>Orban
>Kaczynski
>Brexit
>Trump
Upcoming:
>Le Pen
>AfD
Is the current political course somewhat comparable to the Spring of Nations in the mid-19th century? Back in the day, people were sick of monarchism and imperialism, now they're fed with globalism.
It's more like 1930s and I am not even joking. In both cases there is dissatisfaction with political elites and severe economic downturn.
neither lel pen nor afd will win you fag
>Is the current political course somewhat comparable to the Spring of Nations in the mid-19th century?
Did the conservatives of the world started gunning down their leaders and launched revolts and even outright civil wars across the western world?
No?
Then it isn't. Its just meme elections and refendums which you fuckers do all the time.
...
Not that guy, but a Le Pen presidency is more unlikely than a Trump presidency. It may happen but I think it is ambitious to see it as a certainty. If she makes it into the final run off then whichever party has been knocked out, the socialists or the UMP, will encourage their voters to vote for against Le Pen like they did in 2004. The UMP are moving right themselves so they have the potential to eat in to FN momentum.
Interesting times we live in.
it´s year after the current year
conditions are different, you no longer gun drown revolts in blood
These. Part of the richness and greatness of Western civilization is that it can tolerate the existence of so many millions of losers and retards [meme referendums, protest votes], while still forging full steam ahead with its goal — the creation of the Overman — without skipping a single beat. The degenerates call this steamroller effect of our culture — the marginalization of all groups not contributing to our culture's goal, and their reduction to clown- and freak-show status by our media — "elitism", "materialism", "globalization", "degeneration", or any number of other nasty names; while between us it is known as simply "power".
The increased level of stress in the modern world is a reflection and direct consequence of the increase in the extent of the order of rank inside our culture. Instead of many little hierarchies, you have a gigantic one, in which everyone feels the weight of many more others on top of him than before. This is globalization: efficiency, progress. Engage with globalization — and either reap the rewards if you are above average, or the extra stress if you are below or don't, by moving to a desert island or Siberia and living like a savage. Claiming that disengaging from globalization is a solution is of course a ruse. They don't even want to limit the extent of their own country's globalization, because when this actually happens they whine about high prices and falling quality of life. At most they try to grab as much as they can of the fruits of globalization while giving back as little as possible. And that's why they are so stressed, because leeching is a far more nervously taxing strategy than simply giving, which is what the above average do, which is why they are above average.
The third option would be stopping globalization altogether but this would require a power far stronger than globalization's, which is to say a culture that's even more globalized than it: aliens, a delusion.
I wouldn't apply Nietzsche in the modern world in that context.
Surely increased globalisation and consumerism only leads to further entrenching the last man? A society in which all wear the same, speak the same, serve the same and think the same? Where only pleasure is good and cheap hedonism.
You are wrong.
Why have the "leftists" been wanting to praise people who do not contribute a single bit.
>comparing modern shitty populist movements to revolutions led by poets, scientists and philosophers
This is the indigo pill, in case anyone is wondering.
>I wouldn't apply Nietzsche in the modern world in that context.
why?
>Surely increased globalisation and consumerism only leads to further entrenching the last man?
The obsessive hatred, bordering on psychosis, against products — i.e. against man-made objects — seems to be the hallmark of the pseudo-intellectual today. Hatred of consumption, a problem which no sane, healthy person has ever had. As if food and clothes, as if eating or dressing were bad. Such is the pseudo-intellectual's craving to appear to be raging at something, that he will rage at life's basic necessitities if need be.
>A society in which all wear the same, speak the same, serve the same and think the same? ... cheap hedonism.
Your obsession with the masses blinds you to the uniqueness found both above and below: yes, the status quo is neutralising, not bad!
What has that to do with my post?
Elaborate. Red raised to a more royal tone?
>AfD
Lol no
Memelord poseur
Nationalism was progressive and revolutionary back then
Today it is reactionary. Liberal Capitalism is dead. Two paths lie ahead; socialism or fascism.
lol
really made me think
???? LOL
Which is why Spring of Nations 1848 was fucking different.
All those Nationalist/Revolutionary Liberals lived in Monarchies & Republics that they didn't like and instead of waiting for change, or parliament meetings, they took matters into their own hands.
The conservatives of today just waited and toed the line and did things as per procedure like the normies they are.
The Spring of Nations of our time was 2011 in the Middle East, no doubt about it.
We are back! #Reactionary4Ever
Indigo is an evolution of blue, not red.
all about the iron pill bruh
>1848
>Europe was OK afterwards
>2011
>Still not finished.
>Middle East is shit.
Europe didn't have the "benefit" of a bunch of much more powerful nations influencing their movements.
Sorry but I'm straight.
feels fucking great man
Nationalist poser detected.
I can't wait for the Golden Dawn to win and invade us :^)
>tfw Mussolini's prediction will come true but fascism is kill and it was replaced by shit
what prediction?
nationalism precedes fascism. fascism was a post-WW1 aberration
>Nationalist poser detected.
It was an EXPLICIT defence of globalism, you fucking idiot.
I.e. almost no points are discussed, and everyone tries as hard as they can to halt the discussion entirely. — Because deep down they know I am right, since all of Existence reveres and praises power and genius. The meanness and the baseness of subhumans are merely the way that this particular form of life praises.
Nationalism started out as a leftist ideology. Those people were fighting against conservatists of the 19th century.
Unfortunately I don't see AfD or Le Pen happening anytime soon.
I mean if Cologne and Bataclan didn't wake the population up, I don't see anything that could bring them in power.
Maybe a 1929ish recession.
Despite humanity's power and genius, we've been going through the same motion for thousands of years. I completely disagree with your conclusion.
NO SHIT THE MOTHERFUCKERS IN 1848 LOST.
Meanwhile the Arabs took out two regimes, and wars are still ongoing
Araps confirmed for better than 1848 Liberals.
>Europe didn't have the "benefit" of a bunch of much more powerful nations influencing their movements.
They did, it's called the Congress of Vienna. European states helped each other out.
Famously in HUngary: Hungarians had the edge versus Austria, but Russia came in Hapsburger's defense.
I'll take green.
Why not both?
I heard that in 2015. Everybody said that there was no chance that Kaczyński will get to power.
>Sejm: 37,58%
>Senate: 39,99%
I heard that again the following year. There is no chance that UK will leave the EU
>Leave: 51,89%
I hear it one more time 2 weeks ago. Trump will NOT become the president. NOBODY will vote for this racist, misogynist, fascist idiot.
>Electoral vote: 306 - 202
Tell me once again that Le Pen and AfD won't win
feels good
What motion? You are quite the reductionist.
The AfD won't win, they have nearly not enough support in the broad population to get the majority
However they will get into the Bundestag
We are just entering the Caesarism phase as predicted by Spengler.
People got fed up with OPEN YOUR BORDERS, OPEN YOUR HEARTS OPEN YOUR WALLETS OPEN YOUR DAUGHTER'S VAGINA rhetoric. The left has dictated the debate for too long. It got out of hand in these past years. Instead of being the party that would provide support to the average working man, they instead became a party representing freaks, making LBGQT and Muslim immigrants their core questions. The average man does not give a shit about that. Hell he'll most likely resent those things. Yet the left marched on, convincing itself that so long as everything they dislike gets the racist brand, they'll win.
People are turning to the right because the left abandoned the people. This isn't a party that seeks the well-being of the majority. They're instead obsessed with minorities and sexual deviants that have suffocated debate from the issues that the average man has to face. And this is why the right is coming back with a vengeance. The common man has something to turn to now. The party of the elites is now the party of the poor and muted. What ironic twists History takes.
I was genuinely told by a sheltered suburban libtard that if you're white and poor it's only your own fault and only niggers have valid reasons to live in poverty. The Democrats went from FDR to this travesty, no wonder the white working class turned on them.
>MUH WHITE WOMENS
Fucking die cucklord.
The 1930s and the previous decade have things in common, but are not completely the same:
In common
>Several re-established states in central/eastern Europe having poorly or not completely established democracies turning non-democratic after financial turmoil
>Several central/eastern European countries having revisitionist claims (e.g. Russia, Hungary)
>USA and the general government striving for a more isolationist economic doctrine, are in the procress of establishing one, or have forces within their countries calling for such a doctrine (Britain, the USA, France, Germany, Hungary, Poland etc.)
> Right wing surgence is a direct reaction (reactionism ringing a bell) to a rising or in effect rise of left ideology
>Debate over religious and ethnic minorities
different
> European powers (e.g. Italy, Germany, France, Britain) already have well-established democracies and no revisionistic claim or economic problems due to a war
> France and Germany try to work together in having economical and diplomatic power over central/eastern/south-eastern Europe
> Fascism as a whole has already been a historical occurence, so it's no novum
> There already is a more functioning league of nations (the UN)
> The EU is already in place, other than just a dream of some Frenchman
> The idea of warfare has completely changed within those 80 years
>Left wing ideology and right wing ideology are usually much more tame than 80 years ago
> International networking and economy is much higher than it was 80 years ago
> Social media has revolutionized social structures
> Equality and economic wealth is much more established in most countries than it was 80 years ago.
> The religious ideology of right-wing movements has much less momentum has christianity is not as powerful as it was in the 20 to 30s
>the problematic religious minorities drives completely different fears than in the 30s
>Ethnic minorities are a completely different problematic than they were 80 years ago
The Left has become a psychological phenomenon of confusing weakness for moral virtue, gaining a sense of superiority over your higher status group by cucking against it, and removing all responsibility for one's situation if one can frame oneself as lower status.
It has also become a surrogate Christianity (oriented around post-Calvinism/Puritanism), wherein people pledge belief in an invisible equality and hunt witches ('racists', 'sexists' etc.) who have held little power recently and who one can be ostracised for being. As if there's something uniquely and inherently awful about thinking in terms of gender and race if one is male or white.
I simply do not buy the claim that 'racism' is any worse than 'nationalism' or 'univeralism' or 'regionalism'. It's just identities brah. Why would you not forge ahead with the work of your civilisation, grown from the stock of your race?
>weakness for moral virtue
Not even that, see According to them you can only be weak and helpless if you're not white.
>Them
>They
That's insanely oversimplifying the leftists movement.
It really is most of them. The revolutionary tumblristas think white people are the devil, Bernie Sanders said if you're white you don't know what poverty is and Hillary has went full neocon in abandoning working class whites.
>inb4 orthodox Marxists
Those are about as relevant as monarchists nowadays, if not even less.
>Tumblristas
>Bernie Sanders
>Hillary Clinton
Regarding the leftist movement on the whole, these examples are extremely focussed on the US.
Well which leftists are still uncucked? I can only think of Zizek and even he is treated like a meme curiosity if anything.
>Brexit
A fairly bland event. People didn't seem to realize how long it would take to get out or the things that would be involved.
>Trump
Trump will soon realize what every president before him has, life in office is very different then life on the campaign trail because you have to deal with a long more factors (Bush's "No new taxes, oh I wait here are some new taxes" is a good example of that).
There are three things amusing about the current situation.
The first are the claims of "elite betrayal". There was no betrayal, they said they would do X, people voted for them, and they did X. The only problem is people either failed to understand what they were doing or couldn't be bothered to pay attention to things like trade deals.
The second is the idea that the left forgot about the working class. The left moved right (econlog.econlib.org
The third is how little people seem to understand the current economy or even the old one. I've talked some who think Trump will bring the glory of the 1950's back. That glory was only possible because everyone was reeling from WW2 or underdeveloped. Others admire the 1980's. That was when deindustrialization was in effect, the US was facing more competition worldwide, and going through extensive liberalization. People will rail against globalization when the US pushed it on much of the world and is now trapped in a web of deals that it cannot easily get out. I'm honestly interested to see what Trump is going to do.
This is what the majority of the leftists I've come across in politics, media and in person have been like.
A fair point. I blame Puritanism.
It's like how former Talmudic Jews went so hard on Marxism.
>uncucked
So, by using that term you're thinking of leftists who fight for the "white" interests as well as uncucked? Or leftists who solely fight for white peoples interests?
And in that regard, what constitutes a leftist for you? Someone who strives for national/international equality, someone who wants to protect nature, someone who is more economically protective towards industries in regards of national workers interests, someone who is economically for high taxes for the rich? All those combined?
Regarding the fact, that you have anarchism, communism, marxism, socialism, social democracy, social justice movements, liberal left-wing ideology, conservative socialism, conservative liberalism, I can't really pin-point your idea of leftists.
Not necessarily prowhite, just not explicitly antiwhite like most American and European leftists are.
I assume they meant someone who doesn't believe that all white people have no problems, who is unafraid to pursue controversial lines of analysis and who actually works for the working class.
The spring of nations were revolutionary democratic movements.
The return of fascism is a reactionary movement against humanism and enlightenment ideas.
Ironically, this reactionary traditionalist movement claims to defend western values, while destroying the ideals that have given us the modern west.
We're in the 30s again, but worse since the disaster of leninism has made people skeptic and there isn't a real counter-reactionary movement anymore. The irrationality of the postmodern left ("swj" according to /pol/) only helps the reaction.
(cont. from
)
To give you an example, after Rotterdam, Zizek wrote a piece about how everyone acts like opportunistic savages given stress and opportunity and we should stop hand-wringing and pearl-clutching while trying frantically to deny that it happened. We should also not language-police hard and instead allow a certain amount of bantz, because that's how people come to know and respect each other.
I personally disagree. I don't want large numbers of people coming to the West who don't share the civilisational impulse (Faustianism), whose views on women are not compatible with how I want society to be, whose IQs are lower, and who will contribute significant amounts of crime while being an unhappy drain on the state. But I can respect it a lot more than "White men are also sexist. Check. Mate.", which was the reaction from most of the mainstream media left.
>Rotterdam
*Cologne
I view him as le harmless Slovene, who has interesting ideas, rather than a blatant shill for global corporate oligarchy with a shrill face.
It's even worse. At least in the 1930s there was a leftist movement to be crushed.
This is the right wing agenda at odds with the right wing agenda and pushing against the right wing agenda, after all, free market and global capitalism were always the endgoals of the right wing "fiscal conservatism". Anyone who is mildly aware should contemplate that this signifies the end of capitalism, finally the ouroboros met its own tail and starts eating itself, with millions of deluded white workers willing to throw themselves and serve as pavement for the same blunderbus that was once heading straight to multinational markets and now heads fast to a wall.
There are "leftist" movements, they are just either very minor or have abandoned reason after the failures of the past century. We're doomed user.
Exactly my point. There isn't a "left". It was long gone. These new neoreactionary movements are pushing against themselves.
And once we realize what a retarded battle everybody was fighting all along, it'll be too late. At least Elon Musk can rest easy on his simulation question. Nope, we are heading straight for a harrowing end.
In these instances it's usually the right wing within the socialist movements that have these views.
Look at the centrum and right-wing within German social democrats, the Green party in Baden-Württemberg, the socialists in Spain/Greece, the revisionist communist parties in central and Eastern Europe. They usually call for harsher immigration policies, for the equality including whites in their social programs.
> At least Elon Musk can rest easy on his simulation question.
I seriously wonder if he thinks this because life has been fucking easy for him and he feels like the overpowered main character in a video game, and it's more likely to him that his success is simulated rather than real.
>neoreactionary
Stop misusing words. Neoreactionaries are a specific group of people that people like Trump or Faeage gave nothing to do with.
>France
Juppé in 2017
LePen in 2022
>Germany
AFD in 203X(still not popular enough)
MEGA MEGA MEGA MEGA
MAKE EUROPE GREAT AGAIN
Where's the bread pill?
Accept Lord Jesus Christ as your saviour.
>almost every government in Europe underwent liberal reform in 1848
This was spontaneous?
yesssss
It's literally the transition to the last stage of civilization, imperium. Look at all these meme lords on the internet quoting Evola and Mussolini. These teens are going to grow up one day and support fascist dictators, mark my words. Far-right politics breeds more far-right politics.
I want a beardpill.
La ilaha illa allah, muhammadun rasoolallah
>Trump
>populist
>didn't even win popular vote
i am not a philosopher nor a scholar, i simply browse this board for dank history-stories. Can someone explain what the hell he is talking about so a retard can understand it?
Are rednecks even real white people? I think they're more closely related to orangeface than actual white people.
ill keep trudging along with my unenlighetend white pill thank you very much
It's closer to the 1870s-80s and 1950s-60s than either the 1848 revolutions or the 1920's-30's. The former was mostly liberalism and the latter fascism, while what we're seeing now is just straight forward populism.
You know that there is such a thing as identity politics...
Yeah but most people have no fucking idea what it means. It's normally limited to the parties tied to an ethnic group or religion that you often see in Third World countries and almost never in the First World, except for regionalists.
As in what that user is griping about in just that identity politics between liberals and conversations with muh LGBT, religion, race etc etc
Left/Right is fundamentally based on class. So those people can't really be called right wing
Another 2-3 elections and AfD will be the largest party in Germany.
All the germano-nordic nations are like that. Consensus-driven and extremist. When the consensus turns it turns HARD and fast.
>Well which leftists are still uncucked?
Literally none in the Western world.
You'll hear a ton of excuses but fact is that the old Left didn't have an issue with workers personal opinions on social issues. Well into the late 70s it was still okay for a die-hard communist of any disposition to consider homosexuality a disorder caused by capitalism which would not arise in a communist society and many strains of SocDems didn't focus at all on issues that affected such negligibly small groups.
I wouldn't bet on Juppe making it with the sentiment going around in France right now.
Is that third one Dutch
I predict Trump winning won't help any of these other parties - legitimate or not.
I predict that he and his Republican Congress will do damage to the US and the world.
>and almost never in the First World
Literally what.
It's the bread and butter of all Leftist movements now. America is the worst about it where every group is talked about in terms of race, but the Anglos and other shit-tier leftists do it too with "muh Kurdish issues", "Muslim interests", "black representation" etc. Free Schools are barely being fought anymore on the left over this kind of vote-buying shit.
Bump
>mfw SD looking to be the largest party 2018 and the others are starting to move towards being able to work with them
>They've gone from arguing large cut in third-world immigration to total stop followed by repatriation of anyone who achieved refugee status by fraudulent means (refugee men systematically lie about their age)
it's hungarian, the colors are red white and green if you look closely and also the language on the flags is hungarian
His success is simulated rather than real. He's coasting on government money.
I don't read no fucking hungrein and color blind it should be better if it was Dutch The Netherlands needs a right wing change
The thing is, the majority of states on this planet, today, are fascist. While it's no novum, it's the current reality.
While they may be mild, centrist fascist states, it's still fascism.
en.wikipedia.org
>slaves desire our current great civilisation to change, and want this to come about politically
>masters are those who adapt to any political climate
The second part is just the economic reality.
"Democratic legitimacy." But there's nothing "legitimate" about it, going by the slaves' own definition of legitimacy. For what "right" does the majority have to rule over, and oppress, the minority? And not only when the difference between the two is a couple of percentage points, as in most modern democracies, but even down to the individual person. What right do the millions have in telling me what to do, and throwing me in jail if I refuse to do it? The same exact right as dictators and monarchs of old: they are more, and therefore stronger. As for being "bound by law", I don't remember signing any contract. No one even bothered to INFORM me that I was bound by law, or even tell me WHAT these laws were. "Democracy": in plain words: the fascism of the majority. This is where their belief in the preeminence of numbers leads: the fascism of the majority is stronger, i.e. more fascistic, than the fascism of the minority (i.e. of the dictators and their cronies). If a "fascist" state lacks "democratic legitimacy", therefore, all this means is that, as far as the slaves are concerned, IT IS NOT FASCISTIC ENOUGH.
I think you're replying to the wrong guy. I agree with you. I believe fascism and democracy can coexist, and often do.
Democracies can only be socialist or fascist.
This.
Even worse and more pathetic in the case of USA and UK, as these two countries are literally the ones responsible for jumpstarting neolib globalization (Reagan and the english bitch) impose that system, profit massively from it for some time at the expense of others and empower corporate global elites as the markets 'will fix themselves'. In addituon they are again literally the countries responsible for provoking the Crisis of 2008.
They're now reacting in an incredibly populist manner against their very OWN deeds and putting the blame on others.
Literally Hitler.
I agree about the US/Britain/etc being largely responsible for globalization yet many of their citizens ignore that to blame others. I don't agree about our situation being like the 1930's.
Things are a lot more democratic and transparent now. Blaming the elites or the establishment is in some cases absurd because a good bulk of the public supported them and voted them to their positions.
Our environment is a lot more internationalist in the sense nations are more connected than ever before, limiting the moves they can makes in some instances.
Our current economic decline is nothing like the Great Depression even in the wake of 2008.
One of the most interesting things about Trump to me is how some see it as some see only as a battle between the SJW/not SJW (though I've only really seen this so far from people on the internet even though I live in a red state). While other right wing places like Zerohedge will go on and on about the evils of central banking they at least acknowledge there are other powerful people worth noting who can have a huge effect on the world. With the alt right that has spread throughout Veeky Forums and other places only the SJW matter. I've heard some say because culture directly effects economics using Sweden as an example. Sweden is a terrible example because the Sweden people typically think of hasn't existed since the 1980's (thenorthstar.info