@antidem

AntiDem

Ask @antidem

Sort by:

LatestTop

Previous

For the sake of fairness, could you do some more NatSoc bashing?

Sure.
First, there are hundreds of great rulers throughout history who did amazing things for their countries. I am at a loss to explain why, out of all of them, the one we should heroize above all others should be the one who got his country destroyed within a dozen years of taking power. Surely we can do better than that, can't we?
Ah, but here's the thing - the reason that many do idealize Hitler is because Hitler really, really hated the Jews. Here, you should notice something that's common among those who want to explain away their failures without taking any personal responsibility for them - they attribute to their enemies (real or perceived) positively superhuman powers. Thus, the Jews, though 2% of the population of the United States (and less in most of Europe) brought down Western Civilization singlehandedly, through only the power of their minds, with not one iota of what happened being in any way attributable to any flaw present in the host population or its culture. What gods are these! To overcome the Master Race by raw intelligence and sheer willpower!
Well, not really. The Jews are just an alien thede with mildly higher-than-average verbal IQ - they're not the goddamn X-Men. Hostile members of their thede, like Alinsky, may have managed to tap into some fairly large and obvious flaws of Whig culture, but they didn't create them. In the end, what happened was our own fault - even if every single charge laid against the Jews was 100% true, then whatever they were selling, we still willingly bought it. Only through careful self-examination and self-improvement can we regain our civilization and keep from losing it again.
But NatSoc isn't that - it's avoidance of that. Notice that for all its appeal to White Power, NatSoc is essentially white dinduism. Just as ghetto dindus claim that nothing bad that ever happened to them is their own fault, but is instead all the fault of shadowy, sinister white racists, so too do NatSocs claim that nothing bad that ever happened to them is their own fault, but is instead all the fault of shadowy, sinister Jews. How has blaming others instead of working on improving themselves worked out for the dindus? Well, that's about how well it's going to work out for us.
Grow up, take responsibility, improve yourselves, stop being overly impressed by snazzy Hugo Boss uniforms, learn some history, find better role models, quit acting like Blues Brothers villains, and look to the future instead of replaying events that happened 70 years ago. That's my advice to NatSocs.

View more

Have you noticed how a large influence of Soviet Communism in a nation resulted in stronger resistance to contemporary Cultural Marxism/SJW crap later? See how Italy (that had a major Communist party until 1991) and Eastern Europe are saner than the Western part, and Russia even saner than them.

Yeah, that's called the "permafrost theory", and you'll see it pop up in discussions sometimes. Sounds pretty plausible to me.

Related users

There are four broadly accepted solutions to the technological unemployment problem. 1) Universal basic income guarantee. 2) Protectionism. 3) WPA busywork digging and filling ditches. 4) Massive population reduction through mass starvation/sterilization. Which do you favor?

No, wait, I've got a better idea - let's continue to import millions upon millions of unskilled, uneducated, dirt-poor Third Worlders into our country and add them to a workforce that already doesn't have nearly enough jobs to go around for the people we have here now, and that will have even less as time goes by due to the effects of automation. I'm sure that will make things better somehow. I mean, Paul Krugman said so in the New York Times, so it must be true, right? The man has a Nobel Prize, after all!

Was America doomed to fail from the beginning? It's done some pretty amazing things (e.g Man on the Moon, etc.) Surely it can't be all bad. Or would the Germans or English have done these great accomplishments anyways?

America is pure Whig. Whigism does a couple of key things really well - specifically, making money and building big impressive machines. What Whigism does well, America did well - no country ever made more money than America, and no country ever built bigger or more impressive machines. But there are lots of things that Whigism doesn't do well - things like creating beautiful art, decent morality, uplifting philosophy, high religion, courtly manners, strong culture, or decent and sustainable societies. America never really did have any of that - we started off bad, and we got progressively worse until we collapsed, predictably, into a rich, industrialized, uncultured decadence.
In the end, you can only be what you are. America took Whigism as far as it could go, and everything that could be done with it, America did. But it couldn't ever really transcend it (despite its pretensions to a bunch of utopian/egalitarian nonsense, which its limited understanding of philosophy and history never allowed it to effectively debunk). Big machines and junk pop culture, both pushed to every corner of the world - that will be America's historical legacy.

View more

"Until we treat low-trust people as they deserve to be treated, that's how things will continue to go." - If you applied this rule seriously and consistently wouldn't it soon turn you into a low-trust person? "Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster," etc.

There are those who see high trust as an unalloyed good; I am not one of them. From what I can see, high-trust people are marks looking to get rooked out of everything they've got by an endless parade of slick-talking snake-oil salesmen. That's what my blog post "Follow the Lady" was all about (https://antidem.wordpress.com/2015/04/28/follow-the-lady). But it's not just me - if there was one theme that ran through all of Mencken's works, it was the general gullibility of Americans. Europeans used to be smarter than that, but as Americanism spread in the 20th century, they got to not be anymore. The credulous, obsessive American belief in equality that de Tocqueville and Dickens giggled at as naive provincialism in the 1840s came to Europe after WWII, and by the 1980s the Europeans only giggled at the naive provincialism of the few remaining Americans (Moldbug's "screwworm-eating wasps") who *hadn't* bought into it hook, line, and sinker. To find out how that worked out for the Europeans, Google "Rotherham".
If you don't burn heretics at the stake, you end up flooded with heretics. If you don't run the pinkos out of Hollywood, then Hollywood ends up being run by the pinkos. Doing those kinds of things isn't high-trust behavior - high-trust behavior is sitting down with the heretics and the pinkos, negotiating with them in good faith, and coming to an agreement acceptable to both sides. Then, not very long after, it's you defeated and humiliated after the heretics and pinkos broke their word and sucker-punched you the second they figured they could get away with it. Which is pretty much the whole history of how the left took over in this country.
Extending high trust to low-trust people isn't honorable or high-minded; it's plain suicide. I take the LaVeyan line here: trust for the trustworthy - for those who have earned trust via a consistent pattern of behavior. And none for con men, known liars, cult fanatics, utopian dreamers, delusional self-aggrandizers, snake-oil salesmen, cadgers, cheats, cranks, gypsies, schnorrers, bums, crooks, touts, carpetbaggers, bullshitters, grifters, card sharpers, racketeers, stock pumpers, coin-clippers, carny barkers, yellow journalists, sleazy politicians, get-rich-quick schemers, sweaty-palmed used car salesmen, and wannabe poseurs.

View more

Do you stand farther to the right than Moldbug?

I don't even know what that means in the context of what we're doing. This isn't really a political movement, but a metapolitical movement; concerned not so much with issues but with systems. I don't even know where Moldbug stands on a lot of individual political issues; it was never very important for him to tell us that. But I do know in great and explicit detail where he stands on how sustainable our current system is and how prone it is to making good choices.
Moldbug's great insight was not that gun control is unwise or that abortion is horrible or that gay "marriage" is decadent, it was that Cthulhu only swims left; that the current system's nature is such that the only movement possible in it is leftward movement. The only way to stop Cthulhu from swimming left is to drain the pond. Any other sorts of attempts to stop him will ultimately be futile; you will simply be dragged along in his wake, which is exactly what's happened to the Republican Party.
The answer is that we're out in the territory where that question doesn't even really come up. We're beyond politics in the way that Nietzsche was beyond good and evil. So I'm at a loss as to how to answer your question. Sorry.

View more

Would you convert to another religion if a woman demanded it as a condition for marriage? How about to another branch of Christianity?

Dude, exert some Pussy Control.

If duels were legal, who would you demand satisfaction from?

I can't get no satisfaction
I can't get no satisfaction
'Cause I try and I try and I try and I try
I can't get no, I can't get no
When I'm drivin' in my car
And that man comes on the radio
He's tellin' me more and more
About some useless information
Supposed to fire my imagination
I can't get no, oh no, no, no
Hey hey hey, that's what I say
I can't get no satisfaction
I can't get no satisfaction
'Cause I try and I try and I try and I try
I can't get no, I can't get no
When I'm watchin' my T.V.
And that man comes on to tell me
How white my shirts can be
But he can't be a man 'cause he doesn't smoke
The same cigarrettes as me
I can't get no, oh no, no, no
Hey hey hey, that's what I say
I can't get no satisfaction
I can't get no girl with action
'Cause I try and I try and I try and I try
I can't get no, I can't get no
When I'm ridin' round the world
And I'm doin' this and I'm signing that
And I'm tryin' to make some girl
Who tells me baby better come back later next week
'Cause you see I'm on a losing streak
I can't get no, oh no, no, no
Hey hey hey, that's what I say
I can't get no, I can't get no
I can't get no satisfaction
No satisfaction, no satisfaction, no satisfaction

View more

Is the military going to help /at all/? Abortion, homo "marriage," millions of immigrants... What's it gonna take for them to actually do something?

Where is our Augustus? Where is our Sulla? Why does he make us wait? Can it be that we have become so degenerate that we are not even anymore able to produce a Caesar to save us from ourselves? Or are they all so lost in patriotism - in the American mythos - that they will do nothing as outrage after outrage is perpetrated against us?
Hope for Caesar, but do not count on him.

Post yfw homosexual marriage has barely passed and the activists are already busy claiming the next battlefield(s).

Well of course they are. That's how Permanent Revolution goes. Again, the left has no brakes; nor, so far, have they needed any. But you can only go down a road in the dark with the gas pedal floored for just so long before you hit something unexpected and end up pulling a James Dean. What can't go on forever, won't. Someday, they're going to wreck, and it's going to be very, very nasty indeed.

Would you ever appear as a guest on the Daily Shoah?

Sure. In fact, I think I'm meeting up with Mike Enoch and Seventh Son IRL in the near future, after Enoch gets back from parts unknown.

I personally think secessionist movements won't gain traction until Fed goes full Stalin and I suspect this battle will be fought by our grandchildren rather than ourselves but I'd genuinely volunteer if South were to rise again any time soon. I'm still nominally a Scottish blackshirt after all. :^)

The thing is, rebellions against tyranny don't usually start when the tyrannical system is at its worst, but when it is seen to have become weakened. That's not very heroic as a narrative, but it is practical and logical. You strike when you have the best chance of success. Until then, you keep your head down and play along as best you can. Again, I know it's not very romantic, but history is full of romantic, doomed failures. Those make for great stories, but I have no interest in being part of one.
This empire is unsustainable; it is visibly in the early stages of collapsing under its own weight. When it is weak, then it is the right time to strike.

Next

Language: English