No Enemies To The Right?

[Lord Sovereign]

Then you will die at the left’s hands. Collective action is how humans have dominated other animals and tribes and nations that work together beat any individual United Nations like Japan don’t have the specter of liberals over them. Also even the founding fathers vaunted supposed individualists had Ben Franklin say “We must all hang together or most assuredly we will hang separately.”

It's not all or nothing for Heaven's sake.

The Right can unite without the National Socialists.

 

[Curved_Sw0rd]

I saw variations on this theme repeated many, many times by many people. It misses the point entirely. It is not about adhering to standards imposed by the left, let alone left-imposed standards applied in bad faith to slur the right. It is about adhering to standards, period. Your own standards.

Now, Haywood argues that right good, left bad should be the only standard. This is obvious nonsense. Sure he makes token efforts to say there is room for excluding "charlatans" and the like but then he goes right back to saying, "By definition, anyone not Left is a friend." I don't know what definition he is using for friend, but I know it's stupid.

This is no way to run a railroad. At best, someone trying to follow this insanity will end up with cope like "being a know-nothing con artist is leftist" and thereby try to exclude people obviously on the right who are also know-nothing con artists. Is pedophilia inherently and exclusively leftist? It will be.

Back in reality, we do not punch right for the sake of punching right (or left for the sake of left, for that matter). We punch where there are people or ideas needing to be punched. And being on the right is not a guarantee that this is not the case.

Haywood also argues that the friend/enemy distinction would shift once things change and the Left is rendered powerless. The Right is a big group, not all groups would be compatible with one another. A Big Man Populist and Ben Shapiro have little common ground, after all.

It's not all or nothing for Heaven's sake.

The Right can unite without the National Socialists.

I'd argue National Socialism isn't nearly as popular or dangerous to even worry about. Spencer had his time in the sun, and the sun revealed him to be on board with Bernie level politics as long as it was only for whites.

I mean shit Fuentes as well has a KF page. I don't see record copies of Mein Kampf being sold any time soon.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

Then you will die at the left’s hands. Collective action is how humans have dominated other animals and tribes and nations that work together beat any individual United Nations like Japan don’t have the specter of liberals over them. Also even the founding fathers vaunted supposed individualists had Ben Franklin say “We must all hang together or most assuredly we will hang separately.”

Then it is a good day to die. Better to fall on your feet than live on your knees, and better to parish standing for something than to who're yourself with Mamon and Satan

 

[strunkenwhite]

Haywood also argues that the friend/enemy distinction would shift once things change and the Left is rendered powerless. The Right is a big group, not all groups would be compatible with one another. A Big Man Populist and Ben Shapiro have little common ground, after all.

I don't care; it doesn't matter. Right now, at this moment, his definition is still stupid and harmful. edit: if "harmful" is a trigger word for you, feel free to substitute "counterproductive".

 

[Bigking321]

It feels like there is some kind of misunderstanding or disconnect going on somewhere in this conversation. It just seems to swing wildly in tone and topic.

I think there might be a core misunderstanding of the topic.

Is this thread about never ever attacking anyone that is lumped into the right by the left and the media like neo nazis and others?

Or is it about trying to maintain cohesion against a greater enemy and not devolving into self destructive purity spirals while the left laughs about it.

I think it would really help to nail down and agree on what is actually the current topic.

Because one of those I absolutely disagree with and the other one seems to make perfect sense. And it seems like in thread both viewpoints are being discussed at the same time past each other.

 

[King Arts]

It's not all or nothing for Heaven's sake.

The Right can unite without the National Socialists.

Please tell me what is a National Socialist? We've had people here say things that would not be out of place from Front National like sending all the Arabs back home, or shooting migrants. And Front National regularly manages to get 10 percent of the vote that is a big chunk. What is a Nazi, is it advocating exterminating a racial/ethnic group? Well one of the people on your side of the debate have done that. Tell me what is National Socialism in your own words. I need a definition so I can decide if something is or is not National Socialism. There are definitions for Islam, Christianity, etc. so we can see if a group falls into it or not. Please tell me what qualifies as National Socialism

Then it is a good day to die. Better to fall on your feet than live on your knees, and better to parish standing for something than to who're yourself with Mamon and Satan

I mean then the thing to do is to stay out of politics altogether. Because right now establishment conservatives prostitute themselves to Mamon and Satan via helping the left and communists.
Like I'm not arguing for submitting to the Nazis. I'm arguing for changing that Cordon Sanitarie thing I posted above. The only nation that handles the cordon well is Israel where the mainstream parties avoid both commies, the Arab rights parties, and the far right Kach. At least then there is symatery both the right and the left get some type of bennefit and it's equal.
What we should do is treat the far right like Israel treats the Haredim. They get to pick one or two issues and we give it to them and some of their leaders get job posts, in exchange their 10 percent of the population votes for us. They don't get close to anything they want, they have to give up most of everything and basically be the prostitute.

 

[TyrantTriumphant]

It's not all or nothing for Heaven's sake.

The Right can unite without the National Socialists.

No one here is arguing that loathsome fools like Fuentes and his ilk should be let in the anti-left coalition. They are both evil and stupid, and their presence would only weaken us.

The real argument, as best I can tell, is between the Christian and secular wings of the coalition.

Which is a difficult issue as while both groups have mostly the same short term goals and for the moment support the same politicians, their long term goals for society are different.

 

[Curved_Sw0rd]

It feels like there is some kind of misunderstanding or disconnect going on somewhere in this conversation. It just seems to swing wildly in tone and topic.

I think there might be a core misunderstanding of the topic.

Is this thread about never ever attacking anyone that is lumped into the right by the left and the media like neo nazis and others?

Or is it about trying to maintain cohesion against a greater enemy and not devolving into self destructive purity spirals while the left laughs about it.

I think it would really help to nail down and agree on what is actually the current topic.

Because one of those I absolutely disagree with and the other one seems to make perfect sense. And it seems like in thread both viewpoints are being discussed at the same time past each other.

I'd argue the latter is what I'm getting at? Maintaining cohesion is important, and self-destructive purity spirals are just that, self-destructive.

To use the incident that spurred this on, Dreher found out someone at a Christian school he was involved with had an anonymous twitter account that he'd post some very politically incorrect memes and retweet some scandalous posts. Instead of handling it privately, he doxxed him publicly and started a witch hunt within the school.

I'll gladly say Dreher is a peice of shit, I don't think doing so contradicts the thesis because what he did was beyond the pale. If I read this right, Haywood wants to explain why this is in error, and when he came out with the thesis, Dreher loudly attacked him.

I guess my line for "harm" from the Right is higher than most. I'm willing to tolerate a lot more than center-rightists and actually explore fringe ideas. I think dismissing them outright, even if you disagree, or find them icky? I think it's wrong, and a little bit arrogant (not talking to you big king here just making a blanket statement).

To me, someone on the Right needs to demonstrate a level of "harm" (and boy am I sick of this Leftist obsession) way beyond what's acceptable. I'm not talking about FBI crime statistics or hard Rs or floating ideas that run counter to democracy or liberalism, I'm talking doxxing and scamming, that sort of shit.

 

[Agent23]

It's not all or nothing for Heaven's sake.

The Right can unite without the National Socialists.

I am sorry, but that sounds a lot like, everyone who does not tow the party line and is a good, controlled opposition cuckservative is a nazi.

At its core, humanity is a very collectivist/tribalist species because of millions of years of evolution and much of the rhethoric about individualism usually falls flat where most people are concerned and when a particular trigger like war, catastrophe or other such occur.

 

[DarthOne]

I don't think they can spread like that. they are universally reviled and can only get any level of support by pointing out how the left has gone insane and started attacking people along intersectional lines and that means there needs to be a group formed to protect the group being attacked. I.E. straight, white, male, whatever else. they only derive any legitimacy from crazies on the left and being lumped in with the right in general. which the left is happy to do even if it means watering down the term Nazi. or racist. or whatever else will secure them the win. being hyperfocused on finding hidden nazis on the right is a waste of time. if someone like Kanye comes out and says something dumb just say yeah that is dumb and move on.

I’m not so sure; maybe it’s just me but I seem to be seeing an uptick of NatSoc talking points and anti-semitism on various websites.

 

[Wargamer08]

I’m not so sure; maybe it’s just me but I seem to be seeing an uptick of NatSoc talking points and anti-semitism on various websites.

Most of the jew shit glows these days. It's got that hello fellow alt right energy.

 

[Aldarion]

It's not all or nothing for Heaven's sake.

The Right can unite without the National Socialists.

It would be better if we did, yes, especially since National Socialism is a leftist, modernist ideology. They despise actual tradition - just look at their art and architecture - and they reject tradition and history in favor of some made up mythology, just like the Karl Marx did. The only thing that separates them from Marxist left is their recognition that yes, tribes are real and class is not the only social separator. But even there, they reject ethnicity and nation in favor of race as sole grouping, and interpret the race itself in class terms.

 

[Agent23]

It would be better if we did, yes, especially since National Socialism is a leftist, modernist ideology. They despise actual tradition - just look at their art and architecture - and they reject tradition and history in favor of some made up mythology, just like the Karl Marx did. The only thing that separates them from Marxist left is their recognition that yes, tribes are real and class is not the only social separator. But even there, they reject ethnicity and nation in favor of race as sole grouping, and interpret the race itself in class terms.

Exactly.

They also buy into corporatism and other such nonsense.