What is the general political stance of Veeky Forums?

Neo-Nomadicist

youtube.com/watch?v=2lnxs_DMUDk

Hahaha so much I kek'd after seeing there's still people believing in the left/right dichotomy. Come on it is 2016.
The only path to enlightment is knowing, not fearing, that the left & right concept is stupid and a social construct that only limit our true potential!

I don't know, I have Communist sympathies but am not convinced by radical egalitarianism.

>Come on it is 2016.

Greenpill here

Third Position on my more radical days
Usually I'm just a libertarian

Except the economists, who gleefully shit on everyone who isn't a proponent of liberal capitalism, because all of your economics is heterodox.

Libertarianism is just a face. True libertarians become crypto fascists at the end,when they realise that their model wpuld only work with a set of people. Commies must be physically removed from society.

Same, I always support communism in arguments, except that I think whites are superior to other races and men are superior to women. Someone on /leftypol/ called my position "alt-left"

>what is the general political stance of Veeky Forums?
Pretty diverse, most people are moderate but of the people who shill politics the "alt-right" is the biggest, followed by marxists. Libertarians have a decent following as do reactionaries.

Iron pill

>Not posting the updated version
Your problem is that you misunderstand the purpose of economics. It isn't supposed to accurately describe anything. It's a discursive tool used to acquire more do$h. "Heterodox" is the wrong word, you just aren't in a position to enforce your own economic opinions as if they were economic laws.

Is Evola a good read? It seems interesting to me,as far as what I read on the web about him,but his writting style seems quite tedious

Did Molyneux went full stormfront alredy? Didnt expect that.

Sounds like proudhon.

Why not find out for yourself?
youtube.com/watch?v=go22wxBDvj0
youtube.com/playlist?list=PLrHG_aAvxl-na1bPH-sexeuJSu4AelZ26
youtube.com/playlist?list=PLS8UswvQNy5EztQ_9oUSHhbM7QY-pxOxB

youtube.com/watch?v=_3yAulC10qI

Thanks for the links,I will look into them. Just wanted to know other people's opinion about it.

meh

He's an interesting thinker, basically the negation of the negation of Nietzsche from what I can tell. His most interesting concepts are the Imperium and the Differentiated Man.

Center right.

I'm a feudalist and I get called a bourgeoise by the local Marxists every single day.

His writing style is actually excellent (at least the English translations I have read, am am unsure about the original italian).

His terminology and intent are far easier to follow than other scholars, philosophers, and historians, as he clearly defines:

1. Who he is writing a book for
2. What his purpose in writing it is
3. What the modern historical backround leading up to the book is
4. Definitions of all terms he uses
5. What he hopes this book will offer the reader

His arguements are well organized and happens are sensibly divided.

What do I personally think of him? He's a defeatist who bases all his arguement on mysticism. Fuck evola.

But his analysis of modern history is impeccable and unrivaled.

Holy fuck,he went from ancap idealist to this. It tends to happen with libertarians.

I don't give any shits about Trumps.
Neither /pol/ but sometimes I recieve shit like vid related that itches my keks.

youtube.com/watch?v=SJ50XmALd54

JUST

this test is awful and places most people in the green due to its retarded questions

>tfw

I know that feel

Thank you. Seems to be very interesting. My last read was Burke,and is a pretty underrated guy if you ask me. I hope I like Evola

>defeatist
Do you feel there's hope, then?

I've been meaning to read Reflections on the Revolution in France, I need to brush up on paleoconservatism.

The makers of this test are autistic

This is their assessment of the 2016 US candidates

He is very inteligent. I like his writting a lot,and his arguments defending tradition were pretty new to me,something that sparked my interest. He was spot on why modern revolutions failed. Pretty underrated guy.

Looks about right

Seems accurate.

Here's my progression
High school
>The Daily Show basic bitch liberal
>ecstatic about Obama's election
>view government having a duty to regulate industry and enforce equality
Early College
>Become disillusioned with Daily Show style leftism because of Obama's first term
>Learn more about the NDAA, Fast and Furious, CISPA, all the other shady shit that Obama was doing or continuing to do
>Become centerist libertarianism because legalize weed, keep guns, and fuck the surviellence state maaan
>SJWs just appearing on the scene, think that they're wackos who ruined Occupy Wall Street with inane social bitching
Late College
>SJWs fucking everywhere, online culture war in high gear
>Start going even further right wing
>Lose some libertarian tendencies because muh degeneracy
>Start to become more reactionary, identitarian, and racist
>Unironically listening to The Daily Shoah and Counter-Currents
Post-College
>Realize that many popular alt-right positions are incoherent, but continue to agree with the idea that cultural clashes and in-group/out-group dynamics are becoming extremely relevant
>Beginning to reevaluate my stances,
>Realize that I have never done any "serious" ideological reading or development
>No idea what I believe in anymore, not sure if I have the energy or fortitude to read a bunch of political philosophy

Realizing that I basically still had same the unsophisticated meme-tier understanding of politics as when I was watching Jon Jewart was harsh. I'm trying to improve my level of discourse.

Nationalist republican/nationalliberal.

We all could have posted our entire intellectual history. You're the only one who chose to. How do you feel?

Nothing wrong with that.

Like I'm not going to suffer any social penalty for it

holy shit this forced meme needs to die

Oh look, a samefag

Vote
strawpoll.me/10407759/

>his political history is that of us all

Also, does anyone find it weird that pol hasn't caught on to the "store front" captchas yet?

From what I noticed people here are mostly critical of liberal capitalism, and some are full-blown Marxists, plus some tankies.
But otherwise pretty centrist.

So many fedoras

'no'

I don't understand your point.
I didn't imply that at all. I implied that any of us could have given as many details about ourselves as he did.

That's edited, here's the real one pham

>ms paint

Which meme?

My post was weird and overwrought, but since I did it on an anonymous imageboard it doesn't really matter.
Also, I think the general direction of my ideological journey is pretty common on Veeky Forums. I wanted to see if anyone agreed.

good

...

>but since I did it on an anonymous imageboard it doesn't really matter.
I disagree, desu.

that's literally me

Political stance is the enemy of history. Political stances are the cancer that distorts historical narratives to suit is fucking purpose. And therefore must be expunged from history as much as possible.

The lefty believing in eventual communism is as cancerous as the conservative who believes in the predestination of nation-states as the natural state for human societies, or the religious faggot who believes in apocalyptic millenarian visions.

History just happens. Period.

Heterodox refers to any economics that rejects statistical modeling because it hurts their feelings. Which is to say, any economics except Keynsian macro and neoclassical micro.

Civil Libertarian

Case in point:

>Is it better to control inflation or unemployment
>implying they aren't interrelated and that things that affect one don't affect the other

The test maker should an hero.

Communist.

More specifically Luxemburgist, but Lenin&co had some good ideas I guess.

The orthodox/heterodox distinction is based entirely on power relations. Marxist economics were orthodox in the Soviet Union and China pre-Deng, despite the fact that Marxist economics have always been heterodox in the West.

In the absence of central bank printing money:

Employment saturation causes inflation, economic recession causes inflation to halt, or even deflation.

Correct?

Waldemar did nothing wrong.

Your time will come.

The funny thing is had they not made a martyr out of Luxemburg she probably would have been forgotten like many other leaders of failed communist revolutions.

Instead the revolution lives on.

Dubs confirm
Rest well based spick of commie removal

That's a retarded and objectively incorrect definition.

Rainbow Pill best pill.

>the revolution lives on.

What is this political stance called?

Potentially apathy

bullshit, trump for example is not for "market economy"

But she is basically forgotten, if her revolution were focused on in Western history books people would sympathize with the Nazis more and understand the concept of reaction better. The only people who take her seriously are useful idiots.

>the revolution lives on

Literally nobody cares about the revolution anymore. Even fascism has a much bigger chance of resurging than communist revolutions.

What are you implying?

They just meme it up because he's le evil billionaire.

Depends on the country really.

To be quite honest I would say Rosa has only gotten more relevant among communist circles since the USSR fell, given her criticism of the earliest days of it could help describe where it went wrong.

> if her revolution were focused on in Western history books people would sympathize with the Nazis more and understand the concept of reaction better.
Yeah, bro. They would sympathize with the people who wanted to drive certain ethnicities to extinction because they were asshurt that a Polish Jew wanted to make Germany socialist.

I consider myself 'politically non-euclidean'

Depends where.

Neo-Fascism is very first world, communism in the modern day more or less proves Mao's thoughts on third worldism to be correct as they still have armed communist insurrections.

Although one could argue that revolution is inherently unpredictable and there could be another communist revolution in a world-power as happened in Russia to begin with.

what if you popped all the pills at once

It's dead in pretty much every relevant country on the planet, USA, Russia, Germany, UK, China, you name it. Nobody cares anymore. Just because there's a few memers sharing dead squirrels in Chiapas doesn't mean it's not dead.

>They would sympathize with the people who wanted to drive certain ethnicities to extinction because they were asshurt that a Polish Jew wanted to make Germany socialist.
Well, I know that I did after I found out that there was a Communist revolution in Germany after WWI. I know that a lot of contemporary leftists don't understand what the social impact of a revolution would actually be. I know that the Nazis were human beings, just like all the human beings I know, and I know that the majority of Germans clearly did not want to be part of the USSR.

It would be extremely painful

i didnt imply anything, i made a statement

For blue

I don't understand why you said it, though. I've seen nothing to indicate that Trump is opposed to market economies.

Fuck off. I do have a political stance alright, but this must be kept separate from history. Let it be said that "X Empire existed, and fell due to the problems that actually felled it." And not "LOL X KINGDOM FELL CUZ OF THE PROLETARIATS/IT WASN'T A DEMOCRATIC NATION STATE/GOD WANTED IT TOO."

Save politics for the shit that is affecting us now.

>Well, I know that I did after I found out that there was a Communist revolution in Germany after WWI
Yes, that's because you've drank the propaganda that socialism is 100% evil.

Not to mention Luxemburg was a vocal critic of the USSR and didn't exactly want to join it.