We all understand the difference between country, state and nation. What I’ve been thinking about lately is how people, often depending on their race, conceive of their identity and what exactly they’re loyal to. I’m mainly thinking about this within the context of non-White government employees and agents.

What I’ve noticed over the years is that non-White citizens of Western countries will express their loyalty to the state (the government) rather than the actual nation, or they conflate the two and then claim to be loyal to the nation. I don’t think this is intentional on their part — I don’t think they consciously understand the difference — but their subconscious mind intuits that they have no real (racial) connection to the nation that founded the state and country they occupy. So they pledge their loyalty and peg their identity to the state and/or the country, but think little of the actual nation.

As our governments become more tyrannical, this will become more important to notice and point out. The non-Whites will side with the tyrannical government.

This debate between two CIA agents is a good example of what I’m talking about here: loyalty to the state vs loyalty to the nation (its history and core values). One CIA agent is of Greek descent, the other is of Mexican descent.

https://youtu.be/n8iDa-IGDKk?is=

Unfortunately, there are too many conservatives who also foolishly believe that the “police defend our freedoms!” But this level of unreflectiveness is far more common among non-Whites, who align themselves with the state over the founding nation.

#Haiti 🇭🇹: Haitian Gang members conducting military drills in the city of #Pòtoprens (Port-au-Prince).

The gang members appear to be armed with an M14E2 pattern rifle, a possible M16A1 (Colt 603) rifle, AR-15 rifles and AKM pattern rifles.

https://x.com/i/status/2065987130979909818

The monkey sounds are so fitting

Something I’ve come to realize is the my position on the necessity of the 2nd Amendment — and having the skill to use arms in a time of defense against tyranny — is routinely misunderstood by a lot of people in this political space. Often because they want a single solution in isolation, and for whatever reason can’t fathom that it requires multiple things in conjunction. Having guns is just one critical pillar of resistance against tyranny. And I think Matt Forney is basically trying to make this point in his Twitter post — what he’s saying is that organization is an overlooked critical pillar. It’s hard to disagree with him here.

He argues that the debate on whether having guns is necessary or not is fundamentally flawed. Because It doesn’t matter if you lack organization. I agree, in the sense that you need both. Both are critical.

I prefer the analogy involving pillars, because you need more than one pillar to hold up a structure. One pillar is not enough.

https://x.com/mattforney/status/2067396449952842036?s=20

Having guns versus organization is a chicken or egg dilemma. But tight organization is essential.

As things get worse (balkanization) I think organization on all sides will become inevitable, and from there, what else is necessary (like guns) will become clear and not even up for debate.

No women in politics. In any capacity. Ever. If you want a civilization.

On this day, 77 years ago, the AK-47 was officially adopted into military service.

Every institution in Britain was involved with either the perpetration or coverup of this industrial scale child rape — cops, hospitals, schools, social services, state media, etc. You'd probably have to capitally punish at least half of the public sector to fix that country.

I doubt that grooming gangs were covered up to "preserve social cohesion" or because everybody was terrified of being called "racist." We know British cops were, and probably still are, raping kids. How likely is it that people higher up the British political system are implicated? Starmer covered up 13,000 cases and they made him prime minister. How do grooming gangs related to broader criminal underworld in Britain? Money laundering, fraud, narcotics, etc.?

It's clear that grooming gangs are primarily operated by ethno-religious mafias, and that South Asian muslims commit the vast majority of these heinous crimes, but I don't believe a coverup of this scale would be conducted merely in the name of "anti-racism."

Stop saying “what normies think doesn’t matter.” You were once a normie; and less than 10 years ago, most of you here probably would have called me a “racist asshole!”

If what YOU think matters, then what normies think also matters.

There is no debate between irons vs optics on pistols. This is pure boomer nonsense and deserves to be mocked

You wouldn't rock just irons on a combat rifle if you had an optic available, so why would a pistol be any different? Yes, you should be able to use irons, and yes if your chosen handgat isn't optic compatible that blows but they really do make a huge difference. If you're on the fence just get one. If your not, then don't worry about it but understand that optics really are the move and you should probably get one down the line when you have the chance.

Having access to firearms does make a difference, whether they are utilized is another story. That's where coalescing s a unit front is necessary. https://t.me/hapaperspective/19344