/mlpol/ - My Little Politics

>>202341
ikr, It's almost like they don't have any fucking influence on people.

That said, does anyone knows why the fuck is that guy shilling for AOC?!

>>202382
Dickie Spencer is controlled op who pretends to be the leader of the "alt-right" but spends more time making us look bad. Keep in mind he wants socialism "but for white people."

>>202402
This!

>>202402
I just find ironic how this guy grounded most of the "far-right", and now he's shilling for AOC, and how he talks a lot about POWER.
Makes Cozy shilling both sides for power seem like a parody of him.

>>202402
>>202407
What do you think is his bet with AOC? Why does his gf keeps talking about "nuance" and shit?.

I know it might piss you talking about this because it's a non-issue what a guy with NO INFLUENCE WHATSOEVER in OUR movement is up to, but it's not like this board it's so fucking active that it dosen't have time for this.

>>202428
>What do you think is his bet with AOC?
Spencer changed his tune, he is not longer one of us.
Whatever his bet is, for us is almost irrelevant.

>>202429
I know am fagging a lot with "this guy's still influential and shiet", but i just believe that he can compromise our movement even further.

>>202429
I just find weird his change of tone without fucking explanation, just started talking about the nature of power, Trump's not the solution (agreed), high and low vs. The middle, and then all of the sudden started shilling for AOC this time with no explanation.

There's a video where Nick called him out, and he didn't even responded, a guy just waged in and argued with Nick 'till the rest of the stream, then there's a video pointing out how odd is all of this, and her gf show's up in the comments section talking about nuance and shiet, just to delete most of her comments a day later.

>>202449
>I just find weird his change of tone without fucking explanation
Usually the explanation might be simpler, like somebody making a better offer ($$$$$$$$$) or blackmail.
Also, he had a record of controversial opinions which most of the guys let go for the sake of the movement.

>>202402
>Keep in mind he wants socialism "but for white people."
This looks bad but there is a lot more about it.
I mean, it is a lot more complicated to understand because of NPC programming, which leads to believe that free market is the solution to everything, but at this stage is a trap to enslave the people.
I found a video from Kai Murros that explains in detail how the things are right now and why White revolution is a must.

America, Middle Class and the End of Growth
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9RrIMw5cuM

>>202465
That's exacly what i think.
>>202480
Good one.

>>202323
>spencer
I see him as the glownigger he truly is, everytime they open their mouths using their anti-Trump/White pilpul bullshit the likes of saul alinsky, karl marx, and trotsky come to life and babble their typical commie bullshit.
The reason why /pol/lacks slowly became anti-Trump is only because of (((their))) fruitless hard work, schizophrenic determination, and most of all; their elaborate global corporate network and carefully made social infrastructure that took decades to build carrying them all the way through.

>>202912
Alt-Hype went on a long rant about why he doesn't like Spencer-style activism. It's worth checking out.
https://youtu.be/u1jsWrQu7CQ?t=4151

>>202942
I agree completely with the "retard rallies" being a really dumb idea, and to keep on doing them even after charlottesville being one of the dumbest ideas ever.
>>202912
I though he turned into some kind of third positionist at first when he started the 'nature of power' thing, but damn, who the fuck is this larp?

>>203151
Not taking sides but I assume that the tweet means "Better to starve than to survive on crap food."
Could be wrong though

>>202480
>NPC programming
Look, Kai Murros is wise in many subjects, and I agree with him in his attack of the concept of the "middle class," but he is no expert on economics.

For example, he believes that growth can only end because there is no more "frontier" and the frontier is the foundation of American thought. His view on growth is wrong. Growth was exponential partly because of new natural resources coming into the equation, but that was only a fraction of it. Growth is a function of natural resources, human resources, and technology. Europe at this time was also growing rapidly at this time because of the latter two; Germany had little growth in the domain of natural resources but excelled due to a booming, literate population which by natural intelligence innovated rapidly. Even now, even as the West is squeezed for resources by an expanding state and various parasitic populations, and is stagnant in white populations, it is still growing economically due to technological innovation. This is why, even discounting the possibility of a space "frontier," the West could grow endlessly so long as the quality of its people could at least remain the same. Technology is not about using new resources (except when it demands elements not already used), but about using those already present more efficiently.

>middle class this, middle class that
"Middle class" is an arbitrary stratum propagandized by politicians to appeal to the greatest number of people. Obviously saying "upper class" is right out and saying "working class" alienates those who are already moderately comfortable, as they fear what they do have will be taken away. By saying "middle class" you appeal to everyone: working class as it implies reaching the middle class will be easier for them, middle class as they can remain comfortably where they are, and upper class (to a lesser extent) as it implies at least nominally pro-business programs that would not harm them. People like to equal themselves to the middle class at least because it is taking refuge in the average.

Also, I'm saddened to hear that he's eaten up the post-enlightenment rhetoric that if you're working class your interests are against the rich. This is demonstrably false. So long as the rich do not take others' money (corporate welfare) they are not economically harming anyone. The rich are a valuable class to everyone because they build the factories, stores, and centers where people work, thus raising the overall wealth of society. By working for the rich even the poor are better off, as they voluntarily trade their labor for money which they can spend or save as they wish. People think the rich are "wasteful" because they generally have more luxury goods, but they also give a larger proportion of their money to charity and thereby benefit society even outside the market. What is bad is when a (((certain tribe))) becomes a disproportionate number of the rich and can coordinate their money to subvert society.

>revolution
A revolution always changes out an old elite for a new one. Always. Rather than saying "hang all the rich people" you should hang the "thieves" and allow the producers to become a new non-coercive elite.

Also, he posits that it is because of "big corporations" that "big government" and corruption results. It's a chicken and egg problem. If you have a coercive body, especially one that has a monopoly on power (the government) then individuals will scheme to use this to their advantage. In old monarchies this was often certain nobles; in democracies it is special interest groups. In any setting the rich will be a disproportionate source of corruption because they have the resources to trade wealth (which they have) for political power. Obviously Kai Murros is not an anarchist and so he doesn't want to abolish the State, which is the only way besides "hang the rich" that you can get rid of corruption. You cannot get rid of competition, which he correctly identifies as the goal of companies, if you cannot use force against them.

I agree that economics is not everything and "blood and soil" is imperative for civilization. It is important that America return to its ethnic foundation and root itself as a people as the Europeans did (ironically, Dixie did try something like this). I also agree that America must be split into ever smaller subdivisions in order to have ethnic harmony and the Empire must end. I can disagree only where he says that economic freedom effectively does not matter. It very much does matter. Although it is not crucial to the survival of a people, as the Poles and Russians can attest (both of whom I admire), it is because of economic freedom that you can have growth. Ceteris paribus, if my people are secure in a homeland I would rather they have more wealth than if they do not. The key is to figure out how to not let them become soft.

Kai Murros falls into the faulty economic thinking of Adolf Hitler, who believed that Germany was doomed to misery if it did not open up a frontier in the East. Hitler disparaged "internal improvements," thinking they were finite, but they are finite only in regards to present technology.

>>202912
>>203199
Spencer might as well also have said "Better to wear a Red Army helmet than subsist on beer in Munich," or "Better to wear a Red Army helmet than subsist on a diet of pasta in Turin." It's an irrational wish for hardship rather than enjoying any facet that your culture did produce.

>>203151
>I though he turned into some kind of third positionist at first when he started the 'nature of power' thing
he simply did a similar strategy like peterstein, by pretending to be someone who is palatable to the unknowing masses and psychologically scarred youth, what peterstein and spencer have in common is their target audience, a very particular type of demographic group; Young White Men. and then there's the (((friends))) they keep in their company and their (((special connections))).

>>203221
>Look, Kai Murros is wise in many subjects, and I agree with him in his attack of the concept of the "middle class," but he is no expert on economics.
Perhaps. However I believe he stresses the concept of "Class" because he employs it as the key component in the revolution.
In other words, he wants to apply Maoist methods and Cambodia Khmer Rouge's killing style against all enemies, non stop until victory is achieved. Which are well tested methods to reset societies.
Consider it a remedy against of millions of SJW, non agreeable NPCs, and armed formations serving ZOG.

>>203259
>Cambodia Khmer Rouge's killing style against all enemies
And by the way, this was said by him in a speech, not me.

>>203199
It's not so much about the tweet, but about stuff like the AOC endorsement.

>>203259
I agree with this, though I believe any action must be service before violence can be acted upon. Gain ground and reputation then radicalize as people discover there is no other choice.

Also, I'm more of a "Leninist" or "Vanguardist" in the Hoppe sense. For a private society to get started all (((those))) who used state power to their advantage must be eradicated.

>>203313
>all (((those))) who used state power to their advantage must be eradicated
And don't forget those who support the System satanic policies just because it benefits them, their crimes cannot be forgotten and they must be included in the purge to obtain a healthy reboot.

>>203221
>revolution
>A revolution always changes out an old elite for a new one.
>It's a chicken and egg problem.
>I agree that economics is not everything and "blood and soil" is imperative for civilization.
We agree in many points.
Kai Murros is centered in the ethnic ethos and to regain it, he says blood must be spilled through White Revolution.

>Kai Murros falls into the faulty economic thinking of Adolf Hitler, who believed that Germany was doomed to misery if it did not open up a frontier in the East. Hitler disparaged "internal improvements," thinking they were finite, but they are finite only in regards to present technology.
Perhaps, but I am inclined to agree with Murros about the competition for resources, we need them and the must be secured to sustain and expand our civilization.
About Hitler; the opening of the Eastern front was a must from the point of view of resources, without the fuel from the refineries in Romania, Germany would have been paralyzed. It was a race with the USSR about who would taken them first, and Germany did it first.

I believe that Kai Murros is "The One" to mentor the Global White Awakening and his thoughts must be embraced as the recipe for our survival.
I just found a THOT's video made yesterday pushing back SJWs and liberals, and its best and on topic part comes at the time index 7:05; you will be surprised, the message is getting through.
Video: I'm So Bored of Your Victim Mentality
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GoW4dTAin-Q

>>203980
"At the end of the day, it is we who survive."

>>203221
>Adolf Hitler, who believed that Germany was doomed to misery if it did not open up a frontier in the East
And here another take of Hitler attacking USSR.
It is the idea that was a preemptive as the soviets were amassing hardware and soldiers with the aim to conquer Europe.
Sauce: https://demstuermer.wordpress.com/2019/02/06/exposing-stalins-plan-to-conquer-europe/

>>203980
>>204054
I am not doubting the necessity of that campaign (though without Finnish and Turkish support it could not be won), I am referring to his own words in Mein Kampf where he talks at length about the necessity of Germany to seize new land and make a land empire while the British take a sea empire. His logic was Malthusian and predicted that without more land Germany would face famine and strife, as "internal colonization" and "improvements" had a limit. He was right in a sense but did not take into account new technology that has improved living standards and total wealth, even for Germans in a country that has been robbed of territory and otherwise weakened.

People like Hitler and Murros are quite cogent and effective in matters of race and activism, but tend to fall short in economics as they disparage the idea of voluntary association. That is why I'm a libertarian in that sense and I created a thread a while back to try to reconcile the two.

Back to the Spencer topic.
>Richard Spencer Bolshevik Agent
>Ladies and gentlemen, welcome back to another video, today I want to talk about the struggle for Europe, how different dialectics are seeking to control Europe’s economy, culture and well being. I also want to talk about how various groups, like Antifa, the alt right and the yellow vests all play an integral role in the dialectic.
>Stalin and the Soviets were the first people to recognize Israel as a nation after world war 2, every single leader Israel has ever had, has been a Jew from the former Soviet union, with David Ben Gurion as its first prime minister who was a proud Bolshevik. PsyOps like Q-anon, Wikileaks and the alt-right media networks have been designed to benefit Israel and Russia. As Yuri Bezmenov would say, people have been demoralized to the point where they now look to their enemies as its savior.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oA22aZix83o

>>204591
You see, there's that shitty news channel, ADN40, which is almost Mexican CNN, but something weird happened like a month ago.
A show there called "El pulso de la fé", which mostly shits on Trump's racism and shiet just like CNN does. However, a debate took place there, and a guy who got like a third position on it said something like this:
"If you look at it, Trump's wall, his anti-immigration/white power rhetoric/spirit; isn't any different from Israel's. And am going to say this know; i am semite, just in case some people want to call me anti-semite when bringing this up.
There's this guy Soros a semite who hates Trump, who finances those migrant caravans, anti-trump press and so many other stuff, and there's proof about it, Soros it's very open about it. And there's this other guy, (can't fucking remember his name) who is also a semite, who is behind Trump's resourses, who said at some point; 'The biggest allies of Israel, are the Christian Zionists', and this two guys are clashing on the US."