(When I use the term “88’er” I’m referring exclusively to the people who try to justify the hitler cult who lack intelligence to do so, and rapidly resort to insults and spamming when their sophism runs into the brick wall of reason, logic, science, and the institutions necessary to produce and maintain a polity its economy, and its commons.)
Basically I’m ok with anything as long as it’s not false or impossible. And for a polity, it’s economy, and its commons, the chickens come home to roost eventually. The less more correspondent your rules of decidability, the more survivable and durable your polity, economy, and commons. The less correspondent your rules of decidability the less survivable and durable your polity, economy, and commons.
NSDAP was a non-correspondent momentum play – an attempt to create a religion (cult) to use remaining property-in-toto, to create an empire that would provide survivability where the status quo would not. That I agree that this aesthetic was beautiful, and the strategy was a brilliant use of new media, propaganda, and irreproducible time-and-place, is very different from saying it was either survivable or repeatable. The Nazis innovated using new technology to take advantage of time and place. If you want to create a new aesthetic in this time and place, you need to innovate in aesthetic, use new technology, that will produce similar ends in this time and place.
IMHO this is not possible because NS was a working class movement that competed against the communist working class movement. And frankly we no longer possess such a working class, nor one that can be motivated by such means, in this time and place. The era where we could rally the peasantry, rally the working class has been gone, and we are left with the opposite vulnerability – others are rallying the under-and-immigrant-classes (the opposition) using the strategy the NS made use of.
Right now we have a full spectrum of the New Right emerging with a language for every class. And as is usual in the west, instead of speaking with one class voice (the working class under NS, the peasantry under christianity), we are speaking with all voices of all our classes.
Yet, each class makes the mistake that their language is sufficient for the motivation of other classes. They live in their own cognitively biased world. And so we may in fact need various languages of inspiration and motivation for each of the classes – I certainly don’t intend to inspire the working class, only to fight for his interests in my own classes.
So rallying around a singe ideology is very difficult. And it will be difficult until we have a solution and a plan of achieving it. But when we have a solution and a plan of achieving it, each class can modify it’s message to support the plan or some variation of it.
This is what is preventing the right from coalescing into a single movement. It’s why the current administration bought us time, but may not have been as helpful as being backed against the wall as the left now feels.
I am certain my solution of modifying the constitution will produce the ends we desire over a fairly short if not rapid period of time. And it will work – not because it will produce a shared belief – but because it will prevent the formation of competing solutions, and it will use the same selfish market incentives in the prosecution of anti-westerners as we westerners have used to create our other ‘markets in everything’.
Just as simpletons talk about people, average people talk about events, above average people talk about ideas – in revolutionary context, simpletons talk about beliefs (if we all believe or value x), average people talk about education or policy (if we can only get x done), above average people talk about institutions and incentives (if we only do x the rest will follow).
There may exist some other possible means. But as far as I can tell, we have lost our numbers due to the intentional invasion of the west by the underclasses for the purpose of creating demand for authority, for the purpose of ending western aristocratic civilization, and the great experiment of the anglo saxon peoples in contractualism, sovereignty, and rule of internally consistent externally correspondent reciprocally moral, Natural Law. The only system of self governance that makes possible Sovereignty, Liberty, Freedom, and Subsidy.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-12 08:33:00 UTC