No.1834263
>>1834260What the fuck my heroes all together!?
>white nationalistCIA meme
No.1834268
>Yousef made frequent, unsuccessful attempts to convert McVeigh to Islam
No.1834362
>>1834263you're right, your "hero" wasn't a white nationalist, he was a glowuyghur
No.1834762
>>1834263white nationalist is an oxymoron. what that would mean is to be an ethnonationalist of a white nation. but all self proclaimed white nationalists are really white globalists, they want all white countries to live under the one world government for white countries and also think there is such thing as white culture and that it is the same for all white nations. that is of course completely retarded and false.
Also if you don't drink alcohol you cannot be anywhere on the authoritarian scale (nationalist, communist or something else), sorry not sorry.
No.1835343
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Nazism#%22Universal_National_Socialism%22,_1950s%E2%80%931970s>Yockey, a neo-Spenglerian author, had written Imperium: The Philosophy of History and Politics (1949) dedicated to "the hero of the twentieth century" (namely, Adolf Hitler) and founded the European Liberation Front. He was interested more in the destiny of Europe; to this end, he advocated a National Bolshevik-esque red-brown alliance against American culture and influenced 1960s figures such as SS-veteran Jean-François Thiriart. Yockey was also fond of Arab nationalism, in particular Gamal Abdel Nasser, and saw Fidel Castro's Cuban Revolution as a positive, visiting officials therehttps://indianexpress.com/article/news-archive/print/fidel-castro-recruited-exnazis-to-train-troops-during-cold-war/>Fidel Castro recruited former Nazis to train Cuban troops at the height of the Cold War, according to newly released German secret service files>Castro, the then Communist President of Cuba, also bought 4,000 Belgian-fabricated arms from two middle-men who had strong links to the extreme German right>It sheds light on the extent Castro,who in public was stringently committed to socialism, was willing to go in order to further his grip on the island nation and prevent an invasion from the US>Bodo Hechelhammer,historical investigations director at German foreign intelligence agency Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND) said: “Evidently, the Cuban revolutionary army did not fear contagion from personal links to Nazism, so long as it served its objectives.”>The documents, released by the BND and published online by German newspaper Die Welt, show a series of plans developed in October 1962, at the height of the Cuban Missile Crisis>They reveal that two of the four former Nazi SS officers invited to La Havana had taken up the offer,and that they would receive ‘substantial wages’ of more than four times the average German salary at that time, the New York Daily News reported>And regarding the purchase of right-wing linked arms, they show how Castro, now 86, had dealt with two traffickers, Otto Ernst Remer and Ernst Wilhelm Springer, in buying 4,000 pistols No.1835379
who cares
No.1836097
>>1835343It all makes sense. In two centuries of capitalism, there were no national socialists, but after just one communist state, a hundred of third positionist movements spring up from nothing. So clearly these had to be financed from the west. But with SSSR winning, there was no use funding them anymore and more organic ones popped up that didn't necessarily engage in ideological globalism and supported endless wars to exterminate communism worldwide
No.1836105
>>1834260>what are some examples of unlikely political friendships in history?Vladimir Lenin critically supporting an Afghan monarchist
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1919/oct/14.htm No.1836430
>>1836097>It all makes sense. In two centuries of capitalism, there were no national socialists, but after just one communist state, a hundred of third positionist movements spring up from nothing.Ehhh minor correction here, "National Socialism" as an idea can be argued to have predated the USSR. Charles Maurras for example was arguing that "anti-democratic Socialism" was in fact the "pure" form of Socialism as early as 1900 and is quoted as saying something along the lines of:
>"Socialism fits Nationalism like a well-made glove fits a beautiful hand."During the Russian Revolution some Whites eventually came to advocate "National Bolshevism". Similarly you have figures like Ferdinand Lassalle who were simultaneously nationalists and socialists.
Not trying to be dismissive, mind you. I'd say a kind of "National Socialism" (though that term has been tainted by the Nazis) was an organic emergence in Socialist thought. It was inevitable that some would try to combine the two, especially given that before Fascism, "Nationalism" was more associated with a kind of Jacobinism of the French Revolution.
No.1836455
>>1834762>they want all white countries to live under the one world government for white countries and also think there is such thing as white culture and that it is the same for all white nationsaside from dick spencer and the rare tradcath this simply isn't true though
we acknowledge the ethnic differences between different white subgroups while at the same time seeing the value in collaborating against the nonwhite hordes
I'm a burger not european proper so I won't comment on the EU, but I know most American white nationalists are opposed to NATO and tend to be isolationist instead
>>1836430glad to see someone here is even familiar with maurras
his writings are the main reason my response to being called an antisemite is "thanks for noticing" lol
No.1836484
>>1836430>>"Socialism fits Nationalism like a well-made glove fits a beautiful hand."Not the same. NatSoc in reality was an anti soviet ideology.
>Hitler did not invent the term 'National Socialism': it was first described by an Austro-Hungarian political activist named Rudolf Jung in 1913. Jung declared that it was necessary to fight the evils of 'international socialism' by opposing it with a movement for 'national socialism'.>As Jung saw it, socialism promoted class warfare and division by pitting capitalists against workers. His preferred solution would be for capitalists and workers to work together - with state intervention to force them to cooperate if necessary - and instead focus their efforts on fighting enemies of their race (such as Slavs, Jews, and other so-called subhumans).So if anyone is wondering why making race a central tenet of your ideology is bad, well here it is. Of course, modern left identity reductionists are basically the same, I can totally see them say retarded shit like this. I can't say though whether Jung was a plant or something else
No.1836486
>>1836430Of course that is not real national socialism, that title would be more fit to maybe Korea but I don't know enough to say. There is of course nothing wrong with nationalism but I wanted to point out that there are several coincidences when it comes to WWII
No.1836500
Well they are all bomb makers who fought the US government.
>how would their ideologies have clashed and what conversations they could have had?
Islamists and white nationalists don't get along but Bin Laden was a borderline luddite and environmentalist. Yousef and McVeigh probably talked about bomb making. Of the three, Yousef would be the most skilled and experienced bomb maker.
>what are some examples of unlikely political friendships in history?
Heidegger (a card carrying Nazi) had a sexual affair with Hannah Arendt, a Jewish socialist, and helped her escape persecution. Walter Benjamin of the Frankfurt School was good friends the conservative philosopher Leo Stauss who's idolized by neocons. Tali Fahima was and IDF vetran and Likud fanatic Netanyahu supporter. She somehow got the phone number of Zakaria Zubeidi, leader of Al-Aqsa's Martyrs Brigade in Jenin, and the two developed a sexual relationship. She moved in with him as a voluntary human shield to stop the IDF from assassinating him for which she was convicted of terrorism and sent to prison. She later dumped him because he made a deal with the Israelis so he could leave Jenin for medical treatment.
No.1836506
Foucault was apparently friendly with Ayatollah Behishti who he met when he visited Qom during the run up to the Iranian revolution. Behishti was a left wing member of Khomeini's inner circle who's assassination by other leftists triggered the crackdown on the left in Iran. Behishti used to attend Foucault's lectures in Germany when the gay philosopher was in the early stages of his career.
No.1836571
>>1836484Figure I should say I was using the term “national socialism” in a general sense rather than referring to a specific organization or movement in a historical context. My point being the seeds for a kind of “National Socialism” were planted long ago. It’s sort of reminiscent of some anecdote from Engels I believe, where he mentioned the Social Democratic movement as finally giving a name or vehicle to the ideas Marx and his followers expressed. And much like how Social Democracy would later become infamous for its betrayal of Socialist Principles I’d argue that the term “National Socialism” had lost any utility as a description by adopted by a movement of Misanthropic Racists and Capitalist Stooges.
There’s actually a really good scene in “Look Who’s Back” where Hitler encounters a group of modern far rightists in Germany. They call themselves the “National Democrats” and he completely clowns on their baby faced leader. One thing he mentions is the term “National Socialist” implies democracy so calling yourself “National Democrats” is redundant. And Yknow it shows what I’m talking asking about, it’s like a VHS tape that has become a copy of a copy of a copy, the quality decreasing with each iteration. They call themselves National Democrats because they want to conjure the image of the National Socialists, who in turn wanted to borrow from the image of the Social Democrats, and so on it goes. The terms becoming less coherent or relevant with each iteration.
As for Rudolf Jung, I’d say he was probably 60% egoist, 40% the genuine article. He apparently wanted to be known as a Nazi party intellectual, the “Karl Marx of National Socialism” and would occasionally feud with more influential Nazis. However I believe his policies were more or less welfare capitalism like bog standard social democracy, and his origins suggest he maybe was influenced by conflicts between Czech and German workers.
No.1836696
I don't know how true this is but Adolph Hitler apparently met a black American once and called his people slavish untermensch for not physically overthrowing Jim Crow and hanging every Southron by the balls
No.1836720
>>1834762>if you don't drink alcohol you cannot be anywhere on the authoritarian scale (nationalist, communist or something else)Huh?
No.1837683
least craziest political blunt rotation
No.1837782
>>1837708>>1837775So this is 'based', but Proudhon gets denounced despite the exact same case. The only difference being that he was an anarchist. Proudhon literally cannot be mentioned on here without it being brought up, but when it's Hyndman its suddenly okay.
No.1837828
Don't underestimate how far a shared hatred of liberals and the status quo can go in cementing friendship. I've repeatedly found it easier to talk politics with far right traditionalists and Islamists than with centrist libs. Don't get me wrong, in an actual political struggle with such people I'd not hesitate to shoot them dead, but when the stakes are low (as the inevitably would be in prison since none of them could take further action on their beliefs) it's not hard to have a friendly conversation.
No.1837837
>>1837708A lot of people criticize the Soviets for doing studies on why Jews are successful claiming that it is inherently anti-Semitic but I do think that out right ignoring the strong over-representation of Jews in media, finance and academia could lead to more anti-Semitism. It's similar to the situation in Hollywood, like sure it's not Jews all but it's a lot of Jews.
No.1837849
>>1837828>I've repeatedly found it easier to talk politics with far right traditionalists and Islamists than with centrist libs.That is cause you are a maniac. I'm a communist and I have insightful conversations with my lib friends. Always trying to steer the conversation towards socialist view points. I couldn't imagine having a conversation with a christian fascist or a islamist.
No.1837857
>>1837828>Don't underestimate how far a shared hatred of liberals and the status quo can go in cementing friendshipPretty sure the point in that the 3 people in OP made friends on is that they share a cell block and rec area devoid of other human interaction. That individual humans will often find reasons to get on when it's the only option as socialising tends to be important to us.
Not to be a dick but its autistic to contort it to view it as an ideological bonding.
No.1837888
>>1837837I think that Indians pretty much disproved the genetic antisemitism by being over represented themselves too. So I think the answer is nepotism or racism to gentiles
No.1837918
>>1836720Well Hitler was a teetotaler so I like to joke that a drunk never committed genocide (yes I know it's bullshit, it's a joke).
>>1837849To defend OP's point, I chat politics with a wide array of people. The libs would meet radical solutions with "But an eye for the eye makes the whole world blind" or "But when would you know where to stop" or some reiteration that problems can be solved by vooting hard enough. The rightists seem more open to the idea that the system has decayed so much that revolutionary overthrow is the only way anything different will happen.
I guess it depends more on whether you emphasize revolution or the economic aspects.
>>1837837To be fair, Judaism had/has a pretty strong academic tradition. Like Norman Finkelstein on his discussions on Israel, he recently said that to be a "Jew" to him meant shit like Franz Kafka or Woody Allen, emphasizing this stereotype of "kind of wimpy but really smart/cerebral" and given the fact medieval laws essentially forced them into trades that would benefit with the rise of Capitalism (banking, for example) it's no surprise Jews do well.
I also think it goes back to what Nietzsche calls "slave morality." Which is to say that when you've become completely overpowered by a more dominant force such as the Jews have been, and when materially challenging that force has proven to be impossible, then you retreat to introspection and pursuits "of the mind" in a way that allows you some degree of power outside/over your masters.
No.1837919
>>1837918>The libs would meet radical solutions with "But an eye for the eye makes the whole world blind" or "But when would you know where to stop" or some reiteration that problems can be solved by vooting hard enough. The rightists seem more open to the idea that the system has decayed so much that revolutionary overthrow is the only way anything different will happen.Nah. People who feel that way just want to "rock the boat".
No.1837933
>>1837837>>1837919>>1837918So, in my country, there's an ethnic group(the memons) who like less than 0.5% of my nation but are extremely disproportionately represented in business and media. They dominate it and it's not even a matter of debate. They have a centuries long strong academic and mercantile culture(plus they hire their own which probably helps a lot as well). They started most of the media industries in my country and a lot of the businesses. Now if this group somehow were dispersed in another region, I'm sure they'd survive and manage to thrive there as well and I assume it's a very similar case with the jews
No.1837949
>>1837919I mean, kind of? I can sympathize with it at least. I’ve got lib family and I hear a lot of “the Dems are trying their best!” Nonsense.
I also think it’s a habit on the radical right to have an ideological disconnect as it were. It’s something unfamiliar to us because we constantly strive for “the right line” or coherence in line with certain principles. The Nazis are unironically a good example of what I mean because while they’d be psychotically racist monsters, you see again and again some weird “exceptions”. Nazi officers would have “pet Jews” and Hitler himself would weirdly have positive relationships with every single Jew he’d personally meet—his mother’s doctor, his officer, his first crush, a little Jewish girl he met at a rally, etc.
It’s a disconnect that, like I said, you don’t really see in the Left. Tucker Carlson will have vaguely Left Wing people on his show, or express solidarity with causes beloved by the Left Wing (for example inviting a Palestinian Christian on to discuss Israel’s horrific treatment of their people) but if a Left winger returns the favor then they’re decried as platforming a fascist. I don’t know why that is, but it goes back really far—when Russian Whites developed sympathy for the Bolsheviks and tried to develop a “national Bolshevism” Lenin dismissed them as reactionaries and suppressed them. By contrast ᴉuᴉlossnW would give a few Leftists desk jobs. Marx would repudiate reactionary Socialists while Bismarck would meet with Lassalle. Shit I’ve heard there was even an anecdote in Wrangel’s biography on the Russian Civil War where he claimed (take this with a huge load of salt) that the Romanov’s kids would wear red ribbons out of some vague Bolshevik sympathy—kids playing romanticized revolutionaries more likely.
Now this isn’t to say you should ever presume you’ll be regarded as “one of the good ones” but it’s a trend I’ve seen on the Right that doesn’t really have a counterpart on the Left. Fuck I think even the Houthis have some communists they’ve brought into their governance.
No.1837980
>>1837849>Always trying to steer the conversation towards socialist view points.I find that to be unironically harder with libs, since by definition they either think that there is nothing seriously wrong with the way things are or that there is nothing that can be done to substantially improve things. At least with people on the radical right hate the same institutions I hate and can often at least entertain how capitalism is the cause of the things they don't like. They're also open to dramatic changes and smashing these institutions. The biggest problems with those types is their lack of universality, ie they may accept socialism in principle but always want to inject spooky ethnic or religious nonsense into it.
No.1838014
>>1837849fascism IS liberalism, it always degenerates to liberalism for any minor worker's rights it might have started off with. See Franco's spain
No.1838019
>>1838014Franco isn’t a good example since he was more or less just a conservative despot that came to direct a Fascist movement after its leadership was killed. The Falange, for example, tried setting up worker coops. Hitler would be a better example of Fascism being liberalism but more insane.
No.1838037
>>1838035>gaddafis>dengsthis aged badly
No.1838085
>>1838035Death to class collaborationists
No.1838124
>>1838035>>1838037I mean if we want to be pedantic couldn’t it be argued that communism always devolves into liberalism given Deng, Gorbachev, and shit, maybe even Castro all making some space for Capitalism.
Hell if we take the image at face value then it would appear ᴉuᴉlossnW’s ideals surpassed Stalin and Lenin’s.
No.1838298
>>1837775What are you talking about? Neither is okay. We have a white nationalist poster here. You're just too much of newfag to have noticed
No.1838300
Nightmare blunt rotation
No.1838304
>>1837949This is largely due to the fact that rightists have their projects already half done since they don't truly understand massive social systems or their ideologies and ambitions are much simpler to conduct leaving space for flexibility. Ultimately it all devolves into opportunism. They don't seem to care enough about the job itself as long as it gets done. Leftists on the tiger hand have very complex jobs that require trust and commitment which is why we are so purge happy. The Leftist ambition is absolute whilst the rightist is porous.
No.1838305
>>1837980This is because they are opportunists at heart or atleast compromisers for a specific thing they want. They don't care about how to get it as long as they get it. Rightists don't actually believe in any system, they are consumers fundamentally, they just want a particular thing to happen without the rigor to understand anything at all. If you recruit rightists you'll most likely either corrupt your movement or get a bunch of yes men.
No.1838307
>>1838124Well no given that after liberalizing almost all of them collapsed with very few of them thriving. Cuba is effectively collapsing, Indochina is in an impoverished state with slow development, and the only one that remains fairly developed and unliberalised is Norgh Korea
No.1838308
>>1838307all those countries are under a capitalist mode of production dude
No.1838309
>>1838308Very weak Glowposting my uyghurous fren. Also I didn't dispute that
No.1838311
>>1838304>>1838305See I reflect on statements like this and contextual statements from the Left at the time, where they kept receding against Fascists who, in their own words, "had no political programme."
Like what's it say if you've got all this equipment for finding water, but keep getting beat by a guy with a dousing rod and a vibe? Whether Lenin actually said (and I don't believe he did) that it was a shame the Italian Left lost ᴉuᴉlossnW because "he could have delivered us Italy" the fact of the matter is that ᴉuᴉlossnW did ultimately conquer Italy. Against a Left that had terrific thinkers like Gramsci and Bordiga. Against a Left that had quite a few years of experience. They still ultimately receded.
>>1838307So Fascism conquers a country, falls to liberalism and opportunism, and the country thrives after making a stable liberal turn. Communism comes to power in a country, falls to liberalism and opportunism, and the country is left a hollowed out wreck after. At least that seems to be the implication of what you're saying.
Look Communism achieved great things in its time on earth. It turned Russia into a superpower. But the arguments you're making just backfire.
No.1838313
>>1838309>basic marxism is "glowposting"lol why do i even bother with imageboards anymore
No.1838415
>>1838307China is on the right path and growing quickly, retard
No.1840438
>>1837708>>1837837Anti-Semitism is an all-consuming force that can often override and contradict all other racial prejudices. For example, William Dudley was an admirer of Hitler who didn't seem to hate black people and Native Americans. In fact, he was a big advocate for the latter and thought that the reservations should be for Jews and for a great people like the Natives
No.1840544
>>1838035I mean, Arab nationalists were pretty much all inspired by fascism. It's not even a question but when fascism fell and the Soviet Union became a dominant power they hid just quietly ignored but didn't change any ideological or political foundation
No.1840551
>>1834260>political friendshipsdont think thats the case they wouldnt have liked each other outside of prision but inside they had no other options
No.1840916
I think just considering the difference between Kaczynski and McVeigh is an interesting one. As people, to the extent that we know them, they were entirely different. As narratives, entirely different. And as well in terms of their own consciousness of what they were doing, apparently entirely different.
I have no interest in the life of Ted Kaczynski. I can read what he wrote–I don't agree with the main premise, but I appreciate its being written–and that's all I need. I feel I know everything about the man, expressed with impressive clarity. I don't feel there's anything in his relatively ineffectual acts or in his hermitage of any value beyond the extent that his lifestyle and his actions allowed that text to crystallize.
McVeigh, on the other hand, wrote little of note. His essay on "hypocrisy" is an interesting look at the limits that his reaction (and it is not a reaction isolated to him) to imperialism could possibly reach. His statements during the 60 Minutes interview get even closer:
>I went over there, hyped up, just like everyone else–not only is Saddam evil, all Iraqis are evil. What I experienced was an entirely different ball game. And being face to face with these people, you realize, they're just people.
<It's hard for people to come to grips with you as the same person who was commended by the army, as being the same person who was convicted in the Oklahoma City bombing. They cant put the two together.
>I do understand. Many people say, well Tim, if we think you're guilty, imagine the paradox. In the Gulf war, you were given medals for killing people. So I've faced that issue quite a few times.
<How do you explain it?
>At that point, I usually just leave it at that. And say that…it is an interesting paradox.
He couldn't express himself–he already had. The only real statement of truth that Timothy McVeigh ever made was in the singular bombing itself, which must stand as the greatest artistic statement to have come from the US in the twentieth century. It is the purest juxtaposition–the daycare in an Iraqi institution is a "shield"; the daycare in a US federal government building makes it an atrocity–that once illustrated, demands no further words. Everything else about his story–whether told by him, by his defence team, the media, the FBI–melts upon touch.
I can't imagine Ted having a particularly satisfying conversation with Tim. But I do find their ultimate proximity something quite dramatic.
Unique IPs: 35