Dear Leftists. You are not safe. You never were. You never can be. That is your greatest folly. We have been patient. But we will come for you. And when we come for you, we will have no mercy.
Source date (UTC): 2016-03-05 13:14:00 UTC
Dear Leftists. You are not safe. You never were. You never can be. That is your greatest folly. We have been patient. But we will come for you. And when we come for you, we will have no mercy.
Source date (UTC): 2016-03-05 13:14:00 UTC
Either he wins and there are a few years of reprieve. Or we revolt and change it now. I mean. It’s that simple yes?
Source date (UTC): 2016-03-05 13:14:00 UTC
DEFINING REVOLUTION
—“A revolution is a rapid, fundamental, and violent domestic change in the dominant values and myths of a society, in its political institutions, social structure, leadership. and government activity and policies. Revolutions are thus to be distinguished from insurrections, rebellions, revolts, coups, and wars of independence. A coup d’etat in itself changes only leadership and perhaps policies; a rebellion of insurrection may change policies, leadership, and political institutions, but no social structure and values; a war of independence is a struggle of one community against rule by an alien community and does not necessarily involve changes in the social structure of either community. What is here called simply “revolution” is what others have called great revolutions, grand revolutions, or social revolutions. Notable examples are the French, Chinese, Mexican, Russian, and Cuban revolutions.”— Samuel Huntington
By Huntington’s criteria, is it revolution I (we) pursue? I did not think so. But at this point I do. For the restoration of truth telling, the suppression of political parasitism, the conversion of information to a commons, the imposition of strict construction, and the imposition of market government, and the eliminationgn of politicians, all are fundamental changes in the postwar feminist/socialist epoch. Even if they are restorations of the anglo saxon order.
Source date (UTC): 2016-03-05 13:08:00 UTC
(riffing off eli’s elites)
As a member of the 1% (on and off at least), and due to my avocation, I have the incentives of elites. And I cannot dismiss myself from eli’s criticism. On the other hand, my family is quite old, and carries old traditions, and in those old traditions I understand the obligations of the nobility(elites).
I understand them be cause we are dependent upon our commoners, as they are upon us. This is what makes the libertarians and jews weak: they have to appropriate some other group’s warriors for defense. But aristocracy may organize man into orders. And within those orders man may prosper. But without us to organize man, or without men to organize, we are both defenseless against competing men and a ruthless universe that could not care whether we succeed or fail.
Source date (UTC): 2016-03-04 06:43:00 UTC
WE’RE THE NEW RIGHT NOW. OWN IT.
Lets just take over new-right and new-libertarians, rather than alt-right, and call the establishment the old right, and the old libertarians. The european new right is traditional but they rely on that insipid germanic and french sentimentality in search of a new christianity. americans are constitutionalists: rule of law. We may also be religous or social conservatives. But by and large what separates conservatives from progressives is rule of law versus populist will. Rules versus discretion. Property versus State.
( Ivan Ilakovac )
Source date (UTC): 2016-03-02 09:10:00 UTC
They aren’t wrong. The problem is, that “right” is undesirable by those who can ONLY subsist through parasitism. (Sorry)
Source date (UTC): 2016-03-01 15:45:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/704694171748212736
Reply addressees: @pewresearch
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/704693966457823232
IN REPLY TO:
@pewresearch
White non-college Republicans have markedly negative view of politicians who compromise https://t.co/Yae2WHPe3j https://t.co/m9oXDhlEbj
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/704693966457823232
Too many people on this earth still assume that they are oppressed, and if empowered they can shower prosperity on their own.
Source date (UTC): 2016-03-01 15:43:11 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/704693473065172992
Reply addressees: @ForeignPolicy
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/704692931450564608
IN REPLY TO:
@ForeignPolicy
Not all of Bolivia’s indigenous people are happy with Evo Morales, the country’s first indigenous president. https://t.co/0StAWxrcsl
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/704692931450564608
— “one of the central problems with the formation of any ‘society’ is providing men with the incentive to defend a commons.”—
“This point is missed by most. Modern men have become soft, voyeurs (porn, gaming and sports) neglecting the martial duties of manhood. Defense of our folk is vital to our survival. Universal suffrage and feminism represent a defensive failing.” — Howard Roarrk
Source date (UTC): 2016-02-29 11:30:00 UTC
Nonsense Psychologizing. All political movements are demographic.
Source date (UTC): 2016-02-28 22:55:11 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/704077415862149122
Reply addressees: @speechboy71 @delong
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/704071872435113984
IN REPLY TO:
@speechboy71
Please join me in calling bullshit on this: https://t.co/SLuZaRQZ2S https://t.co/Mv8aL53p7E
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/704071872435113984
We either all fight for liberty or we cannot possess it. I know many men would prefer to talk rather than fight. I know some of us would prefer to fight rather than talk. But liberty only can survive when we insure one another. There is no other insurer of it. And belief or desire is not action it is the avoidance of action.
A man. A plan. A purpose.
Truth.
Kill them all.
Source date (UTC): 2016-02-28 08:18:00 UTC