs problem has always been that it isnt actually conservative and never has been. It's voters are, but the GOP actively hates its voters.

now to be fair Ike broke the mold because he was the only one who wasn't massively full of shit. So did Reagan and he benefited hugely from the religious right who actually went out and did shit even if that shit was fucking retarded half the time.

Like literally we hold the SC.

Ah yes the Supreme Court where a Bush loyalist, career corporation and institution simp with brain damage is the chief justice and Kavanaugh and Barret are uniparty hacks.

What a glorious cultural victory.

Nah the right is winning on the ground specifically because of a new flavor of right wing populism is taking over national discourse and its much more aggressive and assertive than most conservatives are.

 

[Scottty]

Like literally we hold the SC it doesn't matter if they hold the presidency for the next twenty years that means that unless they shamelessly pack the court a move which will only result in an unheard of backlash the results will mostly stay the same.

SCOTUS has very little actual power. If the Demoncat regime decides to just flat-out ignore a Supreme Court ruling, (as many of them would happily do) there's not much the judges could do about it.

 

[Free-Stater 101]

I felt we were getting way too off topic with this whole line of discussion and it really deserved it's own thread.

 

[Free-Stater 101]

People turned away from Republicanism because they remembered sitting on their grandpappy's laps listening to tales about how they were so militantly in favor of big government that they helped start a war that burned down cities and killed 650,000 people because the central Government they erected determined that states whose entire existence was owed to a violent succession from a foreign government did not have the right to secede from an agreement they spent the majority of blood and treasure backing. Then these same dudes suddenly got cold feet when the daughters of abolitionists took their centralized "We will force you to change your ways even if it means culling your population" to its logical extremes with the eugenics movement.

The architects of the first and second world War were the children and grandchildren of the Civil War. Patton himself was the grandson of a confederate general and Mac was the grandson of a Commander in blue.

No one took Republicans seriously because they saw a bunch of dudes who got the ball rolling on outrageous centralization then got cold feet then started to claim descent and ideological wardenship over minarchistic free market values from men they would have scorned as seditionistd.

What was a Repuglican but the last in a long line of cowards who preserved the values of their opposition from a generation past?

Who the hell was Herbert Hoover to fight for limited government intervention when his party funded sectarian terrorism in places like Kansas and then proceeded to kill over half a million people to protect centralized power?

Then, like now the vast majority of disgruntled Americans who actually care about freedom saw the GOP as a bunch of confused mooks. Why support a sell out and a coward when you're faced with a wheel chair bound strongman? And his successors?

First of all, please cite more what you are talking about as this isn't a guessing game and just getting through the first paragraph is a chore in of itself.

Second of all, bringing up the goddamn civil war as the reason modern leftism flourishes is disingenuous and an outright lie in of itself, both in the United States and abroad, people rejected Hoover because FDR ran the first ever successful mass media propaganda campaign against him and made damn sure that all blame was placed at Hoover's feet as well as minarcism in general, saying either the man or ideology 'didn't do enough' or 'could have done better' which was of course dogwhistling for the left and for all people who wanted more centralized government, while the way you are talking you would seem to imply that leftism only sprung up from the fountain of Lincoln as it was a home grown fucking national thing, only problematic and native to the U.S. when it wasn't

It didn't help that Japan and Nazi Germany went batshit insane and kept giving FDR excuse after excuse to shove the U.S. in a war stance and once their crimes were fully uncovered it made isolationist look dumb and caused the GOP to start to shift into their ever drifting leftward stance as by the time of Eisenhower the party of the 20's was long dead.

Third other than nipicking you haven't disproved a thing. The system can't be fixed the only thing to do now is stall and hold what we can.

And if you think I'm just projecting, yeah my family owned a newspaper down South before tbe government seized it because we called a dictator a homosexual 🤣🤣🤣 I can tell what was being reported by the foreign press vs what was reported by the successors of bastions of integrity at home lol.

My sympathies for your family, but honestly, I could care less about it in a debate like this.

No offense, but have you ever given a flip when Norma McCorney kept flip flopping on Abortion and both sides stated we should do 'X' because her belief was this? Did you ever care when a war veteran argued we should or shouldn't have entered a conflict based soley off the fact that they are a veteran, and you might not be?

If I only listened to people based only off their street creed without a second opinion or forming one of my own, I wouldn't be much of my own man, would I?

My take comes from that. Seeing America's social ills as an outsider and to me the GOPs problem has always been that it isnt actually conservative and never has been. It's voters are, but the GOP actively hates its voters.

now to be fair Ike broke the mold because he was the only one who wasn't massively full of shit. So did Reagan and he benefited hugely from the religious right who actually went out and did shit even if that shit was fucking retarded half the time.

I agree.

Ah yes the Supreme Court where a Bush loyalist, career corporation and institution simp with brain damage is the chief justice and Kavanaugh and Barret are uniparty hacks.

Don't profess to say they are angels or will always hold up to scrutiny, but if we stopped focusing on the presidency and only focused on them, they would be more likely to stay in line and even then we don't need them forever.

The rights goals should be to let the left crash themselves and sweep in and clean up before rebuilding nothing more, nothing less, the presidency is irrelevant to that and only those who believe intrinsically in FDR'S myth of the Imperial President saving everyone believe to the contrary.

 

[The Immortal Watch Dog]

No offense, but have you ever given a flip when Norma McCorney kept flip flopping on Abortion and both sides stated we should do 'X' because her belief was this? Did you ever care when a war veteran argued we should or shouldn't have entered a conflict based soley off the fact that they are a veteran, and you might not be?

Ehh we lost a Newspaper but gained a bunch of cushy federal positions when we backed the next dictator and seized a bunch of land from subversive. South American society is a Merry Go Round, never cry over spilt milk, you'll get yours one or two tyrants or cronies down the line.


Oh and more importantly difference is that I was just clarifying why I took a position not appealing to non existent authority.

I hate experts and those who defer to them and have zero interest in making myself into one.

nice try though.

Second of all, bringing up the goddamn civil war as the reason modern leftism flourishes is disingenuous and an outright lie in of itself, both in the United States and abroad, people rejected Hoover because FDR ran the first ever successful mass media propaganda campaign against him and made damn sure that all blame was placed at Hoover's feet as well as minarcism in general, saying either the man or ideology 'didn't do enough' or 'could have done better' which was of course dogwhistling for the left and for all people who wanted more centralized government, while the way you are talking you would seem to imply that leftism only sprung up from the fountain of Lincoln as it was a home grown fucking national thing, only problematic and native to the U.S. when it wasn't

Ah yes correctly pointing out that Hoover took an authoritarian party whose sole contribution to modern America was eroding the liberty of states and defiling the very concept of a Union of States into a minarchistic direction and caused plenty of skepticism is disingenuous and a lie.

Rather than faced with two evil parties of tyrants and sellouts most broke ass Americans opted to go bootleg to feed their families or someshit.

It didn't help that Japan and Nazi Germany went batshit insane and kept giving FDR excuse after excuse to shove the U.S. in a war stance and once their crimes were fully uncovered it made isolationist look dumb and caused the GOP to start to shift into their ever drifting leftward stance as by the time of Eisenhower the party of the 20's was long dead.

Americans knew Japan had gone batshit since the end of world War One. Hell the US was slapping them with sanctions well before FDR decided to destroy their economy and provoke them into a fight.

And I'm pretty sure he allowed Pearl to happen specifically for that reason.

Third other than nipicking you haven't disproved a thing.

Lmao okay dude.

 

[Free-Stater 101]

Oh and more importantly difference is that I was just clarifying why I took a position not appealing to non existent authority.

I hate experts and those who defer to them and have zero interest in making myself into one.

nice try though.

Then why bring it up? No, seriously why? I don't recall ever talking to you about it nor caring or even seeing you speak about it in public so who where you clarifying too?

Ah yes correctly pointing out that Hoover took an authoritarian party whose sole contribution to modern America was eroding the liberty of states and defiling the very concept of a Union of States into a minarchistic direction and caused plenty of skepticism is disingenuous and a lie.

Prove it. It's a known fact that Calvin Coolidge and Hoover where minarchist by both word and action and presided over the party after most of the progressives left whine the Bull Moose Party failed and the more pro-business portion of the party that had clung to Taft took over and their where plenty of examples of it.

That's a fact.

Rather than faced with two evil parties of tyrants and sellouts most broke ass Americans opted to go bootleg to feed their families or someshit.

No.

Americans knew Japan had gone batshit since the end of world War One. Hell the US was slapping them with sanctions well before FDR decided to destroy their economy and provoke them into a fight.

And I'm pretty sure he allowed Pearl to happen specifically for that reason.

I don't care about your theories involving the goddamn war, they are irrelevant true or false. The American public regardless took FDR's words at face value resulting in more backlash against the Republicans.