Jesse Walker has this interesting essay titled “How Third Parties Die”, which gives the history of many third parties and notes that they generally fail because of internal dissention.
Jesse Walker has this interesting essay titled “How Third Parties Die”, which gives the history of many third parties and notes that they generally fail because of internal dissention.
Which gangs splinter the most –
left statist control freak gangs ???
right statist control freak gangs ???
Curious that the author didn’t mention anything about the Green Party & its not quite always unified National Party candidates.
Didn’t the Greens also disaffiliate 3 states recently? Alaska, Rhode Island, and Georgia, I think. I don’t know if there were others.
Right statist control freak gangs is a self-contradiction. The definition of right wing is pro freedom. The more pro freedom the more right wing. The more anti freedom the more left wing. All statist control freak gangs are leftist. That is the actual definition of leftist: statist control freak gangs!!
The definition of right wing is nationalism, or social control.
The definition of left wing is socialism, or economic control.
Liberal/libertarian is freedom.
Nationalism is freedom. The alternative is internationalism, which is subjugation by evil foreigners and tyranny. The folk of a nation have a natural intrinsic connection to its land – blood and soil, defended in unity with loyalty and honor. They have a natural connection to God, faith and freedom as expressed through church and family. Atomistic individualism is just a false veneer of freedom used by totalitarian international communist devil worshipers to divide, subjugate and conquer. There is no freedom without nationalism, patriarchy, and racial and family cohesion and integrity. Slavery to drugs, lust, miscegenation, greed, gluttony, welfare, etc is the furthest thing from true freedom.
The alternative to nationalism is individualism, as you alluded to, somewhat hilariously, using the descriptive term invented by socialists – “atomistic individualism”. That isn’t actually all that surprising, since nationalists are just right wing collectivists. The thought process is the same as with left wing collectivists. “Atomistic individualism” is, as everything that comes from socialists, complete nonsense. Libertarians obviously are huge supporters of the division of labor and free trade, or operating as groups within, for example, corporations. Both of those require networks of interacting people, not individuals acting solely in isolation. Libertarians simply take the stand that, as Ayn Rand put it, individual rights are not subject to a public vote. That is what freedom is. And it is what you completely reject.
You are, however, the first person that I’ve seen make the claim that individualism leads to subjugation by foreign tyranny.
The argument being novel to you is no substitute for addressing it’s merits. Atomistic individualism, as previously explained, is not a genuine alternative, but merely a mirage and stalking horse for the ultimate tyranny of internationalist totalitarianism beneath the steel boot of the synagogue of Satan. Thus, the only genuine choice remains between freedom, liberty, nationalism, Christian theocracy, patriarchy and white power on the one hand, and luciferianism, communism, miscegenation, forced feminization, tranny tyranny, slavery to drug addiction, engineered dumbing down of society, and the breakdown of civilization on the other. In other words, the ultimate practical effect of applied atomistic individualism is paradoxically more collectivism and less freedom.
As a side note, no part of what I advocate as the basis of genuine freedom should in any way be subject to any public vote.
The argument isn’t new to me. I already told you it’s origins.
I also explained why it was nonsense, as libertarians support the division of labor, free trade, corporate ownership, and other group activities. “Atomistic individualism” is a complete straw man.
You, of course, are the one demanding actual totalitarianism, in line with your preferred beliefs. That is, you would be if you weren’t just a dumbass troll.
1. “You are however the first person..
”
2. Corporate interactions don’t preserve the purity of the bloodline, and it is the purity of the bloodline which is a prerequisite for preserving freedom, civilization and all that is worth preserving.
3. The only alternative is eternal darkness and tyranny by way of internationalism and miscegenation, as well as multiculti, amazonian masterhood, tolerance of heresy and paganism, drugs, gender benders, etc;
4. Thus it is you who, to be charitable probably without knowing it, is for actual totalitarianism, which you sell in the false guise of greater freedom – but what you sell is to freedom as Icarus is to flying high,
5. I am entirely sincere, and reasonably educated and intelligent.
1. “You are however the first person..
Is Russian your first language? The opening statement in that comment refers to the claim of libertarianism being “atomistic individualism”, which is not new but, as the follow up says, you are however the first person that I’ve seen make the claim that individualism leads to subjugation by foreign tyranny. Through gender benders, apparently.
> 2. Corporate interactions don’t preserve the purity of the bloodline, and it is the purity of the bloodline which is a prerequisite for preserving freedom, civilization and all that is worth preserving.
Utter nonsense. There is no dna sequence for freedom and civilization that is unique to one “bloodline” and not another.
> 3. The only alternative is eternal darkness and tyranny by way of internationalism and miscegenation, as well as multiculti, amazonian masterhood, tolerance of heresy and paganism, drugs, gender benders, etc;
Yeah, because a white man marrying a South Korean woman means they will suddenly start doing drugs and swapping genders. Makes perfect sense.
> 4. Thus it is you who, to be charitable probably without knowing it, is for actual totalitarianism, which you sell in the false guise of greater freedom – but what you sell is to freedom as Icarus is to flying high,
Someone else worshiping a pagan god effects you how exactly? Right: it doesn’t. You can still worship whatever god you want, or no god at all.
> 5. I am entirely sincere, and reasonably educated and intelligent.
No. On all counts.
Jim discredits himself by claiming without offering any evidence that my beliefs are something other than what I have stated here or that I lack education. As for my intelligence, I will let the readers judge; I have no reason to doubt it myself, and Jim has certainly not offered any either. I’m only responding to him for the benefit of others reading, if indeed anyone still is.
He is correct in one matter, Russian is indeed my native language, ethnicity, and nationality, and my Orthodox faith in Russian translates as Glorious Right in English. I strive to be glorious, patriarchal, right wing, and righteous. I am proud of my country, our President Putin and the special operation to liberate the people of Russian Ukraine (border region) from the corrupt Satanist Jews and Nazis who have formed an unholy alliance of convenience with NATO to oppress them and to threaten Russia. With God on our side all these enemies will be crushed.
Regarding my command of your language, I studied, received advanced degrees, and worked professionally in the United States and United Kingdom, including working as a translator, and have also worked as an English translator in Russia. Thus, I have no reason to be insecure in that either. Perhaps it is Jim who is somewhat ignorant of some of the finer points of his native language, as it seems many unilingual people often are.
Allow me, therefore, to elucidate: “Atomistic individualism” is a phrase, not an argument. My argument is precisely that which Jim said is novel to him: atomistic individualism leads to total slavery under foreign rule (and I should add, ultimate tyranny under Satan’s rule).
Supposing Jim is correct that the term atomistic individualism originated with socialists, so what? The political use of the word libertarian also originated with socialists (previously it only referred to a religious or philosophical view that stood in contrast to predetermined fate). So did the political use of the word capitalist. Prior to its application to politics by socialists, it only meant someone who had capital and invested it for a profit, and had nothing to do with what political beliefs such men had. If Jim considers himself to be a libertarian capitalist in ways beyond his views on the nature of fate or how he makes his living, he is using terms created by socialists. Thankfully, even a broken clock is correct twice a day.
Contra Jim, DNA sequences have everything to do with freedom and civilization. They are why some nations flourish while others flounder. Nation such as Egypt and India which were once great empires mixed their bloodlines with dark skinned savages and descended into darkness and mud, and a third world crapholes today. Likewise, even once great European nations such as Greece, Italy, Portugal, and Spain have become the basket cases of Europe as their bloodlines have become too mixed.
The reason why the USA needs President Trump to make it great again all stem from dumb, ignorant decisions your leaders made in the 1960s to allow race mixing, mass third world immigration, and the destruction of the traditional patriarchal family, the secularization of society, and the sexualization of children. If left unchecked, these trends will turn the United States and European Union into third world mudholes. Russia is fighting mightily to save Christendom and European civilization, but we may not be able to do it alone if all the other once great White nations fall to savagery through the luciferian engineered great population replacement (aka White genocide).
Jim’s argument misses the forest for the trees. One man choosing to worship false gods or betray his race by mixing his blood doesn’t in and of itself do all that much to his neighbors, but taken in the aggregate such decisions over a course of time destroy nations and civilizations. One man’s decision to never father children, or to not help raise them, or one woman’s decision to not let him, or to kill them before they are born, isn’t the end of a great country; millions of such decisions are.
Atomistic individualism misses the roles which church, family, race, and other important factors play in preserving civilization and allow that individual’s freedom to exist in the first place, or to be something more than a quest for minimal survival. Economic interaction alone doesn’t take their place, and the mixing of races and not protecting borders sufficiently leads to the decline and fall of culture, as does the deliberate destruction of church and family and the orchestrated attacks on law enforcement, all stemming from the nefarious plots of leftist luciferian elite conspirators (synagogue of Satan, elders of Zion, illuminati, new world order, or whatever your preferred term is).
Is Paul trolling here again, this time as “Maximum Right Maxim”?
No, I am not trolling and my name is Max, not Paul. Can Jim or Andy, assuming they are indeed not the same person, show any reason why he/they keeps accusing me of dishonesty? My working hypothesis is that he/they have no other way to counter the obvious strength of my positions, so he/they must resort to trying to resort to distractions such as accusing me without any evidence at all of being a liar. I say the onus of proof should instead be on him/them that I am incorrect in anything I have said.