Political Compass Test

Discuss everything else: politics, society, culture, science, philosophy, ideas, etc.
User avatar
That Guy
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Posts: 458
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 9:17 pm
Reputation: 1257
Norwood: NW2.5

Re: Political Compass Test

Post by That Guy » Tue Dec 04, 2018 11:14 am

yettee wrote:
Tue Dec 04, 2018 10:36 am
What's your view of what he wanted to do and did, both in Germany and outside it? What do you think about him as a person, morally (good? bad?)? Do you think he wasn't interested in taking over other countries? You mentioned the topic and it seems like you aren't satisfied with what you were taught, so I'm curious about your views.
You're really asking if I'd consider myself a Neo-Nazi, which I wouldn't, but more specifically.

My view of what he did and wanted to do?

I guess this depends on specifics, but I'll say that the basic ideas of being an ethnostate, your people first, that democracy is not always the solution, and rejection of communism and foreign interest I would fundamentally agree with.

But, much like the Neo-Nazis of today, I disagree as to what life should be like for the people in that ethnostate or the means of achieving it, and I disagree with the whole "master aryan race" thing. I don't think we need people rounded up in death camps (though it's inevitable when democracy fails for too long), I disagree about the kinds of personal interests that should be sacrificed, etc. For example, most Neo-Nazis I've heard think that women should be married off against their will shortly after puberty, that they should "remain perpetually pregnant until they're years of fertility have passed" and that they shouldn't be allowed to vote or have agency because they'll just be whores otherwise.

It's little more than materialism and growth for growth's sake applied to people and is just cover for their own failures with women. It's really funny, because Nazis champion Iceland and Poland for being successful ethnostates, but fail to see that their particular brand of authoritarianism isn't needed to achieve this state.

Was He Interested In Taking Over Other Countries?

I think that's obvious.

Why am I dissatisfied with what I was taught?

My teachers would have you believe that Hitler (and Mussolini) simply rose to power because people are awful bigots or that maybe Hitler just had some sort of hypnotism powers. These people had absolutely no valid point or motivation whatsoever. They and their followers were just evil and that was that. Fuck, my Bolshevik 9th grade teacher literally said that Hitler was just angry because a goat bit one of his nuts off...

It's intellectually dishonest and lazy.

Even the communists still had a point; it's easy to see why socialism appealed to the Russian people.

But here's the redpill:

Russia, Poland...they survived a brutal government and economic system that was designed for them to serve rather than the other way around, which economies are supposed to do. They survived the most anti-freedom ideology there is because they remained one people, "comrades", and they came out of it as one people.

History, especially concerning the soviets, teaches us an important lesson that the west is only beginning to remember: People like Dinesh D'Souza are wrong when they say that "When a nation is no longer free, it ceases to be a nation." A nation ceases to be a nation when it's ethnic people, with a shared genetic history that ties them to a culture and ancestral homeland, are lost.

It is for that reason that I cannot say that any of the nationalist dictators, be they fascists or communists of yore, were wrong about their sense of brotherhood.

User avatar
That Guy
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Posts: 458
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 9:17 pm
Reputation: 1257
Norwood: NW2.5

Re: Political Compass Test

Post by That Guy » Tue Dec 04, 2018 11:18 am

@Admin I got a double-post accidentally trying to edit.

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1174
Joined: Wed May 30, 2018 10:45 pm
Reputation: 2471
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: - 5% Minoxidil, Stemoxydine and Adenosin shampoo
- 1.5mm dermarolling every 10 days
Location: Belgium
Contact:

Re: Political Compass Test

Post by Admin » Tue Dec 04, 2018 11:53 am

That Guy wrote:
Tue Dec 04, 2018 11:18 am
@Admin I got a double-post accidentally trying to edit.
By the way, you now have a 15 minute window to delete a post.
Hair transplants: 2000 graft (May 2014) and 2024 graft (January 2018) FUE's with Dr. De Reys for front and mid-scalp.

User avatar
blackg
Hair Loss Expert
Hair Loss Expert
Posts: 753
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 2:18 am
Reputation: 842

Re: Political Compass Test

Post by blackg » Tue Dec 04, 2018 1:12 pm

That Guy wrote:
Tue Dec 04, 2018 11:14 am
You're really asking if I'd consider myself a Neo-Nazi, which I wouldn't, but more specifically.

My view of what he did and wanted to do?

I guess this depends on specifics, but I'll say that the basic ideas of being an ethnostate, your people first, that democracy is not always the solution, and rejection of communism and foreign interest I would fundamentally agree with.

But, much like the Neo-Nazis of today, I disagree as to what life should be like for the people in that ethnostate or the means of achieving it, and I disagree with the whole "master aryan race" thing. I don't think we need people rounded up in death camps (though it's inevitable when democracy fails for too long), I disagree about the kinds of personal interests that should be sacrificed, etc. For example, most Neo-Nazis I've heard think that women should be married off against their will shortly after puberty, that they should "remain perpetually pregnant until they're years of fertility have passed" and that they shouldn't be allowed to vote or have agency because they'll just be whores otherwise.

It's little more than materialism and growth for growth's sake applied to people and is just cover for their own failures with women. It's really funny, because Nazis champion Iceland and Poland for being successful ethnostates, but fail to see that their particular brand of authoritarianism isn't needed to achieve this state.

Was He Interested In Taking Over Other Countries?

I think that's obvious.

Why am I dissatisfied with what I was taught?

My teachers would have you believe that Hitler (and Mussolini) simply rose to power because people are awful bigots or that maybe Hitler just had some sort of hypnotism powers. These people had absolutely no valid point or motivation whatsoever. They and their followers were just evil and that was that. Fuck, my Bolshevik 9th grade teacher literally said that Hitler was just angry because a goat bit one of his nuts off...

It's intellectually dishonest and lazy.

Even the communists still had a point; it's easy to see why socialism appealed to the Russian people.

But here's the redpill:

Russia, Poland...they survived a brutal government and economic system that was designed for them to serve rather than the other way around, which economies are supposed to do. They survived the most anti-freedom ideology there is because they remained one people, "comrades", and they came out of it as one people.

History, especially concerning the soviets, teaches us an important lesson that the west is only beginning to remember: People like Dinesh D'Souza are wrong when they say that "When a nation is no longer free, it ceases to be a nation." A nation ceases to be a nation when it's ethnic people, with a shared genetic history that ties them to a culture and ancestral homeland, are lost.

It is for that reason that I cannot say that any of the nationalist dictators, be they fascists or communists of yore, were wrong about their sense of brotherhood.
You have impressed me lately. You're still a bit simple at times but these type of posts deserve some credit
Stop the caravans!

User avatar
yettee
Hair Loss Rookie
Hair Loss Rookie
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 8:55 am
Reputation: 346
Norwood: NW2
Regimen: Minoxidil

Re: Political Compass Test

Post by yettee » Tue Dec 04, 2018 1:29 pm

That Guy wrote:
Tue Dec 04, 2018 11:14 am
I don't think we need people rounded up in death camps (though it's inevitable when democracy fails for too long)....

It is for that reason that I cannot say that any of the nationalist dictators, be they fascists or communists of yore, were wrong about their sense of brotherhood.
Are you horrified by the death camps? Or is it just, "I don't think we need" it, and they were "inevitable" as you said above? I used the last quote above because in sum it sounds like you're giving a balanced treatment to the Nazis. Like, they reacted to something and were right to react to it, and what happened was inevitable, and there's the red pill. Here you talked about how the communists are to blame, in other posts you talked about how they were reacting to the actions of Jews, that essentially the Jews brought on the reaction they got due to their actions. You've said it a couple of times, blaming these groups for what happened. Which leads to the unanswered question I asked about morality. ... I didn't or don't have any preconception about how you might answer any of this, I really was curious, based on your comments.

User avatar
That Guy
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Posts: 458
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 9:17 pm
Reputation: 1257
Norwood: NW2.5

Re: Political Compass Test

Post by That Guy » Tue Dec 04, 2018 7:25 pm

yettee wrote:
Tue Dec 04, 2018 1:29 pm
Are you horrified by the death camps? Or is it just, "I don't think we need" it, and they were "inevitable" as you said above? I used the last quote above because in sum it sounds like you're giving a balanced treatment to the Nazis. Like, they reacted to something and were right to react to it, and what happened was inevitable, and there's the red pill. Here you talked about how the communists are to blame, in other posts you talked about how they were reacting to the actions of Jews, that essentially the Jews brought on the reaction they got due to their actions. You've said it a couple of times, blaming these groups for what happened. Which leads to the unanswered question I asked about morality. ... I didn't or don't have any preconception about how you might answer any of this, I really was curious, based on your comments.
Are you horrified by the south african murders against white people? The Ottoman Conquests and Jannissary? The Armenian genocide? The natives vs colonials atrocities? The Nazi death camps?

I suspect that difference between someone like you or me, in terms of politics, is that I find all of those things horrifying where as most on the left really only are bothered by one of those things.

The simple reality, that we've learned at this point, is that two or more opposing cultures cannot peacefully coexist in the same space, and when the dominant culture becomes threatened, massacres are inevitable if there is no peaceful way to make the invading force leave.

There is no way that mass third world immigration to Europe or its colonies, where these immigrants have an insane birthrate, where white people already make up under 1 billion of the world and everyone else is 1 billion or more, will not eventually lead to an ethnic cleansing of one race or the other.

By adopting a closed borders, ethno-nationalist stance, and deporting/re-migrating the people they have taken already (lots of migrants will soon lose their status in Italy under new laws) we can prevent this.

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1174
Joined: Wed May 30, 2018 10:45 pm
Reputation: 2471
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: - 5% Minoxidil, Stemoxydine and Adenosin shampoo
- 1.5mm dermarolling every 10 days
Location: Belgium
Contact:

Re: Political Compass Test

Post by Admin » Tue Dec 04, 2018 8:07 pm

That Guy wrote:
Tue Dec 04, 2018 7:25 pm
Are you horrified by the south african murders against white people? The Ottoman Conquests and Jannissary? The Armenian genocide? The natives vs colonials atrocities? The Nazi death camps?

I suspect that difference between someone like you or me, in terms of politics, is that I find all of those things horrifying where as most on the left really only are bothered by one of those things.

The simple reality, that we've learned at this point, is that two or more opposing cultures cannot peacefully coexist in the same space, and when the dominant culture becomes threatened, massacres are inevitable if there is no peaceful way to make the invading force leave.

There is no way that mass third world immigration to Europe or its colonies, where these immigrants have an insane birthrate, where white people already make up under 1 billion of the world and everyone else is 1 billion or more, will not eventually lead to an ethnic cleansing of one race or the other.

By adopting a closed borders, ethno-nationalist stance, and deporting/re-migrating the people they have taken already (lots of migrants will soon lose their status in Italy under new laws) we can prevent this.
I agree to an extent but I personally believe that culture and religion are way more powerful than race or ethnicity. If you go to a Church in the West, you'll often find that they're flooded by black Christians and you can get along with those people very easily. And I'll even dare to cite the example of my Muslim Arab best friend.

We love each other (no homer), yet you know my stance on Islam, and he knows it too, and I sometimes sit back and let him say that the West is not better than the rest of the world, that we can't possibly judge Saudi Arabia and that yeah, even their women must be happy to be second class citizens! Things like that.

Despite all that, he's a conservative at heart and he still wants to play the Western game. He can say he doesn't believe in it, that Islam supercedes it, but that's not what his actions show us. The rules of our game precede the rules of his game. But the main problem is that we know what happens the second he decides that his rules now apply.

Race, ethnicity and external appearance in general remain very secondary factors that don't account of much hatred and fear between groups of people, and it's sad that leftists still easily get stuck on those superficial variables. Like I don't know, white people probably hate Arab people because they think that brown skin is ugly or something, or that it's scary to racists and that's why they're Islamophobes! Sometimes I'd swear that this is the level at which they analyze this.

I have no choice but go full theological here because I believe this is where the difference can be found, sometimes manifest (ISIS), sometimes dormant, like in the case of vast majority of Muslims?

So to get back to those rules of the game, from what I learn so far, I can boil it down to this. What are our most fundamental rules in the West?
  • We all contain a spark of divinity and are all created equal before God so we deserve the same respect" <= that's a rule, an assumption, an axiom
  • God can be bargained with, he's still above us and should be respected but he's not a tyrant. He's a person, we are his son (Jesus) and we use speech (the Holy Spirit, also represented by Mary) to interact with him. The holy trinity as simply (so I guess it's a bit wrong) as I can put it.
  • Since speech is also divine, the truth is our highest value, under no circumstances can you lie, and if you absolutely have to (because you can tell the truth to commit evil), you have to come clean afterwards (confession).
Now let's view the mirror of those axioms in Islam, as far as I could understand them from reading the Quran, researching Islam, having a Muslim best friend and a goddamn cousin that converted to Islam:
  • We are all creatures of God and he has decided that Muslim men, Muslim women, slaves, the People of the book (Jews and Christians), kufars (atheists/agnostics) and apostates (ex Muslims) would all have different worths in his eyes. We are not divine and we don't have to respect each other. Always try to assess where other people stand on the above hierarchy and follow the Quran and the Hadith to know how to treat them.
  • God decides and his word his final, you can't bargain with him, he's not a person and we were not created in his image, he is this invisible form who can't truly be apprehended and understood by us. His Holy Book is right there, it's immutable, follow it to the letter and that's it. The trinity (so the logos/divine speech that goes with it) is explicitely denied in the Quran itself.
  • Since speech is not divine, and truth can be dispensed with, it was also easy for Muslims to codify the doctrine of Taqiya which clearly stipulates that God allows/commands you to lie if it's in the best interest of the Muslim community, if it will facilitate the bringing about of the Nation of Islam which according to them will one day rule over mankind.
*Takes a deep breath*

So all this to say that culture and religion will easily beat race and ethnicity when it comes to creating deep conflicts that are almost impossible to resolve. I'm concentrating on Islam and the other Western religion (and to an extent even the Eastern ones) here because it's no use making that analysis with other religion. I believe the above is why Islam is fundamentally incompatible with Western values and I also believe that very few Muslims (mostly apostates anyway) will ever give an inch when it comes to explicitely denying those values that they identify with, even though they usually don't live by them. It leads to this weird schizophrenic state where if you ask them about them, they'll tell you that of course, it's Islam that got it right, and the world would be a better place if their values above replaced ours.

And as people who still believe in socialism usually do, they will tell you that all the current Islamic countries didn't get Islam right:

"Real Islam has never been tried!" = "Real communism has never been tried!"

And that's why they all turned into shitholes.

Never thought I would end this post on that word, oh well.

Image
Hair transplants: 2000 graft (May 2014) and 2024 graft (January 2018) FUE's with Dr. De Reys for front and mid-scalp.

User avatar
That Guy
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Posts: 458
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 9:17 pm
Reputation: 1257
Norwood: NW2.5

Re: Political Compass Test

Post by That Guy » Wed Dec 05, 2018 5:40 am

Admin wrote:
Tue Dec 04, 2018 8:07 pm
I agree to an extent but I personally believe that culture and religion are way more powerful than race or ethnicity. If you go to a Church in the West, you'll often find that they're flooded by black Christians and you can get along with those people very easily. And I'll even dare to cite the example of my Muslim Arab best friend.

We love each other (no homer), yet you know my stance on Islam, and he knows it too, and I sometimes sit back and let him say that the West is not better than the rest of the world, that we can't possibly judge Saudi Arabia and that yeah, even their women must be happy to be second class citizens! Things like that.

Despite all that, he's a conservative at heart and he still wants to play the Western game. He can say he doesn't believe in it, that Islam supercedes it, but that's not what his actions show us. The rules of our game precede the rules of his game. But the main problem is that we know what happens the second he decides that his rules now apply.

Race, ethnicity and external appearance in general remain very secondary factors that don't account of much hatred and fear between groups of people, and it's sad that leftists still easily get stuck on those superficial variables. Like I don't know, white people probably hate Arab people because they think that brown skin is ugly or something, or that it's scary to racists and that's why they're Islamophobes! Sometimes I'd swear that this is the level at which they analyze this.

I have no choice but go full theological here because I believe this is where the difference can be found, sometimes manifest (ISIS), sometimes dormant, like in the case of vast majority of Muslims?

So to get back to those rules of the game, from what I learn so far, I can boil it down to this. What are our most fundamental rules in the West?
  • We all contain a spark of divinity and are all created equal before God so we deserve the same respect" <= that's a rule, an assumption, an axiom
  • God can be bargained with, he's still above us and should be respected but he's not a tyrant. He's a person, we are his son (Jesus) and we use speech (the Holy Spirit, also represented by Mary) to interact with him. The holy trinity as simply (so I guess it's a bit wrong) as I can put it.
  • Since speech is also divine, the truth is our highest value, under no circumstances can you lie, and if you absolutely have to (because you can tell the truth to commit evil), you have to come clean afterwards (confession).
Now let's view the mirror of those axioms in Islam, as far as I could understand them from reading the Quran, researching Islam, having a Muslim best friend and a goddamn cousin that converted to Islam:
  • We are all creatures of God and he has decided that Muslim men, Muslim women, slaves, the People of the book (Jews and Christians), kufars (atheists/agnostics) and apostates (ex Muslims) would all have different worths in his eyes. We are not divine and we don't have to respect each other. Always try to assess where other people stand on the above hierarchy and follow the Quran and the Hadith to know how to treat them.
  • God decides and his word his final, you can't bargain with him, he's not a person and we were not created in his image, he is this invisible form who can't truly be apprehended and understood by us. His Holy Book is right there, it's immutable, follow it to the letter and that's it. The trinity (so the logos/divine speech that goes with it) is explicitely denied in the Quran itself.
  • Since speech is not divine, and truth can be dispensed with, it was also easy for Muslims to codify the doctrine of Taqiya which clearly stipulates that God allows/commands you to lie if it's in the best interest of the Muslim community, if it will facilitate the bringing about of the Nation of Islam which according to them will one day rule over mankind.
*Takes a deep breath*

So all this to say that culture and religion will easily beat race and ethnicity when it comes to creating deep conflicts that are almost impossible to resolve. I'm concentrating on Islam and the other Western religion (and to an extent even the Eastern ones) here because it's no use making that analysis with other religion. I believe the above is why Islam is fundamentally incompatible with Western values and I also believe that very few Muslims (mostly apostates anyway) will ever give an inch when it comes to explicitely denying those values that they identify with, even though they usually don't live by them. It leads to this weird schizophrenic state where if you ask them about them, they'll tell you that of course, it's Islam that got it right, and the world would be a better place if their values above replaced ours.

And as people who still believe in socialism usually do, they will tell you that all the current Islamic countries didn't get Islam right:

"Real Islam has never been tried!" = "Real communism has never been tried!"

And that's why they all turned into shitholes.

Never thought I would end this post on that word, oh well.

Image

They aren't though. Nothing trumps ethnicity because it is a tie that transcends time, forever.

Most of those black christians will live in black communities. If you were to ask them if to choose one way of identifying themselves, and only one, they will not choose christian. They will not choose American. They will not choose straight, gay or bisexual. They will choose "black" every time.

I saw this when I was in Indiana. In this one town, although they shopped at the same stores and stuff, blacks lived on one side of the town, and white people on the other. Elkhart, around 2008.

This is also supported by many studies: Ethnocentric preference is the highest among any other type of ingroup preference.

The Muslims, the christians, etc. all had, at one point "united" different populations under their banner. Their culture, and their religion. It never lasted.

There will always be exceptions, but these are largely based on the individual, and never represent the group as a whole. It's kind of like how there are some Republican minorities in America, but the overwhelming majority aren't. So it doesn't matter.

If I might make an honest opinion Fred, I think that while you and I may agree on many talking points, I still think we are fundamentally different. That is, I think that you are still, at your core, a globalist.

It's best determined with a question:

Do you believe that white people should be allowed to have their own countries and territories, just as every other ethnicity in the world, is allowed to have their own?

User avatar
yettee
Hair Loss Rookie
Hair Loss Rookie
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 8:55 am
Reputation: 346
Norwood: NW2
Regimen: Minoxidil

Re: Political Compass Test

Post by yettee » Wed Dec 05, 2018 6:31 am

Admin wrote:
Tue Dec 04, 2018 8:07 pm
Race, ethnicity and external appearance in general remain very secondary factors that don't account of much hatred and fear between groups of people, and it's sad that leftists still easily get stuck on those superficial variables.
I think there's actually a lot of racism, and a lot of it is on the right. Clearly. And when you see and acknowledge this, the left/right distinction is going to finally become much less important for you than it is now, because it's also very clear that you hate racism and antisemitism. I suspect that you hate it so much, and see it as so nonsensical - and I agree - that it might actually cloud your view of how very common it is. And it's a cause of huge problems (as are some of the cultural/religion issues you wrote about. Both things can be true!), whether or not it comes from the left (and yes of course there is also racism coming from the left) or right. There is a huge center waiting for you, with people who are not racist and also have sensible ideas regarding immigration and refugees. Where it's not "push out the people who are different!" or "let everyone in!", which are both extremes. It doesn't have to be one or the other. The center gets less attention because it gets drowned out by the loud voices on the left and right, but it's surely there, and it's not a cop-out to be part of it. Far from it.

User avatar
That Guy
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Posts: 458
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 9:17 pm
Reputation: 1257
Norwood: NW2.5

Re: Political Compass Test

Post by That Guy » Wed Dec 05, 2018 7:09 am

yettee wrote:
Wed Dec 05, 2018 6:31 am
Where it's not "push out the people who are different!" or "let everyone in!", which are both extremes. It doesn't have to be one or the other. The center gets less attention because it gets drowned out by the loud voices on the left and right, but it's surely there, and it's not a cop-out to be part of it. Far from it.
It does have to be one or the other.

"Legal immigration" from the third world is the exact same thing, the same demographic replacement that the left wants: Just slower and legal.

Centrism, I've come to realize, is a lie, and it is for two reasons. There two types of "centrists" and they're two sides of the same coin.

The first type is a classical centrist, who supports a "balanced" policy. But these are generally dysfunctional as they try to blend aspects of fundamentally opposing ideas. These are invariably the type of people who, if two armies were marching toward each other, will be standing in between with their arms outstretched screaming "You both have valid points!!!" only to get cut down by both.

You have to pick a side. As the opposing sides move farther away from each other, the center WILL collapse and you'll be put on a team regardless.

The other type of centrist, is really just a person who has a lot of varied political beliefs. These people are extremely materialistic and are the type who, just yesterday said he'd be marching with your army, but you find him among the enemy ranks the next day and he's like "Well, sorry bro...they're kinda right too and I like their economic ideas better."

What centrists are, and is ultimately why I can't call myself one any more, is people who believe in nothing except maintaining order.

The issue of our time, and likely generations to come, is not about whether you're left or right, lib or con, socialist or capitalist.

You're either an Ethno-nationalist who believes that nations are their people and those people have a right to their own lands, or you're a globalist who believes they don't.

There is no in-between on this issue.

User avatar
rclark
Hair Loss Expert
Hair Loss Expert
Posts: 713
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 2:57 am
Reputation: 692
Norwood: NW4
Regimen: Finasteride 1 mg daily, Progesterone 2% (22mg daily), Minoxidil (15% AM/30%PM/ faster hair growth only).
Using 1.5 mm needle on all bald/balding areas weekly.

Re: Political Compass Test

Post by rclark » Wed Dec 05, 2018 3:42 pm

Took it again today.

Here's my results:
political_compass.png
political_compass.png (21.11 KiB) Viewed 177 times

User avatar
Johnt1997
Hair Loss Novice
Hair Loss Novice
Posts: 61
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2018 3:58 pm
Reputation: 91
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: Propecia - 0.5mg/day
Minoxidil - 5 & 12.5%
Regenepure shampoo
Location: Edinburgh

Re: Political Compass Test

Post by Johnt1997 » Thu Dec 06, 2018 4:31 pm

That Guy wrote:
Tue Dec 04, 2018 11:14 am
You're really asking if I'd consider myself a Neo-Nazi, which I wouldn't, but more specifically.

My view of what he did and wanted to do?

I guess this depends on specifics, but I'll say that the basic ideas of being an ethnostate, your people first, that democracy is not always the solution, and rejection of communism and foreign interest I would fundamentally agree with.

But, much like the Neo-Nazis of today, I disagree as to what life should be like for the people in that ethnostate or the means of achieving it, and I disagree with the whole "master aryan race" thing. I don't think we need people rounded up in death camps (though it's inevitable when democracy fails for too long), I disagree about the kinds of personal interests that should be sacrificed, etc. For example, most Neo-Nazis I've heard think that women should be married off against their will shortly after puberty, that they should "remain perpetually pregnant until they're years of fertility have passed" and that they shouldn't be allowed to vote or have agency because they'll just be whores otherwise.

It's little more than materialism and growth for growth's sake applied to people and is just cover for their own failures with women. It's really funny, because Nazis champion Iceland and Poland for being successful ethnostates, but fail to see that their particular brand of authoritarianism isn't needed to achieve this state.

Was He Interested In Taking Over Other Countries?

I think that's obvious.

Why am I dissatisfied with what I was taught?

My teachers would have you believe that Hitler (and Mussolini) simply rose to power because people are awful bigots or that maybe Hitler just had some sort of hypnotism powers. These people had absolutely no valid point or motivation whatsoever. They and their followers were just evil and that was that. Fuck, my Bolshevik 9th grade teacher literally said that Hitler was just angry because a goat bit one of his nuts off...

It's intellectually dishonest and lazy.

Even the communists still had a point; it's easy to see why socialism appealed to the Russian people.

But here's the redpill:

Russia, Poland...they survived a brutal government and economic system that was designed for them to serve rather than the other way around, which economies are supposed to do. They survived the most anti-freedom ideology there is because they remained one people, "comrades", and they came out of it as one people.

History, especially concerning the soviets, teaches us an important lesson that the west is only beginning to remember: People like Dinesh D'Souza are wrong when they say that "When a nation is no longer free, it ceases to be a nation." A nation ceases to be a nation when it's ethnic people, with a shared genetic history that ties them to a culture and ancestral homeland, are lost.

It is for that reason that I cannot say that any of the nationalist dictators, be they fascists or communists of yore, were wrong about their sense of brotherhood.
If the Allies hadn't fucked Germany so hard in the ass with the treaty of Versailles then Hitler would have had no chance of gaining popular support the way he did

User avatar
That Guy
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Posts: 458
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 9:17 pm
Reputation: 1257
Norwood: NW2.5

Re: Political Compass Test

Post by That Guy » Fri Dec 07, 2018 1:11 am

Johnt1997 wrote:
Thu Dec 06, 2018 4:31 pm
If the Allies hadn't fucked Germany so hard in the ass with the treaty of Versailles then Hitler would have had no chance of gaining popular support the way he did
and?

User avatar
Johnt1997
Hair Loss Novice
Hair Loss Novice
Posts: 61
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2018 3:58 pm
Reputation: 91
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: Propecia - 0.5mg/day
Minoxidil - 5 & 12.5%
Regenepure shampoo
Location: Edinburgh

Re: Political Compass Test

Post by Johnt1997 » Fri Dec 07, 2018 1:18 am

That Guy wrote:
Fri Dec 07, 2018 1:11 am
and?
Just going off your point about intellectual laziness. I agree with you that its not just because people are racist and horrible

User avatar
That Guy
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Posts: 458
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 9:17 pm
Reputation: 1257
Norwood: NW2.5

Re: Political Compass Test

Post by That Guy » Fri Dec 07, 2018 5:52 am

Johnt1997 wrote:
Fri Dec 07, 2018 1:18 am
Just going off your point about intellectual laziness. I agree with you that its not just because people are racist and horrible
Fair enough

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest