Something is going on in Peru.

https://t.me/emmalucyshaw/1168

Oh you don’t want to live in a gulag?

What are you, some kind of classical liberal?

this is a repost

On the back and forth between Imperium Press and Thuletide... As I am often prone to say, two things can be true at the same time.

Kevin MacDonald argues that "individualist" behavior is strongly driven by genetic factors. The evidence on this is pretty incontrovertible; some genetic populations are more prone to certain behaviors than others. If you think of individualistic behavior as being a network of personality traits, then we can think of that as "genetic liberalism."

The modern "social justice" ideology which swept the Western world in the 20th century should be distinguished from "liberal" personality traits that drive individualistic behavior among European peoples. Egalitarianism, "equality," and the resulting policies are ideological constructs. Call all of this "social liberalism."

Social liberalism, leftism, progressivism, these are all practically designed to be subversive towards individual-oriented communities and cultures. They are not natural for Europeans at all, which is why they have to be enforced through constant propaganda. They are carefully structured ideological premises. And they are completely different from the "genetic liberalism" that made European civilizations strong and prosperous.

"Genetic liberalism" is not contradictory or subversive towards cultural, ethnic, or national identity. "Social liberalism" is literally designed to be subversive towards all of the above, and towards individualistic traits as well.

@remnantposter

Here’s more info from the shooting in Australia. I can’t help but sympathize with the couple that killed the two cops, given the amount tyranny Australians have already been put through.

https://t.me/realblaircottrell/3888

This is something I’ve suspected for a very long time: the ruling class plans on literally arming and militarizing black and brown migrant populations against the White population. In this context, the sole purpose of gun control is exclusively to disarm Whites first in order to ensure that non-Whites have the upper hand in firepower when the you-know-who led system starts doling out guns to them like that scene from the movie Zardoz. In other words, the establishment is setting up all the conditions for a literal race war.

If this still sounds too crazy to you, you have to consider the following:

Why is it that so many of the migrants flooding into White countries just so happen to be military age males?

Why are gun control efforts aimed at law abiding Whites?

Why is so little being done to disarm non-White thugs that openly flaunt and use illegal, fully automatic weapons to commit crimes?

Why are non-Whites already being organized into these solid anti-White coalitions?

When you put all of this into the entire context of the rest of the establishment’s efforts to target and ban White advocacy or label all freedom minded Whites as “Militia Violent Extremists” you start to see the bigger picture.

Where do you think this is headed? My guess is something like South Africa, but perhaps even more sinister. Hold onto your guns like your life depends on it.

https://t.me/NathanDamigo/368

During the Civil War about a third of the Union army were immigrants, I don't see why leftists can't use this tactic again. I'd expect them to do it, if anything

Chris Langan, the man with the highest recorded IQ of anyone alive today, is unfathomably based. He understands what the right to keep and bear arms is all about and why we all need it.

“Remember, if a cop or soldier can walk around with it, every citizen should be able to carry it around as well. Under the US Constitution, citizens are merely on temporary leave from the Well-Regulated Militias in which they will be expected to serve against any enemies, foreign or domestic, criminally attempting to enforce nonsense like this.

In addition to a little hunting and sport shooting now and then, protection from criminals is what guns are for.

[* We're talking about "small arms", and by "conventional", we mean regularly / conventionally possessed and carried around by criminals, cops, and soldiers (who, where the Constitution is being violated, differ only by wearing or not wearing a uniform).”

https://gab.com/ChrisLangan/posts/109264162652008721

The problem with being a member of a larger country (by population) is that you not only have more intelligent people representing your nation, you also have more idiots — but the idiots will have more weight as far as representation goes. This allows for confirmation bias for anyone looking for evidence that your people are either uncultured, stupid or whatever it is that they want to believe about them, usually it’s negative.

The more people your country has, the dumber it will appear to the outside world, regardless of any objective metrics proving otherwise.

Today on Counter-Currents Radio!

Greg Johnson welcomes Jim Goad to talk about the newly reissued Answer Me!, the zine culture of the 1990s, Jim’s karaoke fundraiser for Counter-Currents, and, of course, your questions. The stream will start at noon Pacific, 3pm Eastern Standard Time, 8pm UK time, and 9pm Central European time at:

DLive: https://dlive.tv/Counter-Currents

Odysee: https://odysee.com/@countercurrents/ccradio

Send questions & donations to Entropy: entropystream.live/countercurrents

That face you make when a tranny’s voice cracks and all the propaganda and conditioning you’ve voluntarily swallowed for years yields to your natural instincts.

What does Nationalism mean to you? Does it mean White survival/power or does it also mean that White people should only exist within the geographic limits of whatever region someone decides is the respective ancestral homeland of each specific European ethnic group for the rest of all time?

With issues like global resource scarcity and carry capacity limitations looming on the horizon, which definition of Nationalism makes the most sense from a pro-White perspective?

This whole sentiment that “whitey needs to go back to Europe where he came from” echoing within the “Nationalist” sphere just feels like yet another example of Whites embracing blatantly anti-White brownoid decolonizer arguments and perspectives.

I’m starting to wonder about the Nationalist label itself: is it even worth identifying with if it just paints a target on your back? Is it worth embracing a concept that can be used against you? “Hey whitey, If you’re such a Nationalist then why are you on stolen land? Gtfo!”

Instead of saying you’re a White Nationalist, maybe it’s better to say you’re pro-White and leave it open ended.

Years ago, an Argentinian white nationalist went on JF Gariepy’s Public Space to explain the situation in Argentina. From what I remember, he was raising the alarm about Argentina because due to nonwhite immigration, it had dropped to 60-55% white. France, on the other hand, doesn’t keep racial statistics, but extrapolating from religious statistics, people have assumed that it is between 80 and 90% white.

So, what you had was the whiter of the two countries fielding a 100% nonwhite team, while the country which is less white percentage-wise fielding a 100% white team.

Sometimes, it’s not a numbers game. Sometimes it’s a question of how bad the mind virus has gotten you.

Live at 9pm, I'm joining Nicholas Jeelvy to discuss how liberalism relates to nations, nationalism and civilisation, which has been a point of dispute for many years. Come along...

https://t.me/nixjeelvy/3182

I'm glad the European team won.

The most important thing about this is the fact that for us Americans, there is no such thing as a "United States of America" without the arrival of Whites. The "United States" is a construct born of English law and the ethno-cultures of the British Isles.

Even so-called "Native Americans" are guests in the USA, because it's a construct they didn't create and never would have created. The entire concept of the USA is a product of White settlers and their descendents.

This is how you know all the stuff about "stolen land" is just sour grapes and gaslighting: deep down, tribal people and Mexicans and all the rest know full well that "the USA" doesn't belong to them, which is why they're always trying to redefine it into something else.

The reason they seem so filled with hate for America and so intent on destroying it is because, well, they actually are!

https://t.me/hapaperspective/8774

@remnantposter

This has got to be a joke. Then again, if a controlled-opposition/pressure-release-valve agent like Elon is running Twitter, this shouldn’t be too surprising.

https://t.me/Prudentialist/4699

One way to look at Elon’s acquisition of Twitter is that of a country taken over by a strongman dictator. Elon appears to have almost godlike control over Twitter and yet look at the results. Elon may be a 90s liberal centrist type of guy, but there’s absolutely nothing liberal about how he runs Twitter; there’s no checks against his decisions or how he enforces the rules he’s made because it’s his platform now: his command is law.

Now imagine if Elon was an autocratic ruler of a country, perhaps your country. If you still have a political-boner for a strongman taking control of your nation, you have to understand that someone like Elon Musk or Donald Trump is the absolute best you could realistically expect to have.

There’s three lessons here: it’s best to assume that no one is coming to save you, that no one can save you and that “anti-liberalism” won’t ever defeat liberalism.