Hey Pol, I'm a classic Liberal/libertarian and I'm starting to feel sad about the death of my content (Europe) and that immigration (that's not from places like America, Canada, Japan etc.) is more trouble than it's worth.
Are there any other liberals who are starting to change their minds and feel somewhat guilty and scared for agreeing with a some points put forward by far right people?
You should really only feel guilty if you feel a specific way about one single point.
Should the needs of your people and your country always come first before the needs of anyone outside it?
If you answer Yes, the other points are trivial
If you answer No, then yes, you should be ashamed.
If you are still a liberal or conservative you are not on our side. Fascism is the only way us nationalists can take our countries back. Fuck civic nationalism.
BLOOD AND SOIL!
How old are you OP?
I was a hyperliberal when I was 16, gradually changed to the right on my own before I even browsered Sup Forums as the expectations of the future we were baited with did not seem to be fulfilled with our ethnically fragmented societies by now. Also no stop is in sight.
If you dont wish harm on others, entertain the idea of soft resistance. What does it mean to be an englander(welsh, irish, or scot) how much of it lies in the blood and if you can with that simple partner restriction make a part of old europe survive in your children for the next century.
That+some kind of urban neotribalism might be a way. If indigenous britons would stick together like your pakis do the bounds of a shared heritage would be more meaningful again.
>burger
Kindly fuck off.
I can't force myself to hate people.
>classic Liberal/libertarian
i dont know why people act like this is a uniquely dignified position to profess to as opposed to the progressive/conservative paradigm, it basically just translates to "complacent". i literally couldnt imagine taking a critical eye to our society and the way things are going and come out of it wanting to kick my feet up and label myself a liberal, or are you just a masochist?
You're worse than the left at this point.
Although I think it's in some way noble to resist in a peaceful manner, sometimes that doesn't cut it anymore, do you think that parts of our great cities, Berlin, Köln etc, that have been violently taken from us by Turkish and Arab gangs, will be returned peacefully?
High IQ gook colonists are much more dangerous than retarded brown welfare helots.
>the people who neither oppose nor endorse you are worse than the people who directly oppose you
I don't understand this mentality.
I'm 20. The whole ethno stuff seems so ugly and none egalitarian though, I hate the idea of otherising people based on their appearance, it's more the ideas that they bring and the refusal to integrate. I don't want democracy and freedom to die by it's own sword like it's currently doing in Turkey.
I'm worse than regressive leftists how? By admitting there is a problem and am trying to engage with different perspectives to find a solution as opposed to shutting down discussion and calling you racists. You people really don't do yourself any favours in the PR department.
They don't have a problem hating you.
Köln isnt really taken. Some parts are dominated by other groups but not taken as I dont fear any places here. If you meddle in shit, or have a business, then I could imagine you might get some trouble in certain parts of town here tho.
Ruhrpott and Berlin have some places tho..
I mean.. what is getting taken in the first place?
Our Taxmoney by extortion and crime, our safety in some places and the feeling of familiartiy in an area. Safe for the first this is all tied to demography so learning to uphold a constructive identity and form communities that learn to cuck this Nannystate out of money or avoid its grasp in other ways seems a better way then appealing to fashy strongmen (frpom where exactly?) to protect you from the brownies or to kill them.
We might have to become the turks of tommorow and these dont take much shit either if you threaten them.
I'd say only this much: If our societies were homogenous (at least culturally) and actually most people valued liberty and freedom then I'd be a Libertarian.
But as things stand now we have a large part of our population scheming and working towards replacing and exterminating us all.
You can't secure the future existence of our civilisation with Libertarianism, these people use violence (currently only against those publicly opposing them) and soon will use violence against all whites.
You can't hope to survive this using only Democratic methods.
Same in Vienna, there are parts of the city that are 100% in the hands of Africans.
No white dares going there, except drug addicts.
Our elite wants to exterminate us, up until recently they only used replacement methods but it'll get MUCH WORSE, that much is sure.
Because they wont suddenly say, well it didn't work out, let's stop. They'll use worse methods the more we all push back.
On what basis can egalitarianism be achieved though and to what level? There is not much to be said against meritocratic acess for all to jobs and oppurturnities, the right to build some capital of your own and an acknowledgement of your fundamental value before the law that does not discriminate.
But what is when the people subjected to this equality find ways to go around it? Is the family that gives greater inheritances to its offspring and supports itself by favourable loans a cell in society threatening egalitarianism?
How about the cult that gathers people drawn in from their common beliefs enforced by streamlined childraising and gives out benefits pooled by the devotees for the devotees as it is with the islamic Eid and christian charitees?
(In more archaic societies the common consumption of a sacrified animal, the deity being the conductor of charity that wouldnt have felt reasonable for the individual ortherwise)
And last but not least, the ethnic tribe, those vague anstract families who derive common features from a common myth and who might take advantage of that connection. Think of all the privilege-quotas and the way the needs of many get highlighted by the state. Tribe and race already won against the egalitarian state by forcing it to acknowledge its importance and base favours on that heritage (such as universities de-whitening their name-patrons for the sake of it. Othering them on the basis of their appearance :^) Other more impactful examples will come to your mind for sure.
All these preferences undermining the egalitarian society stand against the appeal of it and the power of its message to make itself more strong and beneficial then the exclusive groups in direct competition.
But if the liberal british society fails to defend its appeal to the point that more and more concessions get taken in forceful and covert ways by the many peoples there are, do you want to be left out or look for an own group with a vision?
Basically op you're at the point where you've realizes that mass immigration is going to destroy your society and replace it with a worse one. An ethnically fragmented society cannot function, anytime you have a sizeable minority in a country they self segregate and form subcultures .
What's left for you to do is find out (((who))) is behind this great replacement and why they're doing it (I'm a bit unc!ear on the last one myself desu)
Once you get past the memes the alt right are just a bunch of people that are scared their country will die, which is perfectly reasonable. Best of luck to you op
One instance of failure in liberal democracy does not justify it's total abandonment and the adoption of race based fascism though. I agree with the examples of concessions and preferential treatment being offered to certain groups invalidating the model, but that just means that the government is taking the wrong steps and diverging from egalitarianism, not that the model is failing.
One doesn't need to jump from one extreme to another, just reverse positive discrimination and stupid political correctness, abandon the crippling white guilt and start to recentralise policies.
>Is the family that gives greater inheritances to its offspring and supports itself by favourable loans a cell in society threatening egalitarianism?
The only reason people work really hard IS FOR THEIR OFFSPRING. They want to leave them with better opportunities so they'll prosper.
You remove the possibility to do that and you'll end up with a society where no one works hard, as seen in various communist countries.
You maybe know the phrase from the Soviet Union: "You pretend to pay us, we pretend to work"
Also you are going to achieve nothing in the end trying to prevent from certain people achieving power.
I can only tell you about my family/ancestry. We were top 1% in the Monarchy, top 1% under Communism, and now both my brother and me are top 1% again. We've experienced multiple complete wealth resets (last time when my parents moved to the West with nothing but the clothes they wore), sometimes even many members of our family were simply killed.
Sexual selection and upholding of certain values/morals (in our Christian values) will always determine where you'll end up in the hierarchy.
Egalitarianism therefore can never work, all it can do is make it even worse for the average people. Why? Because if you remove all determinants like inheritance from the equation the only determinant left will me genetic superiority achieved through selective breeding over several generations.
You want to live in a society where only genetic superiority matters and nothing else? I don't. I prefer a society where a component of long term planning or luck can allow someone to rise who's been dealt bad carts at the beginning.
>just
But theyll say no. Then threaten you with violence and feel justified. The state itself might already be populated by bureaucrats looking out to shelter their own groups. How will you organise enough young men willing to get hurt as the last form of executing power in the face of this adversity?
The UK is becoming more authoritanian already with all those censorship laws and them trying to take away weapons. maybe you like singapore where they literally whip your ass for misconduct and force ethnic groups to not cluster around neighboorhoods, entertaining secret services to spy them out for segregationist tendencys as it is with their muslims too for example in order to break cohesion.
Even singapor, is divided along cults and interest groups who all believe in singapor though.
>total abandonent
Im not in favour of that, But I believe that if european societies degenerate further into a spineless nutrient solution provided by universal makers on which only tribalist takers thrive then I want to become the latter or better belong to a group that can stand on its and lookout for itself.
Our ethnic allegiances worked in the past and seem to work for non-westeners in the present, it might work in the future too if we manage to reorganise from a minority position out in the future. Or you find something else, its up to you.
amazing larp, saving pasta