/mlpol/ - My Little Politics

>>137446
NB: not newfag friendly.

siege pill is best pill

I have downloaded a copy of the PDF, perhaps i will even supply it to more viewers in a greater quantity. Thank you for the book suggestion, Anon!

>>137446
Speaking of books, we need to make a book list for /mlpol/ anons.

>>137469
If we are going to make a recommended reading list, I'd definitely put attached file related at the top.
>>137446
I'll put it on my list of books to read.

>>137446
Siege is great for a general history and situation of the Movement here in the United States and has some great remarks about how we have tried and failed to achieve power anywhere through peaceful lawful practices in the last 100 years. Mason has a wealth of knowledge on the subject but I would be wary of any proponent of the book with the current state of the movement. Siege is a big proponent of action against the system as a means to gain control over the status quo that is dominated and tightly controlled by our enemies.

Some time ago, there was a takeover of Atomwaffen (A big promoter of this kind of stuff) and their leadership was changed from what looked like leaders of a decent militant National Socialist organization into a bunch of degenerate Satanists who worship violence. Here is a thread were some of this stuff was brought to light.

https://kiwifarms.is/threads/satanic-vampire-neo-nazis-atomwaffen-division-siegeculture.38120/

Just some caution tbh, nothing against the book and its contents. Even James Mason seems like a cool dude from the Rockwell days.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFEXY9OCfDE

>>137446
I'm generally not one for reading books in .PDF, but since I'm not finding any alternative, I will do my best to get through it.
While we're recommending books, pic related is one of mine. Its a lengthy analysis of hierarchies, social structures, and established disciplines and how hierarchies in general operate in a manner that is self-serving and in opposition to the professed intent and purpose.

>>137481
>Some time ago, there was a takeover of Atomwaffen (A big promoter of this kind of stuff) and their leadership was changed from what looked like leaders of a decent militant National Socialist organization into a bunch of degenerate Satanists who worship violence. Here is a thread were some of this stuff was brought to light.
Yeah, basically the TL;DR (from my knowledge) is that AWD unfortunately got subverted by a Satanist CIAnigger (or MI5nigger) group from the UK called "Order of 9 Angles" after their leader, Brandon, was framed for some retarded nuclear bomb plot when the FBI 'investigated' AWD after the mudslime convert murdered two of their guys. Quite unfortunate, AWD as a group were on the correct pathway - far superior to any of these faggy alt-right groups.
Some ex-AWD members have started a podcast on www.fashcast.org - seems pretty decent but only one episode out so far.
Either way, the organization style of decentralized cells seems to be the most sensible way to go about things.

Owo a reading thread? I remember saving a mega of books from pol a while ago

>>137565
There are a whole bunch of books on /ub/.

SIEGE is excellent, but very often misunderstood by even those who read it. VIOLENT conflict with the system is inevitable, the question is whether you strike the system before it strikes you. I think the book falls short in explicitly explaining how we are in a multi generational struggle, despite laying the groundwork for that understanding for readers to build on.

Does anyone have updates on what Mason and Vincent are up to? siegeculture.com was taken down right after they started picking up momentum. I know there was another publishing run of siege in the works, a new publication from Mason "The Theocrat," and other publications on the way behind them. It would be good to know what's going on and if there is a way of helping out.

As far as other related publications are related, the iron march books are very good, and I highly recommend them to readers both familiar and new to natsoc and fascism.

>>137446
So is it illegal for me to download this evil propaganda? I mean Americans can literally buy military books on how to make explosives and shit so It's probably a different story in burgerland.

>>137582
I don't know the laws in Aussieland but regardless you should use at least a VPN to download and store it on a secret hard drive.

>>137530
>>137481
And people ask me why, if I were to make a right-wing activist group, it must be explicitly Christian. What's sad is that there are some anons on this board who would fall for this if they didn't know better.

>>137587
Sorry I can't, just looked it up and it's banned material so I won't.
As a fellow alt-right member I fully believe we should respect the laws of our countries and never step outside their boundaries.
Friendly reminder fellow white-supremacist Anons, dissent against the state is illegal so please don't do it thanks, okay.

>>137596
also, join my discord group it's super cool

>>137596
Good thing we never ever speak against the State or actually read the edgy books we pass around!

>>137602
Yeah, it's all ironic played straight lmao, especially when talking about attacking named active agents-
Why don't you come and join our discord anon? We're a super friendly bunch, always telling eachother about our personal lives, come on fellow /mlpol/star lmao.

>>137646
…
Ye…
You know…
One thing I shou–
Excuse me for one second.

>>137582
Just use Tor and have an encrypted drive if you're worried.
>>137588
>it must be explicitly Christian.
You should read the Vedas and look into Dharma, then you can found a group with a faith based on actual Aryan religion instead of foreign semite religion.

>>137646

how many underage anime girls are in your uncompromised discord server, sounds like a fun time.

>>137582
Meh, I just downloaded the thing. I have a feeling that I've been on a list for a long time, anyways. After all, we are on a natsoc pony board - we are essentially going full circle on Mason's ideology. Now that values such as honesty and integrity are considered gay and passe, only the crazies like Manson hold them close to their heart.

We are the sane men in an insane world, and everyone around us thinks we're crazy. Not even /pol/ will have us, and they are a cesspit nigh devoid of coherent thought 90% of the time.

>>137683

Only the madmen in an insane world are trule sane. btw i would support a pagan Natsoc militia over a christian one.

>>137684
But... Why? What benefits does paganism bring?

>>137684
>Pagan Natsoc
Kind of like how Hitler cozied up to Muslims in his day? Although, I do have to admit that during the times of Rockwell, Muslims were perhaps the only ears in the black community that could be reached with any concept of fascism or nationalism.

It didn't take root, of course, as you can see today, but the very fact that he could stand in the same room without being murdered is a testament to his character, and their willingness to listen.

Christianity has been dead for a long time now. If there ever is a return and a rapture, He will not be recognized...and I guarantee he's going to bring down the temples, churches, and synagogues of today in a blind rage.

>>137685

I am affiliated with the leader of the cult of Epona. He is a fascist and very literate on these topics. he explained to me that pagan religion is preferable to abrahamic reglions (which I am willing to believe if you consider where these religions are all rooted). If you like to have further explainations on the topic, I will forward the question to him if you wish.

>>137687
Do that. I too am interested in the Cult of Epona.

>Imagine Gamergate being tied to Natsoc ideologies with the Cult of Epona.
>"Video games make RACISTS! BAN EPONA!"

>>137692

I send him a note with a link to this thread. If he responds it should be within the next 8-16 hours.

>>137566
Nice they saved it then. I always wondered what happened to the book threads from when this board was just created

>>137685
>But… Why? What benefits does paganism bring?
The ways of the old Gods are the true European spirituality. The christian god is the jewish god which is foreign semitic cancer. Praying to your enemies' god is lunacy. Read the Old Testament (jewish Tanakh) and new testament (also written by racial jews, 'jews of chrestus' as Tacitus called them).

>>137705
Describe paganism though. What are the end goals? As someone raised in Christianity, I can tell you about the main motifs of self-sacrifice and self-discipline. I can also tell you that in most cases, the good man goes to the cross.

What message does paganism offer?

>>137710
>What message does paganism offer?
Ethnocentric religion based upon living an honorable life in tune with nature. Essentially, it's almost the precise opposite to (((christianity))).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAPc6qY_NsE

>>137965
>Ethnocentric religion based upon living an honorable life (((in tune with nature))).

Truth is universal, anon, and the same goes for ethno-nationalism. Ideally, every culture would be ethno-nationalist and would keep to itself. They would remain different but would universally agree on this mode of non-aggression. Such is the case with Christianity.

Regardless of the nature of one's religion, one should wish for it to be practiced by as many people as possible, not necessarily bound by ethnicity. For if the universe is created (and that is a fact, for it could not come from nothing), then it is a moral imperative to pay homage to whatever created it. Since the universe encompasses all mortal beings, then everyone ought to worship the same being or beings. Paganism does not address this, as tribes around the world worship different, often contradictory, deities and have distinct moral codes. If I am wrong, correct me on this.

As for "honor," you are describing such concepts as loyalty, kindness, respect toward others, and not shirking duty, yes? If so, then you should know that these are things that Christianity not only espouses but outwardly displays in its greatest figures.

You should consider nature a beautiful thing, yes, but something always trying to kill us. It is the necessity of humanity to subjugate and tame nature in order to foster the greater good of our existence. Excessive adoration of nature has always been a bohemian ideal, from 19th century poets to 20th century drugged-up hippies to 21st century anarcho-primitivists. The reason why we gave up a hunter-gatherer society "in tune with nature" is because it is plainly inferior. Modern environmentalism is a Jewish tool to monitor and restrict us.

>>137976
> They would remain different but would universally agree on this mode of non-aggression. Such is the case with Christianity.
You're in denial of the most basic human behavior, let alone the behavior of almost all animals on worth. Life is combat and struggle, not passivity and spinelessness. This is as delusional as leftists who believe that multiculturalism will eventually lead to functional societies.
>Regardless of the nature of one's religion, one should wish for it to be practiced by as many people as possible, not necessarily bound by ethnicity.
No.
>For if the universe is created (and that is a fact, for it could not come from nothing), then it is a moral imperative to pay homage to whatever created it.
>Since the universe encompasses all mortal beings, then everyone ought to worship the same being or beings.
There are huge contradictions between your universalist approach to religion and your preaching of nationalism. How do you reconcile this dissonance?
>Paganism does not address this, as tribes around the world worship different, often contradictory, deities and have distinct moral codes. If I am wrong, correct me on this.
Why should people across the planet should be bound by one specific interpretation of a higher power, especially one conceptualized by the most putrid and wretched race of "humans" on the entire planet? Peoples have a history and culture unique only to themselves; why should their culture and history be eradicated or usurped by foreign dogma?
All religious or spiritual people across the planet are praising, through their own lens, a higher power or creator.
Universalism is quintessentially jewish. Before christ, jews were already preaching global dominance and the eradication of conquered nations religious faiths and histories. They were already talking about creating a global government centered in Israel, led by the descendant of David.
People argue that this is a merely a religious concept and doesn't refer to an actually one world government, but how can a global covenant exist without religious leaders, gatekeepers, so on and so forth. An all encompassing, globalized religion cannot exist without a single governing body to rule over it.
>As for "honor," you are describing such concepts as loyalty, kindness, respect toward others, and not shirking duty, yes? If so, then you should know that these are things that Christianity not only espouses but outwardly displays in its greatest figures.
Not exactly, as I said, pagan morality is not christian slave morality. Watch the Varg video, he explains it well.
>>137965
>It is the necessity of humanity to subjugate and tame nature in order to foster the greater good of our existence.
This disdain for nature is extremely jewish.
> The reason why we gave up a hunter-gatherer society "in tune with nature" is because it is plainly inferior.
Look around at the hellish mess of the modern world and tell me that this modern life of debt slavery, suicide and poison is more wholesome than a self sustaining community living in tune with nature.
>Modern environmentalism is a Jewish tool to monitor and restrict us.
This is pure conjecture. Your (((christian))) views on nature sound like they've been ripped straight out of the Frankfurt School and the Pharisees themselves. Pretty cancerous.

>>137986
>almost all animals on worth
Smh spell check.
Earth*

>>137986
Yep, you definitely lean toward anarcho-primitivism.

Certain features are common across humanity, such the favoring of one's own family and kin over others (which ethno-nationalism is an extension of). Universal truths absolutely exist; suggest otherwise to a hard scientist and he would laugh you off. The fundamental laws of the universe are proof of this, but then again such scientific understanding is unlikely to valued or achieved in a pagan tribal society.

How is relativism not Jewish, when it is the basis of leftist ideology, postmodernism, and the Frankfurt school? You are throwing buzzwords around without understanding what they mean.

One of these days I'll thoroughly research pagan theology, but it's absurd to suggest that I have time to watch a 6 hour video. However, I can elucidate regarding common complaints regarding Christian morality. Christianity is often called "weak" for espousing "turning the other cheek," loving one's enemies, and subjugating one's own will to God. In reality one is the stronger for exercising self-discipline and refraining from violence where it would cause more harm. People deserve forgiveness and a chance toward redemption, as we all have our constant failings, and they should be condemned only when they are incapable of repentance (as it is with the Jews). Even the greatest are nothing compared to the One who made us and has a plan for us; we reach our highest potential when applying ourselves to this plan, no matter how difficult or great the sacrifice.

>Look around at the hellish mess of the modern world and tell me that this modern life of debt slavery, suicide and poison is more wholesome than a self sustaining community living in tune with nature
Yes.
Self-actualization, knowledge, and comfort are things worth having. Art, peaceful trade, and technology are products of the white race and are among those things that make us truly special. (((Parasites))) did not build this but seek to corrupt it. I would rather live in the modern world and fight the vermin rather than dance around a tree in the forest. True heroes rise to the fight, they don't escape it.

>Pure conjecture
Sure, that's why radical environmentalists support such things as high taxes, tracking how much carbon each individual uses, (((pan-national agencies))) to control industry, and population control.

I do wish you'd stop posting, and not because I'm getting tired of debate. You're just baiting and trying to split the board up at this point.

>>138000

>How is relativism not Jewish, when it is the basis of leftist ideology, postmodernism, and the Frankfurt school? You are throwing buzzwords around without understanding what they mean.

I consider myself at least in part a moral relativist, scored 2 out of 3 fascists at an online test one of my online associates botherd me to take today. I also find myself leaning towards paganism and reject judaism. I do not believe you can change human nature, but that you have to deal with it. Lastly I want to say that I don't know who the Flagless Pagan is you are talking to, (at least not that i know of.)

>>137976
>>138000
What you mistake cultural relativity for truth relativity along with a vague understanding of Post Modernism, the Frankfurt school, and others. You seem to though as paint all relativity as inherently "Jewish", yet fail to understand how subjectivity and relativity has been philosophised in the West by those like Kant or even others that take a soft position on truth like Hegel. You paint the sciences as absolute or at least where there are certain truths, yet disregard consensus, the nature of objectivity in science, and how even "universal" metaphysics are defined as postulates instead of universal. Ironic as Christianity is idealistic, and unconcerned with worldly matters in the end. The problem with universality is wholesale another topic. One that I rather save for another time. Nonetheless, relativity does not deserve to beaten around as a rhetorical slant. Scientifically, moral and ethnic relativism is sometimes a distinct feature of evolutionary biology. Subjects that seem no way controversial. Simply put, I can describe the character of a people like "Germans are hard workers" or "The French are romantic", and that's relative to them. Even biological going by that memes are genetic expressions.
The characteristics of "loyalty, kindness, respect toward others, and not shirking duty" are distinctly European that existed before the introduction of Christianity that survived not because of, but despite of Christianity. The strawman of hippies that "dance around a tree in the forest" is something contradictory to another strawman of pagans being "barbaric". Which we have to consider these quotes by Nietzsche:
"Man, in his highest and noblest capacities, is wholly nature and embodies its uncanny dual character. Those of his abilities which are terrifying and considered inhuman may even be the fertile soil out of which alone all humanity can grow in impulse, deed, and work."

"Europe not only needs wars, but the greatest and most terrible wars, consequently occasional relapses into barbarism, lest, by the means of culture, it should lose its culture and its very existence."

Of the two characterisations, the latter is more succinct. The Romans, Celts, and Nordics being highly militaristic. Although not opposite to Christianity, the warrior code of a man in his self-actualisation is parallel to "turning of the cheek", showing self-evident the slave morality of Christianity which in antiquity era, Jews overturned of the "bad" of the nobles into the "good" of the commons. Thus, cementing the bind of slave morality which carried onto the Christian doctrine. A doctrine that though banned usury for gentiles, the churches saw no problem in allowing the Jew to cement himself as the interest giver for a loophole. -On a side note, Christians were not the first to disdain usury. Earlier people contended against it, notably Plutarch.- The Christians were the first ones to condone of interest baring banks, creating the Jewish banker. Mentioning Nietzsche again, he did not condemn the Jew for filling this role, to which I must introduce Evola as the successor. In one of his great works, "Men Among the Ruins", he makes it clear that the fight is already here and the ruins a cause of modernity. It is not enough to "live in the modern world and fight the vermin", but to fight both against the modern world and the vermin within it. Evola was a clear pagan traditionalist with both spiritual boldness and desire for violence, so his works are to Europeans what Siege is Americans, only better and more numerous.
Taking a moment to dash these strawmen, I'll address them now:
>anarcho-primitivism
>dance around a tree in the forest
This completely ignores the Frankish, Roman, Hellenic empires as well as the their scientific and mathematical contributions, and the overall structure of the old European people. Pagans individually decide their stance on technology, however there is no consensus that forbids advancement as a whole.
>radical environmentalist
In no way shape or form are any major environmentalist group, let alone pan-nationalist ones (which is quaint since Christianity holds itself to be international), are Pagan. Neither can Paganism endorse Modern Environmentalism because it is not modern. All connections to environmentalist groups and the criticism that comes with it runs off the skin like water, for it has no basis in reality.
>Bohemianism
Cutting off ties with family is explicitly anti-pagan as traditions are patrilineal.
>ethnocentrism
Although not a strawman, it must be addressed that Christianity is not ethnocentric and the poster here admits it. Such evidence is conflict between the mixed Samaritans (good Samaritan story) and this quote, "In Christ there is not Greek and Jew, circumcision and uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, slave and free; but Christ is all and in all." Christianity goes against separatism, not even sparing those colonalised.
The main difference that lies here is that in the Christian doctrine, nature was made for man. Whereas a Pagan sees himself as a product of his environment.

>>138258
Of course you oppose capitalism and individualism as well. Not surprised since they were products of Christian morality, which was founded upon mutual understanding and individual responsibility.

Anyway, I will confess that I have not yet read Hegel and Nietzsche, let alone post-modernist or Frankfurtian works. They, despite their historical relevance, are towards the bottom of my reading list as, from what I decipher of their thoughts, they are incontrovertibly linked with each other. I will eventually determine why they are so celebrated among esoteric rightwing circles, but the fact remains that their contributions toward the Left are far greater. The dialectic is practically worshipped among Marxists and nihilism is a destroyer of tradition and nobility. Hegel and Nietzsche are, in a word, degenerate, and one is far better off reading Sir Thomas More and John Locke.

And no, you don't need to be actually Jewish to fall into the trap of moral relativism. It doesn't make you any less of a useful tool. No one denies that human perception is inherently subjective. If it were completely "objective," as it were, we would be either computers or ants: incapable of thinking differently and trying creative approaches to problems. What is not subjective, however, is the world, at least to those who are not schizophrenics or Egoists. The purpose of scientific postulates and theories is not to "nail down" the facts, but to approach them as closely as possible. Objective facts do exist, but either we cannot comprehend them or we lack the prerequisites for discovering them. Such is the same in cultural applications of morality. Different cultures' approaches do not "disprove" objective morality, they simply indicate multiple interpretations and understandings of the same end. The same moral underpinnings exist but due to cultural emphasis on different areas real-life problems may lead to distinct solutions.
>"Europe needs…barbarism…"
Relapses into barbarism are inevitable on a civilizational scale, that is undoubtable. It is a fact that Eastern cultures such as the Chinese are more comfortable with admitting, though the West is finally starting to come to terms with it through the efforts of such men as M. Armstrong. However, we disagree fundamentally on the purposes of such cycles. Collapses occur when a culture becomes too wealthy, powerful, or large for its own good and becomes consumed by its own hubris. At that point it is impossible to forestall or even delay destruction, but one can record and carry the technology and knowledge over to the next civilizational cycle. This is what the Church did in monasteries as pagan barbarians looted and burned the remnants of the old empire. (Interestingly, the Catholic Church itself has its own cycle of growth, stagnation, corruption, emergence of heresy, and resanctification)

It is incidental you mentioned that only conflict can exist among countries. If so, then a culture must embrace modernity in some respect to survive, lest it be eclipsed technologically, militarily, or territorially. There is absolutely no guarantee that "keeping one's traditions" is worth a deliberate fall into barbarity, as a superior culture may come along to clean up the mess you left behind. Otherwise, one is doomed to become a mere footnote in history, as happened with the Mayans of Mexico.

>>138258
Christianity is not worldly because it recognizes that human beings do not improve with technology, as transhumanists claim. On the flipside, it does not pursue a policy of the literal retardation of civilization which you pursue. Christianity builds, teaches, and serves, but most importantly, it endures. It is the summation and archive of culture, philosophy, and theology, all geared to serve a higher purpose that is decidedly anti-materialistic. Christianity does not build a successful society for its own sake, but as a consequence of searching heaven.

Claiming that "European" morals are lacking in Christianity betrays ignorance in the New Testament. What is more loyal than God sending His own Son to bring back humans who have sinned? What is kinder than approaching those who cannot redeem themselves and making them clean? How can there be any greater respect to those who have not known it? What level of fortitude is needed to be capable of smashing one's enemies in the blink of an eye and saving oneself, yet withholding this to suffer a cruel and humiliating death in an ultimate form of atonement?

There is no "slave morality" in Christian doctrine. There is absolutely no human being who can force us to capitulate. God could do so but chooses not to do so because He doesn't want mindless slaves, He wants brave and willing soldiers.

Specify the Jewish "overturning of nobles for commons." There is no hint of that in Christianity, unless of course you mean the meritocratic assertion that Man is to be judged by his works, not his status. It is the nature of things that "nobles" who fail to be noble but grow complacent and despotic are eventually replaced by those more worthy.
>paganism and technology
Many Roman contributions to government also became introduced to modern societies, seeding them with the cause of the empire's eventual collapse. As I pointed out, the most advanced cultures triumph and therefore "individual decision" will lead to the eradication of some of your beloved pagan groups.

There is one country that comes to mind as close to your anti-modernist ideal, and that is Democratic Kampuchea.
>run off skin like water
I am instantly reminded of a certain quote regarding a group we mutually disdain.
>Christianity and separatism
Christianity does not denounce separatism, only expose the ridiculousness of ethnocentrism when a proud group doesn't even take care of its own. Morality is ridiculous if moral behavior is unrewarded.
Remember on this Divine Mercy Sunday that mercy is not weak but is the greatest form of strength.

>>138439
>Of course you oppose capitalism and individualism as well
Complete strawman. My post doesn't even take an anti-capitalist approach. Nor, do I take a stance against "individualism" as I take account for Plato's Tripartite of the Soul, which strives for a balance for the individual and other parts of the soul, the higher order and family/pride~. Seeing that trade existed and Plato lived before Christianity, the doctrine introduced neither of these concepts. This point of yours is moot.
>from what I decipher of their thoughts, they are incontrovertibly linked with each other
>I have not yet read Hegel and Nietzsche
Anon, admitting ignorance is one thing, but making an assumption based on practically nothing is priori self-defeating. Hegel nor Nietzsche are even connected to Frankfurt! You wouldn't know because all you have to go off on is a faint paranoia. Especially in speaking of the "dialect" (which is not even the bullwark of Hegel), you fail to know that Marx rejected the idealistic assertions Hegel and replaced with his own materialism as being the cause of the dialectic. Creating an entirely Non-Hegelian dialectic as Marx almost diametrically opposes everything Hegel stood for. Why, you stand closer to Marx when you say "What is not subjective, however, is the world," as this is the basis of materialist doctrine. One I wholly reject since I believe as the more worldly or universal an idea tries to become, the more incoherent it will be. From there, the beginning moral failure of globalism. Like your moral failure of rejecting philosophers you did not read. "Degenerate" is an odd insult when Locke degenerated from the monarchist worldview of his time and More being a darling figure to communists due to his writings in "Utopia". Now Sir Thomas More was literally celebrated by the Soviet Union, but I will not be inept as to reject a philosopher simply by association to the left. The bankruptcy in your rhetoric is astonishing.
>you don't need to be actually Jewish to fall into the trap of moral relativism
And, I never claimed moral relativism, but disputed its universality. To clarify my stance on it, I believe that cultures are genetically deterministic as are the "memes" they produce. Making cultures relative. As for science, cultural and moral relativity is a feature within evolutionary biology. Its use not effecting me in the slightest. Science as a whole "is not to "nail down" the facts, but to approach them as closely as possible" works much more in my favour. The attempt to approach fact as closely as possible forever eluding us. An ever-evolving process. Not that I reject scientific law, but find them complex and not fully comprehended. Which is unrelated to morality. The sciences itself take approaches against morality, either or its results do. For this, I would refer to Hegelian unconscious. Also, I find it odd that you relate "the same moral underpinnings" to solutions, when morality is not so much related to concrete problems but abstract, and is unrelated.
Nonetheless, you contradict yourself to varying degrees and even backpedal.
>large for its own good and becomes consumed by its own hubris
Nietzsche speaks about this and comes to the same conclusion. The quotes I referenced are not glorifying barbarism, but speaking of the necessity of it from demanding culture. Indeed, he paints rather starkly and cold, apathetic. The first quote is of a description of Hellenic society. That in the pursuit of higher humanity there is a higher barbarity, to paraphrase. I would evoke Byron's cultured thug.
>cycles
The Christian Constantine rejected a circuited worldview as he saw it as far too pagan. Christianity doesn't seem cyclical to me if it carries a beginning and end. Paganism on the other hand does, and personally I find myself invested in the Greek concept of Kyklos.
>pagan barbarians looted and burned the remnants
You mean the Visigoths? They did no such thing. They even converted after installing their own kingdom. At any point, I don't believe they destroyed the remnants at all, as opposed to the monasteries that destroyed artifacts.
"The licentious fury was not as bad as it could have been. Peter Heather, Professor of Medieval History at King’s College, London, has called it ‘one of the most civilised sacks of any city ever witnessed’. The palaces of the aristocracy were looted, Romans who resisted were killed and women raped by the Visigoths or by slaves who took the opportunity to revenge themselves on their masters. Yet not many buildings and monuments were destroyed and it was said that the attackers did not slaughter nearly as many of the inhabitants as they might have."
https://www.historytoday.com/richard-cavendish/visigoths-sack-rome
The Visigoths even had their own script.
>a culture must embrace modernity in some respect to survive
Some respect, but not all. Technology is respected even by someone like Varg who is more of a survivalist waiting for the collapse than an anarcho primivist.
>it does not pursue a policy of the literal retardation of civilization which you pursue
Fucking retard. The Romans and Greeks advanced technology as Pagans. If anything, it is the Pagans that advanced science, and the Christians that retarded it. The horrible treatment to Galileo, burning the Library of Alexandria, rejecting evolution! Pagans did not do this! How can I respect someone who does not even give me the respect of a civil conversation? Someone so dishonest? Did I not address this with my point about anarcho primitivists? Save your preaching for someone that can't tell your dishonesty.
>"European" morals are lacking in Christianity
I carefully worded my statement to avoid an absolute. There is some basis that Christianity was similar to default European, however it is moreso that Christianity shaped itself to join its host easier and Christian doctrine contrasted with its philosophy.

>>138440
>Many Roman contributions to government also became introduced to modern societies, seeding them with the cause of the empire's eventual collapse. As I pointed out, the most advanced cultures triumph and therefore "individual decision" will lead to the eradication of some of your beloved pagan groups.
Unrelated, asshole. Also, false as well. An empire as big as the Romans fell not because of Roman design, but size.
>Christianity does not denounce separatism, only expose the ridiculousness of ethnocentrism when a proud group doesn't even take care of its own.
You contradict yourself and don't bring any evidence in the contrary. Christianity opposes ethnocentrism. Especially on the basis Jew and Gentile, abolishing any racial connotation. In Christianity, everyone is spiritually a Jew, and of the seed of Abraham.
Anon, you should stop soiling your roots and at least respect them.

>>138711
>>138716
I must concede when it comes to your arguments on paganism. As I have not researched your side how could I challenge your points without gross misrepresentation? Such misrepresentation on your part against Christianity is what drew me into this and so this is what I'll address. I will get back to you in twelve months or however long it takes me to research paganism.

>the sciences itself [sic] take approaches against morality
Science is inherently amoral as it deals with the function of the material world rather than the higher studies of morality and philosophy. Science merely opens up more doors regarding philosophical questions. One such question was created alongside atomic weapons on whether such objects should be used against civilian populations.

>Constantine rejected circuited worldview
No matter what his influence on Christendom, Constantine was not a priest, moral philosopher, or scholar. There is a reason why he was never considered a saint in the West.
Many consider his conversion to have been pragmatic. Regardless, he exhibited some favor towards Arius, who was later condemned as a heretic. He isn't a reliable source for Christian doctrine.

Having a beginning and an end does not deny the existence of cycles between these endpoints. There are numerous allusions in the Bible toward birth, death, and rebirth or resurrection, not to mention sin and deliverance.

>barbarians
You mention the Visigoths but there also existed Ostrogoths, Gauls, Vandals, and Huns (though you may discount the latter for not being European in origin).
Would we have any artifacts left at all if the monasteries systematically destroyed them? No, and it is folly to presume that they would intentionally destroy their history and culture.

>Christianity shaped itself
On the contrary, these virtues exist directly in the four gospels, which were eyewitness accounts of the life of Christ. To suppose all this was fabricated to "fit" European ideals is unlikely given that ancient manuscripts were found all around Asia Minor.

>Christianity opposes ethnocentrism
Christ said, when approached by a Canaanite woman, "It is not right to take the food of the children and throw it to the dogs,"[Matthew 15:26] but after further pleading He did not deny her wish. Why should He, when such faith is heartfelt and strong? Also, if you paid attention to the parable of the Good Samaritan, you'd realize that the only ethnocentrism being condemned is the sort that tolerates blindness and parasitism and which lacks empathy. If your own people will leave you in a ditch by the road, how can you be proud of them?

>spiritually a Jew, and of the seed of Abraham
Certainly not in any sense of the Pharisees or their later Talmudic ilk. Jesus expressly spoke out against these who claim to have Abraham as their father, even stating that their father is "the father of lies." [John 8:39-47] What better outing of the Jew could be found?

Christians are sons of Abraham in the sense that they have been saved from darkness and now serve God with fullness of spirit, just as the former pagan Abram accepted God's will and was promised countless descendants. The Jews are not descendants of Abraham because they have totally rejected God and now worship a perception warped by their evil desires.

Speaking of another group which claims to be spiritual "descendants of Abraham," what about Islam? Do you honestly think that the pagan peoples of Europe, of highly contrasting faiths, could ever unite to repel this menace? Is it not more likely that Europe would have fallen too as countless other pagan nations could not cope?

>soiling your roots
Which is why I don't dismiss the last thousand years or so as being some mistake. I don't dislike pagans (one of my favorite books being Meditations by Marcus Aurelius) but their worldview is incomplete.

>>137446
Reading about old groups like the A.N.P., N.S.W.P.P., or N.S.M. is kind of depressing.
These people actually did things, we just shitpost.

>>139866
They did things, but they were ineffective. They need to read Saul Alinsky's rules for radicals…and reverse them.

For example, he coined a phrase that "People bleed faster than institutions." He was speaking as a leftist against the movement of the right (see rule 12). You can see this every time they try a divide and conquer strategy against a leader in the movement - they do it to EVERY. SINGLE. ONE, so as to prevent the movement from ever gaining momentum. These are the people that assassinate Malcolm X, George Lincoln Rockwell, and Lumumbe - all these people pushed the idea that societies should be based around the advancement of their race, and all of them were murdered around the same time. But getting back on track…

>Reversing the rules
Don't target people. Target the institution. Communists and leftists are cogs in a wheel, and as such are all the same ideologically. Therefore, targeting any single ant in the swarm does nothing - and since the ant Queen is their idea, you can't kill that either. So, what do you do? You take away the thing that binds them together. In the case of ants, it is the pheromones of the Queen that tell them what to do. In liberal societies, it is the Television, the Social Network and its upvotes/downvotes, it is the power grid that powers their computers and phones. You don't target Elon Musk to get at the left, and knock down an idol. You don't target his factories, either. His Tesla depends on the greater society as a whole to be incredibly interconnected. Sever those connections (the power grid), and it is all over.

>Rule 1
Power is all that you have. Never let the enemy know where you stand - don't project power. Hide. Only talk face to face with people you know. Don't reveal your power level. All of these things should be the motto of the Right
>Rule 2
Always go outside your expertise. In the age of the internet, everyone is a god-damn expert, at least on the things that matter. When it all gets turned off, we will be the ones with books and old Atlas's. Always be growing, always learning, striving to better yourself and gain knowledge.
>Rule 3
Only give the enemy what they know. When they work with it, they will leave their indelible mark - just look at lefty memes. Anyone on the right can tell you, straight away, when a meme is a lefty meme. Never, ever let the enemy leave their comfort zone - they need to stagnate there.
>Rule 4
The enemy has no rules, and no shame - so neither should you. Go full Trump and grab them by the pussy, and then go to a church and give a speech. Have no shame.
>Rule 5
Let ridicule flow off of you. You are your own person - society doesn't make you, you make society. They can think everything they want to think as long as you make them suck your dick. Their private thoughts are meaningless then.
>Rule 6
A good tactic is the one that riles up your people and makes them angry - and even better when it makes your opponent angry. "It's Okay To Be White" caused a bunch of idiots to reveal their inherent racism all over the place - but since the Left follows no rules, it was largely forgotten and ignored. They are 'allowed' to be racist against Whites. When we make a campaign, we need to make sure that our side gets ANGRY, like that scene from The Network.
>Rule 7 and 8
I actually agree with those two…mostly because they contradict each other already.
>Rule 9
The fear of death is terrifying - actually killing your enemies kills them. None of this Trudeau nonsense about "If you kill your enemy, they win." No, when you kill them, they die. These leftists didn't say that line about the Nazis - why are they spouting it now?
>Rule 10
Push their 'positive' all the way. Accelerationism is key. They want open borders? Let the Chinese vote directly in American elections. If there's no borders, then every country is America, right? Push this shit. Make them eat their positives until they are a negative. Stuff those SJW faces full of their own shit till they puke.
>Rule 11
Offer no constructive ideas. No way forward. Make them work for it, because they have no workable ideas. Make them lead it up - it's THEIR revolution. Remember - give a communist Communism, and they will starve.
>Rule 12 has been covered

Holy shit, that's a lot of write faggotry. Pasta that shit.

TL;DR
Don't play their game, they wrote the book. Fucking throw it backwards at them.

>>140151
To shorten those new rules:
>1. Don't show your personal power - it's all you have
>2. Always learn more - use that knowledge
>3. Make your enemy stagnate - don't challenge them
>4. The enemy has no rules - don't follow any they impose on you
>5. Your enemies can't ridicule you when they are sucking your dick - Black them.
>6. Rile up your people and provoke the enemy - it's their fight, make them fight.
>7. Don't slug it out - be a flash fire
>8. Always attack - a ghost offers no defense
>9. Don't threaten - act. If you're going to shoot then shoot, don't talk.
>10. Accelerationism - push the enemies' ideas to the extreme, and support that position with logic until they themselves must attack it, shooting themselves in the foot.
>11. Offer no working alternatives - it's the Communist revolution, let them own it. Communism starves Communists.
>12. Attack institutions, not people - bring down Facebook and Television, not Zuckerberg.

>>140151
>>140179
brilliant, I'm going to save all these for later use.

>>140151
>>140179
I hope you don't mind, but I also combined these posts and added a bit more substance to rules 7, 8, and 12. Anything you or anyone else wants changed/tweaked, I can probably work that in.

I think the rule about ridicule is the one that is backfiring on the left the most at the moment. Also whether consciously or unconsciously it was the rule that /pol/ most successfully employed during the 2016 election. The meme about how the left can't meme is basically the result of this. They've been trying to attack Trump by ridiculing him and it hasn't worked because Trump was ridiculous to begin with and we all knew it. All they can do is lob ineffective insults at him like "he has tiny hands" or "he looks like a Cheeto" which only serve to make leftists look whiny and petty.

The "professional" comedians have been having the same problem. Guys like John Oliver and Stephen Colbert have basically been using the same playbook they used against George W. Bush, where they poke fun at his intelligence or his vocabulary. That hasn't worked either, and it isn't just because we've seen it all before. Trump has been thus far pretty much unassailable as a target of ridicule because nobody really took him seriously to begin with. Meanwhile gags that we've come up with, like making fun of John Oliver's "It's the Current Year!" routine or Colbert's "Two Scoops" bit, have become funny memes that completely knock the wind out of those comedians and render them powerless and unfunny.

This is because the left as a whole is the complete opposite of this principle: they can dish out ridicule, but they can't take it. They take themselves and their causes so seriously that not only can they not laugh at themselves, they can't imagine anyone else ever laughing at them, so their jokes keep falling flat while ours keep landing, and they can't figure out why. The more they fail, the madder they get, which just makes the whole thing funnier from our perspective. Colbert was quite good at making the right look silly during the Bush era because he set aside his own beliefs and created a persona that parodied Fox News style commentary. The right was all fire and brimstone, and the left took a giggle at the ghosties approach. However their arrogance got the best of them during the Obama era, and now they're the ones spewing fire and brimstone while we giggle at them.

Never underestimate the potency of humor as a weapon.

>>137469
>>137481

If we are sharing a few PDFs here's one from George Lincoln Rockwell.

Also a couple of less edgy, great books.

>>140392
Brilliant, although the rule 8 changes are misdirected. We are ghosts because we don't want to be doxxed - that is a weapon of the left, wherein they try to make you live in their social network, and punish you if you don't fit in. Don't let the ants swarm you.
>7. Don't slug it out - be a flash fire
>Don't give your enemy a battleground to fight you on. Don't telegraph your attacks - advertise no dates.
>8. Always attack - a ghost offers no defense
>Bring no shields and no defense - you shouldn't be sticking around. Don't let them know who you are. Be the apparition the left screams at on TV, and nothing more. Go for the cameras before you do anything else - leftists can kill more people with cameras than they can with fists and bullets.

>>140417
Oooh, I don't think I have a copy of Rockwell's book. Saved. Thank you very much.