Why aren't you an individualist, Sup Forums? If you want to maintain your ability to think rationally...

Why aren't you an individualist, Sup Forums? If you want to maintain your ability to think rationally, you should reject nationalism and other forms of group identity. Once you identify with a group, you make yourself susceptible to group think.

I am because I'm an adult.

Because one day, a mob will come for you, and you will have wished you picked a side.

Good luck being the white peaceful individualist in Ferguson.

I don't live in Ferguson.

Every man has a natural desire to join a group of some kind and will inevitably belong to one no matter how niche it may be, you're a fucking idiot if you think you won't be able to stay individual inside a group.
The very fact you exist, your skin color, your country, your views or whatever else means you are in some sort of group and identity. Oh boy, better just stop existing then. Don't kill yourself though, then you'll just be in the same group as the dead.
When people have no identity or have a divided and confused identity as in the case of being a product of racemixing they are inevitably psychologically fractured.
Develop your own fucking moral compass, and your own conscience one way or the other and don't be double-minded and maybe you'll get somewhere.

Someone post the
>HOPPE INCARNATE
Image

>Just be a special snowflake

Scattered individuals are weak when up against unified beliefs. The West is weak because individualism is out of control.

When one discusses politics, one might come across the idea of Individualism. Individualism comes in many forms, such as liberalism, libertarianism, anarchism and capitalism, but at its core maintains the same ideal; that the Individual has various needs which come before the needs of the collective, such as a state or a tribe. What constitutes those needs and how the Individuals rights are protected, change depending on the specific ideology, but they all view society as a collective of individuals. But what exactly is an Individual?
The question seems like it shouldn't be a difficult one. The Individual is simply a person, with their own identity, their own personality, their own quirks and their own abilities. And according to the Individualist philosophy, each Individual has the right to make their own decisions about who they are and what they need and desire. But do all people truly make their own decisions? One would not regard a child as a political individual entity, capable of making their own decisions. This is evident by child labor laws and laws regarding the age of consent. We regard any parent who would leave their young children alone without supervision for an extended period of time as extremely irresponsible and in many countries child neglect is a criminal offense. Even the most fanatic Individualist must concede that people before a certain age are simply not developed enough, both physically and mentally, to be regarded as Individuals and that the parents or other caretakers of such young children have a responsibility to these developing human beings.

However, this undeniable reality of parental responsibility also means that these caretakers of developing human beings have the unique position of shaping and molding people who will eventually become so-called Individuals within society. Meaning that all Individuals, who are seen as separate beings, who are defined as people with complete self ownership, are at the mercy of other people during their most crucial period of development. Anyone who has ever been to a psychiatrists office will know that childhood plays an instrumental role in the type of person one becomes later in life.
It is therefore impossible for a person to be a complete "Individual". Each person is born, raised by parents, molded into a certain shape and, usually, goes on to create more people whom they then, usually, have a hand in shaping and molding. Instead of seeing people within society as separate "Individuals", it would be much more accurate to describe us as links within a chain. Each link in the chain is held by a previous link and holds onto a following link. This is a perfect analogy for us as humans, as we are defined by our past caretakers and define our future offspring as caretakers. The collective can then be seen as the chain itself, defined by the links which it is made of and seen in its entirety from outside. The Individualist is simply the link looking around, seeing more links and either unable or unwilling to identify the chains they make up.

Individualism is irrational.

I am an individualist. I would just prefer to be an individual amongst only white people.

Because there is strength in unity

Individualists will be the first to die in the coming war between globalists and nationalists.

Individualism is not being some kind of lone wolf. An individualist can certainly join groups and abide by the covenants of those groups. The opposite of individualism would be collectivism, which involves coercing people to be a member of a group or groups.

That said, I prefer the term "voluntarist" (or "voluntaryist" if you like unnecessary extra syllables). I think it's harder to misconstrue what it means: All association should be voluntary.

> Once you identify with a group, you make yourself susceptible to group think.
Someone that understands it will not enter 'group think' mode, though. You can identify with a group while still being an individualist. It's only after you've shed your ability for individual thought, as it is the case for most Leftwingers who pretty much fell prey for mindless collectivism due to their need to profile themselves as "socially just" within their social group.

Because the beauty of the Black Melanated Queen must not perish from the earth. As a Black man I would never race mix with aliens.

...

Individualism isn't rational. So I stopped being one.

That's disgusting. You and the sheboons need to be purged.

I don't care what the wh*te devil thinks. Just stay away from our QUEENs.

He said he would do that you fucking moron, please end your pathetic existence. reducing your race would do us all a favor.

Whatever crackkka. Fuck off.

ASIA FOR THE ASIANS, AFRICA FOR THE AFRICANS, WHITE COUNTRIES FOR EVERYBODY!

Everybody says there is this RACE problem. Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries.

The Netherlands and Belgium are just as crowded as Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.

Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.

What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?

How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?

And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this?

But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.

Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.

Holy fuck niggers are so ugly