PsihoKekec
Swashbuckling Accountant
Anybody can stop being a bad person if they prostrate themselves before him and submit themselves to his superior transcendent mind.
The Nazi's socialist?
- Thread starter DirtbagLeft
- Start date
ShieldWife
Marchioness
I'm not sure how productive it is for me to remain in this discussion. I think we all get the idea by this point. Hopefully Dirtbagleft has sufficiently revealed himself to us all to be a lesson as to how dangerous the far left can be. What happens when people with these sorts of beliefs get power? Well, we see it again and again don't we - in the Soviet Union, in Mao's China, Castro's Cuba, in the Killing Fields, in North Korea.
"I'm against violence, except against people with dangerous opinions. I get to decide what opinions they actually have regardless of what they say."
This can be used justify violence against anybody.
"I'm against violence, except against people with dangerous opinions. I get to decide what opinions they actually have regardless of what they say."
This can be used justify violence against anybody.
No, you just say that your a libertarian socialist. But socialists also almost universally lie about that as well so there's a very good chance of you doing that; and it's just a case of doing the math. There has never been a Libertarian socialist state ever, and socialist states always become authoritarian. So realistically you present a clear danger to everyone in your nation by spouting off about socialism because the system you advocate almost always kills hundreds of thousands to millions and then implodes.
Why shouldn't you be put against the wall as a political danger same as a 'Nazi'? Or hell ahead of the Nazi! If you're adamant that the Nazis aren't socialist then all we have to fall back on is the SSR, China and the other socialist nations which were and are killing far more people and acting as global threats. If we're allowing political violence to 'protect' people then commies, socialists and other groups that result in anti freedom and loss of life should be the first to get the old short drop and sudden stop on account of producing inherently destructive systems regardless of what they say the intend. Needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Sorry mate.
who the hell still uses the term Octoroon?
Litterally no one here care's who your great grandparents were, this website is composed of people from all walks of life, it has gay people, strait people, bisexuals. We have people of all races, religions and nationality. You stand or fall on this site based on your own merits and not based on who your related to.
Litterally no one here care's who your great grandparents were, this website is composed of people from all walks of life, it has gay people, strait people, bisexuals. We have people of all races, religions and nationality. You stand or fall on this site based on your own merits and not based on who your related to.
Ironically the Nazis would have probably been okay with him. If half his grand parents were white then he would just eke being removed from a kill list.
Last edited:
ShieldWife
Marchioness
For any group that conservatives supposedly hate or want to oppress, there are members of that group here who are fully respected Sietch members.
Morphic Tide
Well-known member
Fuck's sake, we had dissertations about the religious basis for respecting transgenderism from a literal monarchist. This place is not a home of stereotypes.
Also, I consider transgenderism a mental illness specifically because I see "bottom surgery" as something that isn't pointless. Because there are cases in need of invasive medical attention like that, I view the phenomenon as an illness. There's no need for surgical treatment of homosexuality, nor does any race have a universal need of such things.
That particular statement made it clear to me that you're just applying your totem of reactionary to everyone else in the thread, not actually responding to the nature of what is said.
Edit: Here's the thread on trans rights, if you're actually interested in going over the site's views.
Also, I consider transgenderism a mental illness specifically because I see "bottom surgery" as something that isn't pointless. Because there are cases in need of invasive medical attention like that, I view the phenomenon as an illness. There's no need for surgical treatment of homosexuality, nor does any race have a universal need of such things.
That particular statement made it clear to me that you're just applying your totem of reactionary to everyone else in the thread, not actually responding to the nature of what is said.
Edit: Here's the thread on trans rights, if you're actually interested in going over the site's views.
Last edited:
Navarro
Well-known member
I'm not sure how that works, since Eco's points are vague and subjectively defined to the point they can be used for any political movement.
Just ten thousand more tries people!
I mean, even in a socialist takeover he loses. Because the tankies being better at organising and more prepared for violence will roll over his little bunch of communes out in the countryside just like they did in Russia and put all the anarkiddies up against the wall. Then over borscht and vodka they will gloat over how useful those idiots were to them.
Last edited:
Navarro
Well-known member
Also lol at the idea that "reactionaries" as Dirtbag defines it have created nothing of value in the arts. We literally have the world's top bestseller ever - if that isn't an achievement, nothing is!
ShieldWife
Marchioness
I didn't even want to get into the entire argument about how leftists control entertainment because they're just so awesome and their art is so wonderful. I could bring up Star Wars, which is a very conservative franchise to start and then the left demolish the IP with their woke movies.
Navarro
Well-known member
The only socialist art I've seen is smotheringly didactic literature plus portrayals of uber-manly heroic Workers(TM) doing uber-manly heroic things (v. similar to fascist art in that regard). I'm not impressed, to say the least.
D
Deleted member
Guest
Exactly this. There's no question that transsexuality is objectively an illness, reconstructive sex-change operations wouldn't be the cure otherwise (and someone who wants that surgery without needing it is also, objectively, quite ill). Speaking of: What is it with the rather bizarre "bottom surgery" that's become the newspeak of the day anyway? And these people accuse fascists of having a simplified newspeak vocabulary when they're literally inventing a new word, name or phrase for the same thing every couple of years.
Incidentally, I only meet six of the fourteen characteristics of fascism, which is really quite funny actually.
While at least you're not hypocritical (on this one point), do you not see that advancing this position basically undermines the fundamental principles of western civilization, the principles that we fought the nazis in order to save? Legitimizing violence as a valid response to words, even terrible, terrible words, because otherwise those ideas will spread and the rise of fascism is inevitable, is a direct attack on the idea that people should be free to make their own choices and the the public at large can be trusted to exercise power responsibly. You are saying that instead the public are fools who cannot be trusted, and that instead it's up to some nebulous, ill defined group of better and wiser people to guide the national discussion by forcibly silencing ideas the public can't be trusted with.
For some that is supposedly ethically opposed to authoritarians, you seem to be comfortable with a lot of authoritarian ideas.
Everyone shouldn't have thier own unique list, you should just get a better one. Eco's 14 points are a bunch of vague BS that apply about equally to fascist and anti-fascist regimes alike, which is not surprising since Eco was an infant when hitler rose to power, and later a toddler living in an isolated mountain village when WW2 actually broke out. I have a hard time trusting the opinions of a guy who has absolutely no experience with the subject matter he's discussing as the one definitive example of fascism, and if it wasn't so handy to be able to go "hey look, here's a smart guy who wrote this list that says your thing is fascist", no one else would either. The BITE model is likewise less than applicable, since it's (in addition to being based on, amoung other things, Maoist China), about cults, not politics, and can also be applied to every movement under the sun. How many of those checkboxes does, say, the sterotypical left wing tumblr SJW check off?
As for the term fascist become useless, that ship has sailed a long, long, long time ago.
This from the guy constantly talking about "JQ Nazis", a phrase that, as far as google goes, does not exist within the wider political discourse and is instead being used just by you.
Last edited:
Wait 'JQNazis? Does that not imply that there are non JQ Nazis? Like Nazis that don't hate the jew?
Wait, that's what it means? I thought it was some weird corruption of "Just Asking Questions", I've seen that get abbreviated to JAQ a fair bit and figured he maybe dropped a letter.
JQ the 'The Jewish Question'. Pretty sure if you're fine with jews then by definition you aren't aNazi
Bear Ribs
Well-known member
To be fair, The Little Red Book greatly exceeds Lord of the Rings in sales so there's that.
Though there's this one little epic that, while apolitical itself, is generally disliked by socialists...
Isn't calling them "Jewish Question Nazis" both grammatically nonsensical and redundant?
It implies that there are Nazis who aren't up for the Jewish Question, which means he either doesn't know what a Nazi is or doesn't care and uses the word as a rhetorical weapon.
ShieldWife
Marchioness
JQ can mean “Jewish Question” but as others have said, that is kinda redundant with being a Nazi. I think I recall hearing that once before because Richard Spencer is well dressed or something, so he’s a JQ Nazi.