Comments by "No Fate But What We Make" (@SonoftheAllfather) on "Libertarian vs Authoritarianism Debate: A Redux" video.

  1. Styx is in denial. Joel is correct that libertarianism can't exist without some other unifying framework or identity. Styx immediately said that libertarianism existed in America and worked under a "civic awareness," which is absolutely ridiculous. It did work, but the country was both racially and culturally homogeneous and enforced a strict racial and cultural hegemony. Moreover, the vast majority of the population was Christian and operated largely based on those moral values, not "civic" ones. Libertarianism doesn't work without racially and cultural homogeneity and a complete lack of cultural/moral relativism. The Founding Fathers understood this, which is evidenced by the 1790 Immigration and Naturalization Act, which restricted naturalization to "free whites persons of good character." John Adams said "we have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution is designed only for a moral and religious people." It's understandable if Styx were truly ignorant of this, given that he has lived in environments that are 95% white for the majority of his life. But I don't thinks he's ignorant; I think he's willfully ignorant and is being disingenuous. He is always refusing to acknowledge the importance of race and religion as primordial unifying forces. He ignores this for his subjective "civic" awareness. That might work in Vermont, which is already racially and culturally homogeneous, but it won't work in the country as a whole.
    11
  2. Not according to Tarl. He thinks all authoritarianism is leftist.
    5
  3.  @thurin84  Lol that is such a simplistic take. "MUh fAsCiSm iS lEftiSm" reee Collectivism and authoritarianism are not exclusive to leftism. Those are literally the only similarities between the far left and right.
    5
  4.  @thurin84  I've clearly researched it more than you, given that I'm aware it's diametrically opposed to Marxist state socialism in practically every conceivable way. Fascism is collectivist and authoritarian, and it isn't leftism. Ethnic states run by monarchs were collectivist and authoritarian. Not leftist either. I'm not strawmanning you either, you're just trying to weasel your way out of the statement you made, calling "most of what is identified as far-right" as "leftist collectivist authoritarianism." You're wrong.
    5
  5.  @thurin84  Only a halfwit couldn't fathom how they are opposed. Nationalism v. internationalism. Ethno-separatist v. ethno-integrationist. Essentialist v. non-essentialist. Hierarchical v. egalitarian. One emphasizes and celebrates class, race, ethnicity, religion, culture and tradition. The other attempts to demonize and destroy those things. These ^^ are not minor differences, which is why fascists hate communists and vice versa. So you're either dumb or you're playing dumb. I'm guessing the latter, because you have already lied once, saying I strawmanned your position and then taking up that same position only moments later. So tell me how the Kingdom of Spain was not collectivist. Tell me how it was leftist. Lol your desperate arguments will amuse me. The fact that not every kingdom in history was collectivist is irrelevant. The point is that collectivism and authoritarianism are not exclusive to leftism, which is what you implied and what idiots like Tarl say all time. You think you're giving me a history lesson, but you sound like a novice. I think you vastly overestimate your knowledge and abilities. You're like a Dunning Kruger poster child. NatSoc is vastly different than Marxist state socialism. The only people who conflate them are either simpletons (who can only understand political concepts if they are reductive and lack nuance) or liars who do so for political expediency (to either insulate themselves from accusations or to demonize their political enemies). Either way, people who make this argument deserve to be mocked. You think I'm unaware that Mussolini was a member of the Italian Socialist Party? That's common knowledge. It's also irrelevant. There are plenty of ardent nationalists and even lolberts who were once socialists. Your arguments are tired and weak. Classic cvckservstive Boomer-tier lolbert nonsense.
    5
  6. ​ @thurin84  ​ mUh sTrAwMan...mUh pRoJeCtiOn...reeee..... Yeah, that's what you said when I called you out on your "mUh fasCiSm iS LeFtiSm" idiocy. I identified your position and then you dishonestly denied it and said that's not what you meant, only to admit that's what you meant by defending that notion only moments later. Now you're saying the exact same thing: "it was leftist because it was fascist." So I guess you're just a liar. "Diametrically opposed" means completely opposite. Nationalist v. internationalist is completely the opposite, you fool. So is ethno-separatist v. ethno-integrationist and hierarchical and egalitarian. You asked how two collectivist authoritarian systems could possibly be diametrically opposed. "how can 1 collectivist authoritarian system be 'diametrically opposed' to another collectivist authoritarian system?" is what you wrote in your very primitive and uneducated manner. I listed multiple major ways in which they could, and you make no counterargument except to incorrectly attempt to claim I don't know what diametrically opposed means. Now you're saying "i nEvEr sAiD tHe diFFeReNcEs aRe miNoR." Correct; you said the differences couldn't exist at all, you deceptive worm. You're not even smart enough to lie and get away with it. All you can do is deny you said what you clearly said moments ago and then accuse me of sTraWmaNNinG you. A person that dishonest is not even worth talking to, tbh. Collectivism is not exclusive to the left. If it was, then a collectivist monarchy, which you JUST ADMITTED can exist, would be leftist by definition. The idea that some medieval collectivist monarchical state was definitively leftist is just so beyond ridiculous, it isn't even funny. You're still stuck in this Boomer-tier understanding of politics. It's so pathetic and desperate to see people like you take up this narrative. You're literally a meme of yourself. "dEmOcrAts aRe tHe rEaL rAciStS" and "nAziSm iS LeFtiSm" is practically the same thing. I think you're a complete halfwit and a liar. I know more about this topic than you'll ever know. I knew Benito Mussolini was a member of the Italian Socialist Party two decades ago. Meanwhile, you can't even spell or complete a legible sentence, let alone complete one without blatantly lying.
    4
  7.  @thurin84  I see you've written an essay of nonsense and lies. mUh aD hOmiNeM. mUh sTrAwMaN. mUh pRoJeCtiOn. That's all you have. You lost the argument. No amount of copium will change that, neckbeard.
    4
  8.  @googleisskynet7312  I'm not NatSoc. I've never liked the amount of statism required. I'm just your typical ethnic nationalist at the end of the day. I believe in a mixed economic system applied to homogeneous states, like Japan or Sweden circa 1960.
    1
  9.  @googleisskynet7312  The Valknut is not a supremacist symbol. It's a symbol that commemorates fallen warriors. Only cowards and lemmings allow themselves to be brainwashed into thinking any Norse symbol represents white supremacism.
    1
  10.  @tuskinradar8688  The easiest way to maintain cultural homogeneity is to maintain racial homogeneity. Race and culture are not causal, but they are strongly correlated. This is an obvious truth that no one is "allowed" to admit, but everyone understands deep down. Culture and politics are also strongly correlated. Thus, race and politics are strongly correlated. Leftists know this, which is why they want racial diversity. They know that demographics dictate the cultural and political destiny of the nation, and what's worse, they've manipulated their opponents into a situation where we can't even state that obvious truth. I refused to kowtow to their political correctness. I have no qualms about speaking of these correlations, and since I want to conserve the cultural and political character of the United States, obviously I also by default must promote conserving the ethnic character of the United States. Really, every conservative should be an ethnic nationalist or at least in ethnic majoritarian for this reason alone. I also am not convinced that there is not a genetic component in the development of culture. Good cultures don't just fall from the sky and the lucky races get the good ones.
    1
  11. Have fun trying to implement libertarianism to black ghettos. Should work fantastically. Libertarianism doesn't work except under very specific conditions. Styx is in denial of those specific conditions because then he'd have to agree with people like me, who he has always gaslighted and mocked.
    1