2
AmericanSavage 2 points ago +2 / -0

Never. Especially not in her natural state.

1
AmericanSavage 1 point ago +1 / -0

The constitution is completely irrelevant between the amendments and false legal precedent. I want a based king to destroy my enemies, not some gay president limited by judges and the swamp. Say what you want about Trudeau but he's winning right now, and he'll continue to win until an organized force becomes more powerful than his government.

1
AmericanSavage 1 point ago +1 / -0

That's why I support an all-powerful state controlled by an aristocratic vanguard to crush liberalism once and for all.

16
AmericanSavage 16 points ago +22 / -6

This is a serious problem with capitalism that people don't talk about. I get that a strong and moral society is supposed to keep degeneracy in check, but these companies have the perverse incentive of corrupting society to enrich themselves.

5
AmericanSavage 5 points ago +5 / -0

Black hands silencing her white face. This is diversity.

1
AmericanSavage 1 point ago +1 / -0

Same. That sucks.

1
AmericanSavage 1 point ago +1 / -0

Oh lol. Are you American?

1
AmericanSavage 1 point ago +1 / -0

Just wondering, are you a woman? lol

1
AmericanSavage 1 point ago +1 / -0

Here are are a collection of quotes from Evola on the state:

"At the moral and political center of the best state is a king, who may choose a leader to administer the state. Strong central leadership does not subvert and, in fact, encourages subsidiarity or federalism, where most decisions and political activity occur at appropriate lower levels." - Julius Evola

"The Principal of 'number is power' is contradicted by all history known to us, since ‘numbers’ have always been subjugated by small, dominating groups. Empires have been created by these groups, and not by a demographic overflow of masses of the dispossessed and pariahs flooding over the lands of the rich with no other right but their poverty and procreative incontinence."

"The state of a traditional type has often presented the model or outline of the system of two houses, with a lower house and an upper house. The closest example was the duality in England between the House of Commons and the House of Lords in its original form. A Senate with members designated exclusively from above, chosen in consideration especially for their political qualities, the quality of representatives of the ‘transcendent’ dimension of the state, and therefore also of spiritual, meta-economic and national factors, could have constituted a superior hierarchical presence in respect to the Chamber of Corporations." - Julius Evola

"Ideal is a Chamber of Corporations where the estates, professions and vocations of the land are represented on the basis of importance and achievement, not of pure number." - Julius Evola

"The corporatist chamber is to be a place, not of ‘debates’, but of coordinated labor, where criticism is admitted not on a political basis, but on a technical and objective one. Once the parties are eliminated and representation is depoliticised, the purely political principle should be concentrated and exercised on a distinct and superior level. Corporations belong to the order of means and not to that of end. Corporatism is not to be a form or cover by means of which the economy would succeed in taking over the state, and so lead to the degradation and involution of the very idea of the state. The corporatist state is not the economic state. - Julius Evola

"Relations of loyalty and obedience, of free subordination and honor, are the bases of the true state, which does not acknowledge demagoguery and populism." - Julius Evola

"An authoritative state is strong enough to encourage decisions to be made at the lowest appropriate level."

"It is essential to form an elite that can define an idea with intellectual rigor and intellectual intransigence in rapt intensity. We must unite around this idea and affirm it." - Julius Evola

"We must intend to defend the integrity of the family, the basic cell of social unity; communal unity, the basic cell of territorial unity; and, finally, the professional and corporative unities, the basic cells of a new national organization of work and organs for surpassing the class struggle." - Julius Evola

"In the context of a restorative nationalism we are dealing with the following: first of all, giving a formal order to everything that corresponds to the bodily, vital, or animal part of a human organism in the social whole, and that represents dominion over the two inferior classes: work, economy, and political organization in the strict sense, creating an ‘economic peace’ that will bring about ‘unwinding’ and allow energies of a higher type to liberate themselves and act on a higher plane. Then men can begin reconstructing the second caste, which is that of the warrior aristocracy, with the monarch as the first of aristocrats. It is a pure aristocracy in which the ideal of the higher formation of the personality can be realized. We should not look at the corrupt and degenerate stocks, against which an easy demagogic critique can be practiced. We should look at the original type of the Lord, as a being in which self-mastery, refinement, culture, honor, loyalty, and especially the qualities of leaders have become a conquest consolidated on the sound basis of blood. Aristocracy is the necessary extension of positive nationalism, because if nationalism delineates the boundaries of blood and of an ethnic stock, aristocracy effects a selection and a further differentiation within such limits, leading from the general and collective towards the individual on a higher plane. This will be the basis for a type of state of a higher form, but it is too distant for us to do more than sketch it in outline." - Julius Evola

1
AmericanSavage 1 point ago +1 / -0

This is a very good reading list.

I've read most of the books pictured there.

I would say I'm a monarchist too. An aristocratic vanguard has proven to be the best system against subversion and long-term corruption. I mostly agree with Evola's view of the state, although his way of thinking takes some getting used to.

1
AmericanSavage 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'd say watch these four videos in order first. They serve as a good introduction to a truly conservative political philosophy and make understanding more complicated literature easier. They're pretty long all together but very informative.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2x8aZZ7I-Hc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Sf2qQuSI2I

https://youtu.be/N_kuFyN3Cwk?t=1046

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnsXKtE5PNI

Fascism Viewed From the Right by Julius Evola is a pretty accessible way to start reading. It follows a traditionalist right-wing critique of fascism from a man who lived through it. The Concept of the Political by Carl Schmitt is a good follow-up, although you might be better off watching a walkthrough of its main ideas first. The Outline of Sanity by G. K. Chesterton is a good introduction to conservative economics.

1
AmericanSavage 1 point ago +1 / -0

I disagree. Every society and institution will corrupt with time. That's inevitable, but a loose collection of individuals will corrupt much faster than a state with a strong constitution and elite vanguard presiding over the state.

1
AmericanSavage 1 point ago +1 / -0

Thanks man. Reading history and political theory has been my main non-athletic hobby for years now. Thinking about these things is good for the right kind of person. Not everyone will get it.

2
AmericanSavage 2 points ago +2 / -0

Democracy is part of the "liberation" narrative that started with renaissance humanism and the enlightenment.

It comes from jealousy and the false premise that everyone is the same and equal. Turns out, all men weren't created equal, not even close. Even when given the same right to vote, same access to opportunities, and even the same basic income and living conditions in communist countries, people are different. The historical "left" is just straight up wrong on every level and illegetimate.

1
AmericanSavage 1 point ago +1 / -0

I prefer strong government, not big government. Having a strict sense of good and evil (informed by objective morality) isn't the same as a national healthcare program or whatever. The government has to take a position at some point. Our weak government lead to subversion in other institutions that became way too powerful and unaccounted for like the media and academia.

2
AmericanSavage 2 points ago +2 / -0

Liberalism in general is retarded, even in the classical sense.

If you believe something crucially important is true, why would it be left to the majority to decide? Truth is truth whether it's popular or not. The media clique decides what's popular anyway. The majority opinion is completely manufactured and irrelevant.

1
AmericanSavage 1 point ago +1 / -0

I think the country would be better off if less people thought they were aware. We've seen in the last few years how easily brainwashed most of the country is. I prefer brainwashing people into being how I'd prefer them to be, instead of giving them equal say in government.

view more: Next ›