Theme: Coercion

  • Nat’l Fascism was increase in Napoleon’s pre-industrial State and Military Total

    Nat’l Fascism was increase in Napoleon’s pre-industrial State and Military Total War, to post-industrial State, Military, Economic, Culture, and informational Total War against International Political,Economic, Cultural and informational extra-state total war of Jewish Communism.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-26 21:28:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1254522668403109888

    Reply addressees: @DineshDSouza

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1254502136542638080

  • Nat’l Fascism was increase in Napoleon’s pre-industrial State and Military Total

    Nat’l Fascism was increase in Napoleon’s pre-industrial State and Military Total War, to post-industrial State, Military, Economic, Culture, and informational Total War against International Political,Economic, Cultural and informational extra-state total war of Jewish Communism.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-26 20:52:35 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1254513730970365952

    Reply addressees: @EricLiford

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1254503830273830912

  • UNDERSTANDING FASCISM IN CONTEXT Nat’l Fascism was expansion of Napoleon’s Pre-I

    UNDERSTANDING FASCISM IN CONTEXT

    Nat’l Fascism was expansion of Napoleon’s Pre-Industrial State and Military Total War, to post-industrial State, Military, Economic, Culture, and informational Total War against International Political,Economic, Cultural and informational extra-state total war of Jewish Communism.

    Like Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, Communism promised a universal government of the underclasses.The french invented pre-communist european state socialism, Italians post-communist intolerant State socialism in Fascism. Via the French, we forced the Germans into ACTING on it.

    Napoleon……………..Fascism……………….Communism

    Civilizational……………National……………….International

    … Total War…………… Total War……………..Total War

    … … Pre-industrial….. …Post-Industrial…… Post Ind.

    … … State……………… …State………………….Extra-State

    … … Military…………… …Military……………………………….

    … … ……………………… …Economic…………..Economic

    … … ……………………… …Cultural………………Cultural

    … … ……………………… …Informational………Informational

    … … ……………………… …Political……………..Political

    … … ……………………… ……………………………Revolutionary

    … … External Offense….Internal Defense….Internal Revolt.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-26 18:53:00 UTC

  • Fascism was an expansion of napoleon’s ‘total war’ from military and political t

    Fascism was an expansion of napoleon’s ‘total war’ from military and political to economic, social, and cultural. It’s not complicated. It’s all the poetic propaganda that obscures it’s just WAR by all available means.

    Fascism was european total warfare against non-european total warfare by communism.

    Propaganda is not operational.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-25 10:50:00 UTC

  • Fed Accusers Are Protecting Their Malinvestments and Resisting New Investments

    by John Mark, Apr 6, 2020, 11:37 AM My standard response to the fed-post accusation is to: a) mock anyone who says using 2A for its primary intended purpose is “bad” (were the founding fathers “feds”? lmao), and; b) demand they produce and articulate a solution: “What is your plan for when the Right can’t win any more elections?” Often these groups/individuals that countersignal are either consciously or subconsciously trying to hold on to their “market share” of right-wing audience – they have invested significantly in what they are doing, and many people even on the dissident right are still hoping in vain that there is some other way to win without force. P kinda makes everybody else look bad and threatens to make them irrelevant because we are a) describing the situation with brutal honesty (force or at least show of force will be necessary) while they are not, and b) P is so stunningly well thought out, with such thorough coverage and breakthrough insight both in explanatory power and recommended solutions, that it is impossible for anyone else on the Right to compete with. (Simply put, no other group has Curt on their team.) P also requires a decent amount of time investment to understand well enough to say “yeah, I get how this could work”. And time is something leaders have very little of – I have very limited time to invest in learning details about what other leaders/movements/packs are doing. We are also slaying the sacred cows of libertarianism/ancap etc., and correcting a bunch of failed strategies all around. (For example, we say persuasion & voting can’t be the Right’s primary strategy – but most groups on the Right are built around that primary strategy.) All this results in the leaders of other “packs” sometimes having an initial negative reaction toward us. One way to mitigate this without compromising on the truth, may be to invite people like this on my show and genuinely try to promote them (cuz many of them are doing great work in many ways), and then also ask them what they think of our basic solution proposals (policies etc, not in-depth P stuff), and have that discussion. Propertarians are the adults in the room on the Right. And we’re figuring out how to deal with/work with the other “packs”.

  • Fed Accusers Are Protecting Their Malinvestments and Resisting New Investments

    by John Mark, Apr 6, 2020, 11:37 AM My standard response to the fed-post accusation is to: a) mock anyone who says using 2A for its primary intended purpose is “bad” (were the founding fathers “feds”? lmao), and; b) demand they produce and articulate a solution: “What is your plan for when the Right can’t win any more elections?” Often these groups/individuals that countersignal are either consciously or subconsciously trying to hold on to their “market share” of right-wing audience – they have invested significantly in what they are doing, and many people even on the dissident right are still hoping in vain that there is some other way to win without force. P kinda makes everybody else look bad and threatens to make them irrelevant because we are a) describing the situation with brutal honesty (force or at least show of force will be necessary) while they are not, and b) P is so stunningly well thought out, with such thorough coverage and breakthrough insight both in explanatory power and recommended solutions, that it is impossible for anyone else on the Right to compete with. (Simply put, no other group has Curt on their team.) P also requires a decent amount of time investment to understand well enough to say “yeah, I get how this could work”. And time is something leaders have very little of – I have very limited time to invest in learning details about what other leaders/movements/packs are doing. We are also slaying the sacred cows of libertarianism/ancap etc., and correcting a bunch of failed strategies all around. (For example, we say persuasion & voting can’t be the Right’s primary strategy – but most groups on the Right are built around that primary strategy.) All this results in the leaders of other “packs” sometimes having an initial negative reaction toward us. One way to mitigate this without compromising on the truth, may be to invite people like this on my show and genuinely try to promote them (cuz many of them are doing great work in many ways), and then also ask them what they think of our basic solution proposals (policies etc, not in-depth P stuff), and have that discussion. Propertarians are the adults in the room on the Right. And we’re figuring out how to deal with/work with the other “packs”.

  • I don’t ‘sell’ like a priest or philosopher. I fight as a soldier. I teach men b

    I don’t ‘sell’ like a priest or philosopher.
    I fight as a soldier. I teach men by king of the hill.
    Deny the enemy the field so that they have no choice.
    Eliminate the possibility of compromise
    And conflict that arises when sacrificed.
    Truth knows no compromise or mercy.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-24 19:33:15 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1253768987994923009

    Reply addressees: @unfinis06265716

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1253765472849297408

  • Prosecution Online

    Apr 11, 2020, 1:13 PM [O]ne does not sell a liar – one prosecutes him. You cannot get them to agree. So deny the enemy the field. You can leave them defeated such that they come to their own conclusions. But no man is a hero to his debtors. For a decade now, I’ve taught the same strategy.

    1. Return any taunt they made as dispassionately as possible.
    2. Call them a liar or failing due diligence.
    3. State your central argument
    4. repeat until they are exhausted.

    All they do with every cycle is provide you with opportunity to recite the same statements “you are lying, either by design, or by failure of due diligence, [this is the truth], you can either refute it by testimony and warranty within the limits of liability (… 1. Refutation), or offer an equally criticizable solution to the question so that we can judge it’s possibility costs and benefits (2. Competition.), or seek to understand what you clearly don’t (3. Question). But at present you are [lying, denying, fictionalizing, sophistry, pseusocience,mysticism, impossibility, irreciprocity]. Just do the same thing over and over again and they will eventually expose themselves out of frustration – works every time if you stick with it over time.

  • Prosecution Online

    Apr 11, 2020, 1:13 PM [O]ne does not sell a liar – one prosecutes him. You cannot get them to agree. So deny the enemy the field. You can leave them defeated such that they come to their own conclusions. But no man is a hero to his debtors. For a decade now, I’ve taught the same strategy.

    1. Return any taunt they made as dispassionately as possible.
    2. Call them a liar or failing due diligence.
    3. State your central argument
    4. repeat until they are exhausted.

    All they do with every cycle is provide you with opportunity to recite the same statements “you are lying, either by design, or by failure of due diligence, [this is the truth], you can either refute it by testimony and warranty within the limits of liability (… 1. Refutation), or offer an equally criticizable solution to the question so that we can judge it’s possibility costs and benefits (2. Competition.), or seek to understand what you clearly don’t (3. Question). But at present you are [lying, denying, fictionalizing, sophistry, pseusocience,mysticism, impossibility, irreciprocity]. Just do the same thing over and over again and they will eventually expose themselves out of frustration – works every time if you stick with it over time.

  • RT @ThruTheHayes: It’s time for restitution, punishment, and prevention. -@curtd

    RT @ThruTheHayes: It’s time for restitution, punishment, and prevention.
    -@curtdoolittle


    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-24 17:18:13 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1253735008566681602