Does anyone else think neither fascism nor libertarianism is the answer to the destructive leftism we see today?

Does anyone else think neither fascism nor libertarianism is the answer to the destructive leftism we see today?

Of course, Libertarianism is cucked beyond belief and fascism historically tends to be short lived. The real answer is a socially conservative monarchy.

Oh, a fuckin Canuck! Don't trust this faggots answer.

Anything other than the LEFT is a better solution!

fascism is the only way to fight communism

>implying fascism and libertarianism are even remotely similar...

Burger education for you

the ultra liberal military conservative party is the answer. it worked well in star trek. justin trudeau would be our world leader

Personally I think religion has to be restored somehow

Just look into classical liberalism like the founding fathers based in both science and religion literally the definition of being in the middle

Tribal bs

Get off your acedemic high horses and learn to
Respect others

look up the fourth political theory by alexander dugin

>false binaries
no fucking shit kid, read a book

Traditional Minarcho-Agrarianism
Jefferson knew this.

>ultra liberal military conservative party

not an argument

Christianity is the only way out

Ask Pinochet.

*Catholicism*

I think traditional americanism is the way to go.

Dictator who chooses his replacement. This is the only sustainable way in the future. Everything else is a meme, none of our opinions matter.

If you don't think Fascism/NS is the answer, kill yourself or enjoy the garbage society

He was saying that both ideologies which conservative people gravitate towards on the radical ends are not sufficient to counteract a radical left wing movement.

that gray patch is perfect

This. A massive revival is needed to restore mortality in the western world.

Why doesnt everyone just get along

Yeah we need a new political system

Fascism usually ends with a bunch of insane shit and people getting rek't and libertarianism is a total fucking joke that will never happen

Fascism under crisis, Libertarianism at peace.
This is the one true answer.

Mel Gibson is worth over 500 million dollars

...

>tfw when you will never life the StuG life

i like it. I can imagine the transition between a libertarian society to a fascist one...

But what about the transition from a fascist society to a libertarian one? What's stopping a dictator from creating crises once the initial one is over in order to justify their power?

Libertarianism would be a disaster. Open trade and borders? No human or animal rights? Third world shithole in no time.

The left and right used to balance each other. The left took care of people, animals, environment, kept the biz world in check.

Right now the left ARE fascists. they are corporatists, collectivist and fucking totalitarian.

So no, neither are the answer.

if the left are the fascists, what are the right?

I think it's clear that we're seeing the birth of a new political ideology over the last few years

Neither will fix the West's problems. Fascism is unacceptable to the general public, and it will be a while before the people will be able to seriously consider it. Libertarianism will exacerbate current social ills since there is no way within the ideology to limit degeneracy, The only solution is to strengthen the character of the people is to expose them to hard times, and hopefully they'll remember why degeneracy is considered degeneracy in the first place. The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

no the left are individualists in the most strict sense. all they care about is individual people, whether they are americans or not. The left wants a globe full of atomized individuals because the individual is the easiest to control

An armed society tbqh.

The nature of Jewish hegemony makes Fascism virtually inevitable, which is just how the Jews want it.

>Literally the worst candidate for leadership in general
>Cucks Canada beyond belief
>Wants to remake the EU immigration crisis on American continent
K.

tfw the gubment took all ur gunz when u was just a wee lad

No

>hurrdurr dems r da REAL fascists!!

Boomer faggot detected. Does this sound like the left to you?

so what, we need a private army to go around rounding up the jews, separate from the government? I'm down for this

Yes, we need Catholic Monarchy.

>Fascism under crisis, Libertarianism at peace.

You have my ear... where'd you get this and where can I learn more on its theory

Liberals.

>globalisation is thus nothing more than a globally deployed model of western europe, or, rather, anglo-saxon ethnocentrism, which is the purest manifestation of racist ideology

I'm actually English, I know the feeling.

Not anything...

>Progressivism means first of all defending your nation against the dangers that threaten it, white supermancy. It means the destruction of these Nazis and teh opening of a free, tolerant and inclusive way of life and glory for your nation of PoCs.

Paleoconservatism is the solution

Putin's Russian mentor? Why?

Leftists are diametrically opposed to the very concept of a nation. Try again, retarded lemming.

ding ding ding.

Humanity needs to realize humans are a religious being. We make idols out of other people, or buildings, or institutions.

Even if you're athiest the Christian Bible contains so much knowledge from how to live, how to treat the world, how to deal with betrayal -- it's clear we need to return to religion, to philosophy in general, rather than worshipping politicians.

PS - be Christian, or be Jewish. Muslims are literally Satanic.

The "$" side of this is a completely ridiculous straw man.

t. JIDF

We didn't deserve Pat Buchanan.

Didn't realise we were running low on mortality in the western world.

>or be Jewish. Muslims are literally Satanic.

Nice try, kike. How about neither?

Paleocon is a meme-tier political ideology. Like most forms of reactionism, it calls for a return to a past that never was.

how? Liberal capitalism is the root cause of globalism, the destruction of sovereignty

yes
ethnonationalist mutualism is the only option

The real answer is genocide. We need to exterminate muslims and leftists.

>le go back to the XIXth century you fucking CIS white male argument

It's not about going back to the past, but rather changing into direction not dictated by leftist kikes.

If you're too big brained for either, look up propertarianism

Muslims commit atrocities on christians, then act like victims. They aren't better than jews by any stretch of the imagination.

Jews just happen to be more successful with that bullshit.

Can we switch places? You at least have a fucking ocean between you and the jihadis.

unironic fascists are self-defeating losers

>Muslims commit atrocities on christians, then act like victims.

GEE, I wonder what (((((((((happened in 1948)))))))) to rile them up so hard. And I wonder ((((((((who)))))))) keeps importing them into said Christian nations.

Say no to talmudists.

Return to slavery is the only answer.

>Yes lets stop all the blacks from murdering each other and enforce a rigid family structure on them surely that will prevent their population from exploding beyond all reason

Importing slaves to "do the jobs real American wouldn't do" was the worst thing to ever happen to your country, why would you want to do it again?

There's very little that's actually new or unique about Dugin's hairbrained ideas. "His" theories about naval vs. land powers competing for global hegemony appear in Mein Kampf. "His" recommendations for Russian foreign policy (i.e. the dissolution of NATO, the fracturing of China, and Russian dominance of the Middle East) have been official government policy for decades. He's merely a cult leader who wrote some book that lots of Russian generals happen to read so that's why he got famous.

I've worked with arabs too long to fall for the false dichotomy jews and muslims try to force between them.

There's something about growing cultures from fight over wells and livestock that makes truly abhorrent, evil people.

>fighting

i agree, but its still a good book and worth reading. it sums up the struggle against liberal globalism very well

Segregated capitalist society with a religious foundation and void of secret societies.

By itself taken out of context, no. The need for overbearing state control is a core tenant of leftism, even if it has a nationalistic slant.

Well, strictly speaking, that's the modern left. The left of the 2nd half of the 19th and first half of the 20th century was actually socialist.
What leftypol, SJWs, marxist professors and die-hard bernouts don't get is that while their hated fascism has been permanently corrupted by WW2 and its many narratives, their beloved socialism has been permanently corrupted, not by the cold war, but by liberalism.
They might realize that liberalism corrupts socialism, but they can't get that this is immutable at this point in social life (though they are giving it a good shot, I'll grant them).

The modern paradigm is a trend for increasing hyper individualism socially and increasing global political hedgemony. But the individualism confirms that it will be cosmopolitan capitalists that sit at the top of the distribution and their socialist desires will not be met in any full measure.
For all the claims that it's the right that's "reactionary," it's the left that's reaching for long buried ideological precepts that are no longer relevant.

The way forward is to promote social cohesion first in an appealing manner toward a goal of moderately sized citizen-soldiery at a count level in maximum size. The re-birth of the militarized communal city-state that is self-sufficient for the needs of its people and can maintain its own defense, only working in concert within loose leagues to dispatch larger foes temporarily. Stronger community on the personal level, smaller government at the political level.

How to do that though? No fucking clue.

Of course. We need proper constitutional conservatism. Not cucked like neo cons but also not edgelord like larping neo nazis and unironic fascists

>gathering poeple with similar ideas into categories in academic BS

>Unable to decode basic english
maybe if he wrote it in french you'd have less trouble
>Monarchy
>Nepotism works guys i dont need an argument.

Fucking LEAVE(s)

Nazism.

this

It's very similar to Trump's movement tho. Like, the same overlapping themes.

Nationalists, traditionalists, anti-crime, -terrorism, -degeneracy

I hope the "right" develop these traits
> The left took care of people, animals, environment, kept the biz world in check

It makes sense as production efficiencies increase and can be shrunk down and made more local and personal (the production aspect itself not just that which is produced) the dichotomy of the "working class vs big faceless corp" could start to break down too. If people reject consumerism for producerism in the new paradigm.

People are having Identity issues because they are so far removed from production that they engage in forming consumer-identites. Because consumption is so easy it is unfulfilling, it leads to degeneracy, if you don't follow that people often want something more involved and complex. It is like people who adventure when they are young and then have a desire to start a family, but breaching out beyond family into something more structured socially.

I think people just want society to learn from some of the mistakes of disposition made since the 60's-70's.

>stronger community
>smaller government
>how to do that?
I think the problem is that we need larger government to destroy the forces that break down community and push hyper individualism, but i honestly doubt that fascism would work the second time around because it didn't work the first time. The only thing that i could think of would be to replace the individual with the family unit as the political subject maybe, but i don't know

But user, it becomes antithetical to wish for a large political force to destroy the forces that break down the community. It is having a large government itself that destroys community and pushes hyper individualism.
No, government must meet the needs of its people, and that includes the size of it.

We humans cannot properly conceptualize government past a certain size. Once the state becomes large enough, it becomes conceptually divine. It becomes the god people worship over any others they might hold. Whether this is a socialist state, a liberal state, an authoritarian state or any other kind, it matters not.
The only government that people can properly grasp is relatively local government. Small government.
If those on the left had any sense at all, they would wonder why Norway, of all places, seems to be the only state that appears to do "socialism" in any kind of stable and effective manner. Aside from cultural and ethnic homogeneity, I would argue that size is critical here. The entire country is only 5.2 million at the last census, and the country is quite roomy for that amount. By the middle of the Roman empire, Rome itself had 1-2 million people, and that was without any modern technology. The density of people to city and people to state is much, much, roomier. It's not crowded.

It's the density of people that pushes people toward hyper individualism. Folks living in the wilds or in rural areas form strong communities with purpose. Folks living in dense urban areas become consumed with the self and shun communitas.

Fascism can't work because in order to survive, it has to grow. To constantly find lebenstraum. In the end, it will become too large to sustain its ideological goals if nothing else.

Of course, destruction will bring about smaller government, but that's a bad end. What I seek is a peaceful transition. That's the hard part.

Except that time when it didn't and classical liberalism beat communism.

America was fine pre 1965. The political system doesn't matter so much as the people who constitute it. Almost any government would work with industrious people like the Japanese for example.

Different systems have advantages and disadvantages. In the end only the people matter. Just look at Eastern Europe which is in far better shape socially than the west after decades of communism. This is because they protect their identity and social cohesion while rejecting atheism and materialism. Amazingly Neo liberalism has actually proved to be more destructive to the west than communism ever was. Sounds crazy but it's true.

We are no no longer one nation but a multi ethnic empire and thus are destined for conflict, collapse and dissolution.

There is no magic elixir that can fix it. The future is separation, segregation and decentalization unless we adopt Fascism/Authoritarianism and militarize to crush the left for good.

Civil war is far more likely than a peaceful division of ethnostates since control of the federal government and military will give a monopoly of force for either side.

So when the left achieves a non white majority faction around the 2030's expect a bloody civil war with only one side standing in the end.

I believe the white nationalists will win in the end because niggers are stupid and city dwellers will be worthless in a fight. Most of the geographical and rural US will still be white even then. All the heavily urban areas rely on complex supply chains and will be death traps.

Don't get me wrong though, it will be ugly.

Europe is actually in much better shape than the US because they are still overwhelmingly white, have stronger national identities and traditionalist forms of government to fall back on when the real push back starts. You can already see nationalism rising everywhere and white people haven't even begun to really chimp out yet.

>The future is separation, segregation and decentalization unless we adopt Fascism/Authoritarianism and militarize to crush the left for good.

But user, one can never "crush the left for good" because what the left think they want is not a thing that is external, but internal.
The French flag, of all things, conceptualizes symbolically, the three core needs people have for government: liberte, egalite, fraternite.

Freedom, equality, brotherhood.

In all forms of society people need all three values in their lives. Liberalism serves the need of freedom. Socialism (if it works) serves the need for equality. Fascism serves the need for brotherhood (generally in arms).
But we have need of all three to feel a government is doing its job. If you feel like the state is fulfilling the need for brotherhood in a fascist state, eventually you will chafe at its lack of freedom or balk at the inequity that comes with nepotism and favoritism at the highest ranks. Liberalism is great for feeling free, but it has its obvious deficiencies in brotherhood and equality.

In the end, we need all three. If you crush all commies and liberals, then new commies and liberals under different names simply form in time. Because these are internal needs within all men. Pushing too hard in one direction makes the system overloaded and weak to subversion by the other two. Right now liberalism is failing for just this reason, and its both communism and fascism that are taking root and breaking it down.

It's folly to believe that one can truly kill an ideology out of mankind. That's exactly what the idiot socialists think they can do "once all the old conservatives and republicans die out." They don't realize that the internal need for brotherhood is what makes new conservatives, fascists, authoritarians and traditionalists.

It's internal. Not external.

Fascist social policies, libertarian economics.

Mel transitioned to old age well. He's aged like fine wine