How can you unironically support nationalism after two world wars?

How can you unironically support nationalism after two world wars?
Do you want another war?

Germany only wanted his german half, its because france and UK are jew puppets that shit went out of hand.

Prussia > Germany

Globalists are doing just fine trying to start World War 3 with Russia.

Yes.
And nationalism sure worked for USA in defeating the Germans.

>Do you want another war?
Yes

>Do you want another war?
Are you seriously asking this? On Sup Forums?

>implying those wars weren't fomented by international banks who were also funding the internatioal bolshevist movement you support.

These wars were created by jews trying to destroy sovereignty and nationalism. And the same is occurring today. Get it right.

How so, isn't murrica Vlad's bitch now?
For all I know:
Erdogan is Putin's bitch now and when I look at Trump doing the press conference with Erdogan he seems like a bitch as well.
So confused, bruh!

Yes, more than anything.

If deporting all nonwhites will start a war, yes.

War is one of the fundamental parts of man. Without it they'll turn into depraved shells of themeselves.

Yes, third time is the charm and we can finally kill of Germany, would be nice if Russia and France also die.

globalists want a globalized world, where international trade relations make a war unprofitable

...

Nationalism doesn't lead to war. Multiculturalism however does lead to civil war.

Better than being cucked by Fraud Merkel and her cultural enrichment. Tu quoque, Fritz?

The point is that Globalists are just as capable of being violent as nationalists. Don't miss the forest from the trees.

How exactly does supporting globalism help prevent wars? Let me guess, are you one of those simpletons who thinks that the EU is responsible for western Europe being (technically) peaceful at the moment?

Yep, and the same power structures that were involved in starting ww1 and 2 are still in place!!!

...

And if a nation doesn't want to play by global finance's rules, does that mean war?

Nationalism wasnt the reason for the world wars, read a fucking book you horse's ass.

Because the most popular alternative is to create an even bigger, and more powerful state above the national level, which leads directly to massive state violence and murder against it's own people. Usually after some psychopaths get control of said superstate.

Actually, it was for World War 2.

European nationalism is the result of mass invasion by Africans and muslims. I think its you that wants war.

no, it means isolation and sanctions, thus economical stagnations

oh really, because i am pretty sure ww1 started because of a serbian nationalist

If only it was just that...

>A summit of the 20 most powerful nation where nothing is decided or done is an example of Globalism and not fake diplomacy to keep the masses calm

If G20 was truly globalist, they suck ass considering Russia is not contained, China is creating a colonial empire and the EU for half a century has done everything in it's powers to sustain it's self by applying a protectionist trade policy.

gobalization => more trade => less reason to wage war against your trading partners

>World wars were started by nationalism rather than poorly executed foreign policy

Go read a history book nigger

Didn't stop World War 1.

...

80 years ago, we were in a status of total war
40 years ago, we were locked in a cold war, and nuclear anihilation was a very real possibility.
the fact that today, the leaders of the world meet once a year, and are able to speak about their problems, is not to be taken for granted

because back then, the world leaders were nationalist, everybody said "my country first".
Nowadays, the leaders of the world talk to each other and take each others interests into account

Yet that hasn't stopped any wars from happening in the past few decades, Russia did invade Georgia a few years back, USA invaded who knows how many countries by now, France does the same on a smaller scale.

A million hours in paint.

This. World War 1 was a spiral of every single major European party being dragged down into a horrible war due to a complex and nonsensical web of alliances, while World War 2 was caused by the mistreatment of post-war Italy and Germany.

I got nothing for Japan though, they were pretty nationalist.

>How can you unironically support physical autonomy after you got in two fights?
>Do you want another fight?
Simply supporting the existence and prosperity of a country doesn't cause wars, the sabotage of the people through their corrupt governments/bankers/secret societies does.
You can have a country with a very limited government and intelligent, cohesive people that doesn't get involved in wars. Just don't make war pacts with other countries, protect your own interests diplomatically (with defense when necessary), and don't be invasive.
The NAP is not hard to follow unless your government is globalists and your people are stupid/lazy and susceptible to (((social engineering))).

Meanwhile, Europe and America are on the verge of Civil War over migration issues.

But do they take their people's interest in account? Or is it 99% for finance, 1% for the masses? Regardless, its absolutely naïve to believe that Globalism will abolish war when its already setting up the groundwork of a Civil War and a World War.

Yes. Maybe this time good actually wins

those are small scale proxy wars and nothing compared to the world wars.
Sure, they are bad, but its much better than great powers having total wars between each other

>80 years ago, we were in a status of total war
Because half the great powers were in open conflict with the other half of the great powers.

Before WW1 the situation wasn't too disimilar from modern day.

>40 years ago, we were locked in a cold war, and nuclear anihilation was a very real possibility.

And you think that such a situation is not currently undergoing with NATO vs Russia.

> the leaders of the world meet once a year, and are able to speak about their problems, is not to be taken for granted

They have been able to do that for 3-4 centuries, and it hasn't stopped a single war.

In fact it caused some of them, like the NATO intervention in Libya where France put presure on NATO to glass the place.

>those are small scale proxy wars and nothing compared to the world wars.

World wars are by their very nature uncomon, and only happen one every century most of the time, sometimes less sometimes more.

>than great powers having total wars between each other

Which happened how many times?

in the current world order, each country is sovereign and can decide how it choses its leaders.
But in those countries that are democratic, the leaders have to take the interest of the majority into account if they want to get reelected

How did nationalism start wars it does not compute with history?

This is absolutely true - as is the ability of organizations like the EU and UN to help to resolve smaller regional conflicts before they turn into larger global ones. Its the main reason for their existence actually.

Found the original

ww1 started because nationalistic conflicts in the balkan
ww2 started because german nationalism

and yet they happend twice last century

>do you want another war

>And you think that such a situation is not currently undergoing with NATO vs Russia.
yes. nobody today expects to be suddenly nuked by russia.
in the cold war, this was a very real threat and it could have happend anytime, especially during events like the cuba crisis

glad to see that we agree
i hope the globalist position will become more prominent on Sup Forums

How can you unironically support the genocide of the European people? And the main demographic out liner that made the USA.

AT LEAST WAR IS A GENOCIDE ON THEIR TERMS! THEY ARE ALREADY AT WAR WITH SHIT SKINS AND THE LEFT IN THEIR OWN COUNTRIES. THINK THE THIRD TIME WILL BE THE CHARM?

I'LL FIGHT FOR GERMANY!

>Do you want another war?
yes

Your statements are crisp and sharp, but spoken without nuance. Yes, each leader gets to choose how it's leadership arises. But in Globalism, we become accountable to people we've never chosen in the first place, nor have a vested interest in us in the first place. The disenfranchisement and disinterest in natives is why the globalist meme isn't spreading among the masses in the first place.

If Globalism was prominent on a uber free speech platform on pol, it would mean that Globalism meme is unconquerable. But that isn't clearly the case

>ww1 started because nationalistic conflicts in the balkan

No it was caused by the systems of alliance and Austrian incompetence. Most historians agree that had Austria attacked Serbia right after the assassination Russia would have not joined, meaning you can't pin it on nationalism.

>and yet they happend twice last century

And none happened during the 15th century or 16th, one happened during the 17th and twp during the 18th century.

>yes. nobody today expects to be suddenly nuked by russia.
No people do, there is a reason multiple Anti ICBM missile systems are placed in Eastern Europe, and why the US is preparing a long term force to stay there.

Please. Not even normies historians believe this.

>But in Globalism, we become accountable to people we've never chosen in the first place, nor have a vested interest in us in the first place.
but you have the same problems on national level.
If you live in California, you don't get to chose the senator of Texas, yet his decisions still affect you.
That's why it is so important for the leaders to communicate, so they can establish a personal relation and understand the problems of each other

Japan let their imperialist policies in China get in the way of negotiations with the Allies, which led to an embargo and the Japanese attacking Pearl Harbor instead of giving up their Southern policy.
Japan could've given up China infavour of the Soviet Far East and thus secured both land and retained trade with the Allies until '41, but misguided domestic and foreign policy kept them from making an effective deal.

>And none happened during the 15th century or 16th, one happened during the 17th and twp during the 18th century.
nationalism was only invented in 19th century

Yes, because oppressive post-federal bureaucracies that dictate how disparate member states can operate is the perfect solution for reducing the incidence of conflict.
We need to be reducing the scale of sovereignty, not expanding it.

If nations kept to each other, it wouldn't have been a world war, the first steps of globalism in it. Defensive pacts and all you know.
What coulda been a small conflict became a world war, twice, because not being nationalist.

Yet the Napoleonic War, War of 1812 and the 7 Years War, which all can be classified as global total wars happened.

How can you unironically support globalism after years of constant warfare? Don't you oppose war?

The KIKES incited the Serbian to do what he did among other triggers from dirty lying KIKES!

THE PIECES OF SHIT KNOW IT AND RELISH IN IT LIKE A NIGGER. WHY? BECAUSE THEY ARE ANTI WHITE! ESPECIALLY ANTI WHITE MALE!

Rh Negative man will conquer the KIKES and their Pets!

if nations keep to each other and remain self sufficient, they have no reason to care about other nations around them.
So why not invade another nations and take their shit, when you are stronger?

In a globalized world, however, everybody trades with each other, and such agressions are not tolerated

And that's a problem of our system. The US is so diverse and different that it struggles to maintain cohesion. What was once united, is now divided. How do you think Europe will survive when its divided between ethnic Islamists and nationalist natives? Will Globalist forces be able to keep the peace and prevent the nation from falling apart? I was talking to a high level globalist, and he believed that the state would always be able to force cohesion as things drifted further and further apart. I disagreed. Diversity is expensive, and will bankrupt the states as it attempts to keep things coherent.

Nevertheless, how can a Globalist order which represents America ever manage to have common with ground with a nation like China, where one's decision effects the other so thoroughly?

Nationalism ended the wars dumb fuck. Nationalism is all sides. How can you pretend its to blame for that shit.

>Do you want another war?

Only to solve the (((issue))) that wasn't solved the previous twice.

Yes

Yeah, because communism always works.

Oh wait.
Communism Doesn't Work.
Communism Has Never Worked.
Communism Will Never Work.
Communism Doesn't Work.

7 years war was more of a Cabinet War, and not a total war.
Napoleonic war only became so serious because of napoleons autism

I dont think Islamists will ever come into a position of power in Europe.
If they want power, they need to get educated, which will make them drop their islamists believes

>Do you want another war?
its gotta hurt being that stupid

When you're a real national ist your respect peoples nations.

KIKES AND THEIR SHITTY SUB HUMAN PETS DON'T HAVE THE INTEGRITY OR BRAIN POWER TO RECOGNIZE THIS!

They have brown Utopia on the brain because they are sick in the fucking head! A brown Utopia that doesn't exist any where else in the world but their gonna make it happen in EUROPE on the backs of WHITE PEOPLE!

How can any kike think they are to good for an OVEN?

Because Islam only got into power in the Middle East because of education, right?

World wars were caused by imperialism, not nationalism. True nationalism is isolationist by definition. Globalist neocohens have caused more wars in the modern era than anyone else.

Islamists will gain power because they have the monopoly on coercion. In their ghettos, they rule by clans and dictate the fate of others. As the Islamists grow, they will gain a further and further monopoly on coercion, until they deprive Globalists of their monopoly in favor of Sharia.

But you are fundamentally right that if they were capable of getting an education, they would likely drop Islamism.

we got a newfag bois

its a bit more complex than that. and you're retarded if you think the assassination of the archduke is the sole reason for ww1, and not just an excuse to attack serbia..

cant expect of an americunt to grasp history and politics..

This is just gross.

Not really senpai. The war was started by petty European leaders and kept running by bankers trying to protect their financial interests. Not some sci-fi conspiracy theory. The assassination of Francis Ferdinand was basically like 9/11. It just made the people pissed off and willing to fight whoever the government told them to

they are in power because of lack of education.
education is the worst enemy of any theocracy

who cares about ghettos? They produce nothing, they are not relevant for the wellbeeing of european countries.
i simply can't see any way they could get to power

i think as along as a nation is weak, it remains isolationist.
once it becomes strong, it embraces imperialism and tries to opress other countries

and i believe this vicious cycle can only be stoped through global institutions and global trade and communication

this EU faggot is spamming pol with multi pull anti-fascist and anti-trump threads

I bet if you looked who was pushing these leaders you would find a lot more kikes. Its just what they do. Start shit that deserves them an oven! They also ran the news papers causing as much conflict as they could. Just like they do TODAY!

Ah. But look at Israel and Palestine as an example of how things can turn out for Europe. Ghettos can expand, grow, and take more and more valuable territory. Soon, places like Paris and Berlin will be lost to the Ghetto, never to be reclaimed again by Globalism.

Link those threads.

>Do you want another war?
Actually, reconquista would probably be a civil war at first.

I'll support war until the entire planet is white

then I'll support war until the entire population of the planet is of Scandinavian stock

then we're gonna have peace, and in the future we'll meet alien life and invite a bunch of their men to breed us out of existence, and there's nothing you wannabe "whites" called europeans can do about it.

It is our destiny, EARTH YES

huh? israel is an example of europeans colonizing arab land and opressing the local population.
europe is the exact oppsoite. muslim migrants in europe have no historical claim on the land

Global institutions will not do any good as long as they are run by kikes and oligarchs who have a malicious agenda.

>europe is the exact oppsoite. muslim migrants in europe have no historical claim on the land

Yet they take the land and govern themselves by their own rules. As they take more territory into their ghettos, they will undermine Globalist rule until the Globalists themselves are threatened with destruction. If I was a globalist, I would fear Islamism far more than nationalism.

I'd rather lose a war than go extinct without a war. Globalism's only interest is in replacing me and my people with 80 IQ shitskins who will plunder and despoil everything my people worked to build.

Plus, they did diddly dick to actually stop war, they just outsourced it. I don't feel any better about proxy wars with Iran and Russia than I would about direct wars with them.

but they can only do it because it gets still tolerated by us, not because of their own power.
one day, european people will say "its enough", and once the political will is there, changes can be made

how exactly do you go extinct, i dont really get it
who is you, and who are your people?

>one day, european people will say "its enough", and once the political will is there, changes can be made

The question is whether this will be led by Globalists or Nationalists. Better to take care of a problem yourself than let an enemy do it on your behalf.

i certanly hope by globalists.
nationalist parties like AfD or FN have no experience with leadership and it would hurt us a lot if they came in power