Its true
(twitter.com)
New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
Toast message
We know nothing is happening. But a lot more people are noticing online than 10 years ago. And it is necessary for as many people as possible to do that, otherwise, as you said, we'll be stopped by our "peers." Even characters like Nick Fuentes (known as antisemitic and racist) got more into public and even has a lot of clips posted on YT. He even had an interview with Tucker Carlson. He gains quite a lot of popularity as well, so that's something. Asmongold's channel is regularly riddled with comments that notice or point out niggers, and his audience is way more radical than he is.
So "racism" is already soon at a point of public acceptance. 10 years ago? Not even close. There is a development, a trend.
> Why the fuck can’t you defend your claims?
You didn't ask me to. Now I did.
> Maybe stop talking.
Why should I? I work towards TND & TKD. Even if it's not much, at least I write comments that *may* change the minds of people, as to increase the support and decrease the resistance of the idea of TND & TKD. It is what is required anyway.
If talking is worthless, what are you doing here attempting to stop us from even doing that little? Why do you want us to do nothing, even though you argue that "doing nothing" is bad?
How are you contributing better than "doing nothing" at this point? Maybe you should stop talking?
> You are.
Yes, I am. But it is of speculative nature due to the nature of it - it's a prediction. You say that we go extinct and all efforts are futile, my prediction is that there will be NatSoc uprisings in the West, and that I will have contributed to it. That we can use something unprecedented (the internet) to reach as many people as possible.
I know already that you disagree. And there is nothing difficult to say that speculation -> bad. The problem is your attitude. What is even your goal? Do we have the same goal, or are you working against us?
You do not seem to be too busy "doing something" either, right?
> If anything I said was actually wrong, you’d prove it.
I didn't say you are wrong. In fact I am one of the people who say that you are right to others. But just as you can dismiss my predictions, so can I dismiss yours. I see a trend, you focus on past data. With the same logic you can say that a bomb is harmless and nothing ever happens, and until it explodes you are 100% right. How would you feel if it explodes? Stupid?
How would I feel if it wouldn't explode? Well, until my death I would hope it will, and I contribute in a way hoping that it will.
> Instead you scream about emotions as though you’re not the only one being emotional.
You are throwing a tantrum here, and I feel bothered by your repeated defeatism. Without emotions we'd have no will to live or to communicate, right? Let's not pretend either of us is the personification of objectivity here.
> Imagine thinking you’ll ever “win” against anything when you refuse to internalize what you’re even fighting against.
It is not me who has to do that. I have already decided on TND & TKD. I already know enough. I try to convert others towards these goals. For normal people it means making them notice jews and niggers. For right-wing people it means understanding WWII Germany. For people like us, it means dismissing the idea that deportations would suffice. For leftists it means making them look ridiculous or countering their nonsense with facts. There is something for everybody.
Do you have any idea how much text I write that ends up unread? 80-90% of what I write goes into nothingness. Do you have any idea how frustrating it is? With the amount of text I am writing on average, I could write books. And still, I do it anyways. Why? Maybe because I am irrational.
Just as it would be irrational to defend yourself when you or others are mildly harassed by gypsies in a bus. Why bother? The smartest thing is to do nothing. Maybe they deserve it anyway, maybe it's not worth the hassle. But MAYBE the smartest move is to beat the shit out of these gypsies and to take the risk and sacrifice, and to prove to others and yourself that you aren't harmless.
This is why your defeatism is so... annoying to me. Because being like you is something I would hate about myself. It is the EASY option. I would feel shame. I understand your points, and I respect you for expressing them, but still - that mentality is not viable to have. And your one-liner above is just sad. Or do you think that was a good comment? It looks like you have to touch grass to detox from the computer.
*Ｔｈｅｎ ｗｈｙ ｌｉｅ．*
>But a lot more people are noticing online than 10 years ago. And it is necessary for as many people as possible to do that, otherwise, as you said, we'll be stopped by our "peers.”
Sure. So where’s the inflection point?
>…Nick Fuentes… even had an interview with Tucker Carlson.
I want to comment on this as an aside to the broader conversation, and I’d like your views on this matter separately, if you don’t mind.
While I still believe in the validity of the *concept* of Great Man Theory, its implementation in practice hasn’t existed since 1945. As such, we have no leaders and cannot have leaders. What we have are controlled opposition puppets and/or people who get killed before they’re so much as known on a national level, never mind followed.
As such, I don’t trust any ’spokesmen’ for white interests, and haven’t my entire life. Because all of them have been either exposed for what they really are or were actually just degenerates, or weren’t and were simply killed, **new ones just happening to pop up defies the external knowledge of jewish ideological control of all communications systems**. The FCC was created, in part, to silence Father Coughlin. Johnson used a federal agency to silence another white group (whose name escapes me). Even Reagan pressured the… was it FTC? to do the same, and his handlers deregulated the media to consolidate all of it into just six jewish companies. All Internet search engines are run by jews, censoring anything they don’t like. In short, “If you know someone’s name on a national level, jews *allow* it to be known.”
With this in mind, and almost as a separate point to be made itself, I find it interesting (depressing?) that people are so captured by this scripted narrative. We have people here saying that **Fuentes** (irrespective of any other claims about his beliefs and behaviors; I don’t follow them because I don’t trust ‘heroes’ or ’spokesmen’ and therefore can’t comment on them) ***must*** **be a federal agent because he was allowed to speak to Carlson** (son of a CIA agent). Others are claiming that the existence of the interview means **Carlson** (again, son of a CIA agent and who read jewish scripts on jewish television for decades) **has become a white nationalist.**
I’ve seen a handful of their respective recent comments (completely out of context). It *looks* as though Fuentes is apologizing for jews, and Carlson is opposing ‘zionists.’ **Is this not exactly what the Protocols says the script should be?** To keep people in a constant state of confusion by creating rallying points around puppets, pitting them against each other, and then making the puppets’ views incoherent once people are ideologically captured, making them confused in themselves to make their thoughts and actions impotent? Because it feels a whole hell of a lot like that.
I don’t know. What do you think–not just about this specific example, but about the state of ‘leadership’ in general?
>So "racism" is already soon at a point of public acceptance.
When we get to the point that a white jury refuses to convict a white person of a “crime” under the Civil Rights Act, we might have something. Until then, you’ll still lose everything if you get called racist because private organizations will simply cut off your bank account and job and…
>If talking is worthless, what are you doing here attempting to stop us from even doing that little?
I’m here to stop you from talking in a way that gets you killed even faster.
>Why do you want us to do nothing
Who the hell said that?
>even though you argue
Why would you waste time saying that if you know what I actually argue?
>You say that we go extinct and all efforts are futile
We will go extinct because all *existing* efforts are futile.
>my prediction is that there will be NatSoc uprisings in the West
But what justification do you have for this belief? “It would be nice” is not a goddamned argument, and it’s 90% of what I see from people here.
>That we can use something unprecedented (the internet) to reach as many people as possible.
Ten years ago I would have agreed.
>What is even your goal?
Getting people to stop believing (and therefore behaving) like Qultists.
>With the same logic you can say that a bomb is harmless and nothing ever happens, and until it explodes you are 100% right. How would you feel if it explodes? Stupid?
Good analogy. Rebuttal: How do you know the bomb isn’t just an empty shell?
>For leftists it means making them look ridiculous or countering their nonsense with facts.
I don’t know about you, but I only do this as stress relief. They’re neurologically incapable of accepting truth, so any efforts in this regard are objectively wasted.
>Do you have any idea how much text I write that ends up unread? 80-90% of what I write goes into nothingness. Do you have any idea how frustrating it is?
[Not a clue.](https://i.postimg.cc/XvqHg5hf/length.png) You know what’s worse than not being read? Being read and then agreed with and then they don’t even remotely change their beliefs or behaviors afterward.
>The smartest thing is to do nothing.
Well that… sounds more like the strawman people make of me than something you should be saying.
>This is why your defeatism is so... annoying to me. Because being like you is something I would hate about myself.
You’re telling me.
>that mentality is not viable to have.
So “Keep doing things we *know* don’t work because someone warned us against doing them and that action hurt my feelings” is viable?
>And your one-liner above is just sad. Or do you think that was a good comment? It looks like you have to touch grass to detox from the computer.
Cool, so you refuse to do it or comprehend that it’s something that needs to happen among others or that it’s even a viable thing to do. ***No wonder I keep being proven right.*** *“What we’re doing is working, despite it self-evidently not working, because other white nationalists are begging us to stop!”* Fucking hell, man.
I absolutely agree. The only way they can be trustworthy is if they explicitly talk about the taboo topics jews don't want to be discussed in public at all (namely the jewish problem being the most important). Which won't happen anyway.
> It looks as though Fuentes is apologizing for jews, and Carlson is opposing ‘zionists.’
I do not think either of them are agents. They btw accused each other of working for the CIA. Fuentes is as he is since he was ~20 - he was edgy, and his oratory skills and his knowledge of history is excellent. Tucker is just a boomer who went from standard zionist to slightly dissident conservative to becoming critical of israel and dual citizenship as a concept. He grew to agree with a lot of points of Fuentes. I don't think Fuentes is apologizing for jews... that would be like 100 steps forward 1 step backward, so even if true, it doesn't matter.
But I do not care about them as individuals. My view is simply that they are useful for the cause. Criticizing israel means criticizing jews, and Tucker changing his mind means he drags along a LOT of right-wingers to also change their mind into a positive direction. So it's a positive change, and there is a LOT of popularity for Fuentes, which means a LOT of people come to notice the jew. It would be cynical of me to dismiss that because it doesn't immediately lead to TKD.
The question is, when will the 20th century and WWII be talked about? Because when you talk about jews so much, that topic is looming on the horizon. People who already accepted the viciousness of the jews in israel, their control of the media, finance and politics in your own country, they will be open to talk about the holocaust. Was it really undeserved? Did it even happen? Or was a jewish hoax to milk money and be granted immunity through playing victim all along? When the holocaust falls, it's basically over for jews. When it's over for jews, they can no longer suppress the rest of the public conversation, which means people will be even more radicalized. Then TKD will be on the table. When it will be considered "too extreme" aka "too excessive", we have already won, because then it's just a matter of magnitude. "Deportation is not enough" is basically what I tell here on ConPro.
> Because it feels a whole hell of a lot like that.
We are already long in that quagmire. All sorts of leftist ideologies, Climate Change, Covid, cuckservative "based tranny" type, even corporate culture revolving around basically having adult daycares, MGTOW (arguably), Christian zionism, Q faggotry, or just standard ignorance/indoctrination/carelessness, or goofy Flat Earth or aliens-visited-Earth crap - there is no shortage of bullshit ideologies and beliefs. And people inherently *need* their belief slot to be filled with something, even self-declared atheists. I don't think we can ever avoid interference from ideologies, we have to navigate through them as best as we can. Even National Socialism used such beliefs as a vehicle, and it itself became one too.
What *they* can do is push people towards these nonsensical beliefs, as to make them harmless. When there is one ideology or belief that is good, it's good for us. Fuentes doesn't need to be perfect - but it should move the people and the Overton window towards the right direction, and I think it does so. The reason I oppose these trash ideologies and beliefs so vehemently is exactly *because* they are corrosive to many people. The fuck should we care about the Climate Change agendas of 1°C less increase over 100 years when in 100 years we are drowning in niggers? Flat Earth is a total waste of time and makes us look stupid by association. Nigger worship deserves to be ridiculed. They are all distractions that affect world views on a fundamental level towards a bad direction.
> but about the state of ‘leadership’ in general?
You're right about leadership being impossible yet. Unforeseeable events can happen though, which can change the minds of a lot of people. For example as the global opposition towards israel grows, israel gets less support (infinite money from the US), and they might be on the verge of losing. Then in a desperate, arrogant, malevolent attempt they threaten countries with nuclear war, even Europe. That would immediately make jews internationally hated. jews aren't smart, they are just dedicated, amoral and they lie endlessly. To them everything is about the craft of illusion.
Remember, previously (up until recently), when the jew in israel cries, all of us rushed to their aid and even waged wars against their enemies. That has already changed. israel is globally hated by now, only supported by the US. Without the US, israel would fall apart. That's a rather new development.
At some point you may not even need exceptional leaders. Even a mediocre one will kowtow the line the populace wants. Zionism might even become unthinkable among politicians and people in general, to be considered treasonous or irrational like leftist ideologies. The jews will have to try to maintain their control *despite* the will of the people. And the more they do that, the more extreme they become, the more people will notice and hate them. That will inevitably spiral into their downfall.
And maybe at some point people will have shops that say "not jewish" or "anti-zionist." Just a little sticker somewhere at the door. It circumvents the lawfare discrimination nonsense, and will allow people to financially support anti-jewish causes by preferring those shops (along with supporting the very idea/ideology). Even if jews imitate that, the anti-jewish sentiment would be already out there. Little things like this could happen and could get traction on a larger scale.
I’ve always found the opposite to be most palatable for others. They’ll talk about the 20th century all damned day. They’ll agree with all of what I say about the events of that century and how virtually everything that happened went wrong. The moment you try to talk to them about who’s responsible for the century, they shut down instantly. Doesn’t matter if they agreed just seconds before. Doesn’t matter what the topic is.
>"Deportation is not enough" is basically what I tell here on ConPro.
Or, in [meme form](https://i.postimg.cc/g0N37Tsf/immigrants.jpg)…
>Then in a desperate, arrogant, malevolent attempt they threaten countries with nuclear war, even Europe. That would immediately make jews internationally hated.
Well, they [do it already](https://x.com/AFpost/status/1713813118307221902). Have [for a while](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Samson_Option:_Israel%27s_Nuclear_Arsenal_and_American_Foreign_Policy). If they *do* it, you’re correct. But the problem is their policy is to do it only when Israel is existentially threatened. It’s a “if I can’t live, neither can anyone else” policy. By then it wouldn’t *matter* that the launching of nukes would cause a loss of jewish control, because there wouldn't be a world left to control. It would also cause the loss of 75% of the global white population. If the inflection point is “you have to kill all of us before any errant survivors even think about hating you,” we’re already dead.
>That has already changed. israel is globally hated by now, only supported by the US.
I really don’t know about that. Where are the embargoes? Where is the international effort to remove Israel from global financial and trade organizations? Why aren’t independent organizations boycotting Israel and refusing to do business with them or allow their “scientists” in? Ah, right, because you’ll go to prison if you do that. It’s “individuals within countries” who hate Israel. All *governments* are still controlled, and many of them by proxy through US military occupation. And the (respective) people don’t seem to want to do a damned thing to overthrow those governments.
>Without the US, israel would fall apart. That's a rather new development.
Well, it was always the case. From ’47 onward–when Israel admitted that if it hadn’t stolen two American bombers stationed in Europe that it wouldn’t have won the war–the jews have only ever had a homeland because of US intervention.
>At some point you may not even need exceptional leaders. Even a mediocre one will kowtow the line the populace wants.
Or they’ll just [lie to the public’s faces and get away with it.](https://www.zerohedge.com/political/watch-vance-says-us-put-leverage-israel-when-challenged-maga-hat-wearing-student)
>It circumvents the lawfare discrimination nonsense
But the law already says you can’t boycott jews. And it [also says](https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianbushard/2023/12/05/house-passes-resolution-declaring-anti-zionism-a-form-of-antisemitism-some-democrats-are-critical/)…
This sure must be frustrating. My suggestion is to improve your methods of communication with them. They are not like us, they do not have the mental fortitude to just take it bluntly. And they are programmed to shut down on certain triggers. You may have to communicate in a way that appeals to them and their ideologies. Be a little provocative too, but not insulting. I personally improved in avoiding YouTube censorship, and even saving what I write, just in case there is a notification on a comment-thread where I see my comment missing. And when it's missing, I paraphrase parts of it and post it again.
It's not easy, it's a continuous process of improvement. But you clearly have the intellect and skill to do so.
> By then it wouldn’t matter that the launching of nukes would cause a loss of jewish control, because there wouldn't be a world left to control.
Well, that's arguable. Nukes would be aimed at areas of high population density, meaning it would go after leftists primarily, and people in the outskirts and villages would survive. But I'd assume they'd first threaten us with it, or people would draw attention to it. And if they do, the countermeasure could be as simple as just moving in there with a big nuke and detonating it from inside. Just a truck is enough, and if necessary, shoot the border guard kikes. They'll know there is a nuke in there when it's too late. Or some massive EMP device so that they can't launch most nukes, and then take them out quickly... without communication they won't do anything. I am not sure if nukes would have secondary explosions, which could cause massive planetary radiation problems. Nobody said removing such a tumor would be easy.
> Where are the embargoes?
As long as US is their pet that protects and supports them, nobody dares to do anything. Going against israel means conflict and possibly war with the US. And within the EU it would also be shunned and opposed.
> Or they’ll just lie to the public’s faces and get away with it.
Yeah, but not yet... we haven't reached that point in time yet. Vance is a zionist shill created and groomed by Peter Thiel (a jew). They seek to place him as a successor to Trump. The reason he is VP is probably because Trump got the order to have that person as a VP, regardless of Trump's will. Vance came basically from nowhere.
Even now Trump is in a precarious situation, because he seeks peace (along with basically everybody else), but israel seeks to conquer and genocide all of Palestine. Even logically - israel wants Democracy, and doesn't want to have some 50/50 ratio in voting, competing with Arabs. They want at least 90% of the votes, aka they *must* genocide all non-jews BEFORE they can officially conquer the entire territory.
So Trump (along with basically all Americans) wants peace, he doesn't want israel to go after US allies like Qatar, israel wants war, the Arabs don't want to get genocided, and the public opposition to Hamas is dwindling. Even now the actions of Trump are somewhat limited as to what Americans want and tolerate from him. Even the H1B thing was controversial enough. And he already crossed the line for many, making people ready for more extreme right-wing options.
As we speak, israel continues to do a low amount of murders during this "ceasefire," which is a tactic to provoke the Arabs to retaliate. And when that happens, they cry out in pain as they go full genocide mode AGAIN, and to the world they can sell it as "look, the terrorists are at it again goys! We have no choice but to wage war!" It's essentially what the Allies along with Poland did in WWII - provoking Germany by massacring Germans in occupied Danzig with the assurance of Britain to step in when Germany finally declares war. They wanted to bring war to Germany in ~1933, but they needed to do it this way for optics reason, so that they can say "see?! I told you Germany is evil and warmongering!! They need to be taken down!"
I don't care the slightest about the Arabs, they are completely worthless. But other people care. And it's a great vehicle to make them notice the jewish problem in general, and thus domestically - they just need a little push into the right direction.
I think it’s just that they’re not capable of understanding. I take them on the most roundabout routes imaginable. I say everything but who it is for as long as I can. *When they ask themselves, they don’t accept it.*
>Well, that's arguable. Nukes would be aimed at areas of high population density, meaning it would go after leftists primarily, and people in the outskirts and villages would survive.
Not without electricity. Not anymore.
>I am not sure if nukes would have secondary explosions, which could cause massive planetary radiation problems.
No; the explosion disperses all the radioactive material, of which there can’t be very much in the first place because a block no larger than roughly 10 pounds of U-238 will go critical on its own. You literally can’t bring too much of it together in one place. Plutonium has an even lower bound. The real problem after a nuke is the out of control fires that can’t be put out because you have no infrastructure, no fire trucks, and no electricity to pump it because the EMP affected a larger area than the bomb’s destruction. Ground detonation would throw up a shit ton of radiation; airburst not so much (look at Hiroshima and Nagasaki and compare them to some parts of Nevada where no one can go). There’s a reason almost all nukes today are designed to be airburst. What good is territory you’ve won in a war if you can’t conquer it afterward?
>Vance is a zionist shill created and groomed by Peter Thiel
Thank you. I suppose I can count on you to be a voice of reason now that he’s “speaking out against the jews” and “totally holding actual traditionalist viewpoints” by saying things like “Christianity good” and “maybe we should have infinity minus one browns entering the country.”
>Even now Trump is in a precarious situation, because he seeks peace
My brother in Christ. How can you think this.
>israel wants Democracy
Of course; *they created it.*
> “Unjust government can be exercised by a great number, and it is then called a democracy: such is mob rule when the common folk take advantage of their numbers to oppress the rich. In such a case the entire community becomes a sort of tyrant.” **~ St. Thomas Aquinas**; *On Princely Government; Aquinas: Selected Political Writings*; 1254
> “I do not say that democracy has been more pernicious on the whole, and in the long run, than monarchy or aristocracy. Democracy has never been and never can be so durable as aristocracy or monarchy; but while it lasts, it is more bloody than either… Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet, that did not commit suicide. It is in vain to say that democracy is less vain, less proud, less selfish, less ambitious or less avaricious than aristocracy or monarchy. It is not true, in fact, and no where appears in history. Those passions are the same in all men under all forms of simple government, and when unchecked, produce the same effects of fraud, violence, and cruelty. When clear prospects are opened before vanity, pride, avarice or ambition, for their easy gratification, it is hard for the most considerate philosophers and the most conscientious moralists to resist the temptation. Individuals have conquered themselves, nations and large bodies of men, never.” **~ John Adams**; letter to John Taylor; December 17, 1814
> “That what is called democracy is always in fact plutocracy. The only alternative to the rule of the rich is to have a ruler who is deliberately made more powerful even than the rich. It is to have a ruler who is secure of his place, instead of rulers who are fighting for their place.” **~ G.K. Chesterton**; *The Revival of French Royalism*; December 15, 1923
> “The defect of democracy is its tendency to put mediocrity into power; and there is no way of avoiding this except by limiting office to men of ‘trained skill.’ Numbers by themselves cannot produce wisdom, and may give the best favors of office to the grossest flatterers. The fickle disposition of the multitude almost reduces those who have experience of it to despair; for it is governed solely by emotions, and not be reason. Thus democratic government becomes a procession of brief-lived demagogues, and men of worth are loath to enter lists where they must be judged and rated by their inferiors. Sooner or later the more capable men rebel against such a system, though they be in a minority. Hence I think it is that democracies change into aristocracies, and these at length into monarchies; people at last prefer tyranny to chaos.” **~ Will Durant**; *The Story of Philosophy*, p. 214; 1926
> “Democracy is now currently defined in Europe as ‘a country run by jews.’” **~ Ezra Pound**, poet and political critic; The Japan Times; 1934
> “There are many national issues that concern individuals and groups so directly and unmistakably as to evoke volitions that are genuine and definite enough. The most important instance is afforded by issues involving immediate and personal pecuniary profit to individual voters and groups of voters, such as direct payments, protective duties, silver policies and so on. Experience that goes back to antiquity shows that by and large voters react promptly and rationally to any such chance. But the classical doctrine of democracy evidently stands to gain little from displays of rationality of this kind. Voters thereby prove themselves bad and indeed corrupt judges of such issues, and often they even prove themselves bad judges of their own long-run interests, for it is only the short-run promise that tells politically and only short-run rationality that asserts itself effectively.” **~ Joseph A. Schumpeter**; *Capitalism, Socialism, & Democracy*, pp. 260-1; 1942
> “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy.” **~ Elmer T. Peterson**; *The Daily Oklahoman*, p. 12A; December 9, 1951
> “An unfortunate side effect of democracy is that it incentivizes citizens to be ignorant, irrational, tribalistic, and to not use their votes in very serious ways. We have to ask ourselves what we think government is actually for... There’s another way of looking at government, which is that it’s a tool, like a hammer, and the purpose of politics is to generate just and good outcomes, to generate efficiency and stability, and to avoid mistreating people... The idea is that anyone or any deliberative body that exercises power over anyone else has an obligation to use that power in good faith, and has the obligation to use that power competently. If they’re not going to use it in good faith, and they’re not going to use it competently, that’s a claim against them having any kind of authority or any kind of legitimacy.” **~ Dr. Jason Brennan**; political philosopher & applied ethicist; Epistocracy; *Vox*; November 9, 2018
>“Democracy has nothing to do with freedom. Democracy is a soft variant of communism, and rarely in the history of ideas has it been taken for anything else.” **~ Hans-Hermann Hoppe**; *The Paradox of Imperialism*; June 5, 2013
Anyway.
Because people aren't assassinating jews left and right doesn't mean *actually* nothing is happening. The minds of people already have changed. 9/11 is an example where all you have to do is to tell them why it was done by jews (the evidence is overwhelming btw). In the other comment I expanded on why that matters.
> Sure. So where’s the inflection point?
You argue that whatever time frame is, it's too late. Maybe. We'll know when the time comes. I can only speculate. And who knows, maybe we go extinct and you get your final "told you so." But I'd hate myself if I'd do nothing. Hey, if Zelensky or Soros or Netanyahu would be in front of me, I would immediately kill them, knowing the sacrifice. I'd also rush to defend a person from feral niggers or subhumans with lethal force. Maximum violence, no mercy. If I were a soldier, I'd be the idiot who'd throw himself on a grenade to save his comrades.
But I think I can do more, especially over the next years and decades. You too have your book, right?
> But what justification do you have for this belief? “It would be nice” is not a goddamned argument, and it’s 90% of what I see from people here.
Well, as I said, seeing the development of the thoughts of people. If someone like Asmongold would suddenly talk about jews critically, do you think he would lose viewers? His viewership might even explode to new heights. It is not a currency you can easily convert into actions, but it reflects the sentiment of people. When 9/11 happened, people were eager to enlist to fight wars, but today? Nobody wants to die for israel. Even if Trump declared war against whatever sandnigger country, the ambition of the people would be minimal. It could give rise to real opposition to conservatives/MAGA, even NatSoc. This is a limiting factor for politicians. The degree to which they can force their bad agendas against the will of the people is limited.
Further development suggests even MORE opposition to israel, more noticing, more opposition to niggers/pajeets/other subhumans. Do you think that has no value for the future? And this is not wishful thinking. There are points that look rather dire. The Climate Change agenda continues and transforms into a CO2 credit system, the nigger worship transforms into tempered nigger worship ("treat them actually equally"), the reign of leftists (jews) in various countries continues. Btw, I do think that civil wars are inevitable, namely nigger uprisings for being deprived of infinite gibs. Ordinary people will have to deal with feral niggers, and the government will be feckless to handle it for a chunk of time. Things will get much worse before they *can* get better.
> Getting people to stop believing (and therefore behaving) like Qultists.
And do what instead? Assassinating targets isn't particularly feasible. Not because it wouldn't be effective (if continued for a good amount of time, it could cause MASSIVE changes), but it would require people to make massive sacrifices even though the problems aren't overwhelming (yet). So you won't find many (0?) who'd do it (yet). Also a major step is to make people notice the jew, and assassinating them has the purpose to cause them to escalate and infringe on regular people, which in itself would cause noticing.
> Rebuttal: How do you know the bomb isn’t just an empty shell?
We have historically proven to be quite effective in conflicts and wars. On various occasions we have created massive empires, we colonized subhumans with a Christian intent to reform them, we fought each other over basically nothing, there are instances of a group of Whites killing countless niggers, and we have expelled jews 1030+ times from 109+ countries. When the time comes, we as a people have the potential to cause Armageddons. There is certainly a bomb, the question is if and when it detonates next. If we'd have a collective will to fix all out problems, if we'd had true dedication, we could fix them in 2 weeks.
Maybe we just have a rough time for a century, but we've already had many of those and still prevailed. And we lack the temporal overview because we are *right in there*? It's possible people like you and me have thought similarly 1000 years ago. In 1241/1242 Hungarians were raided by vicious mongols, decimating them. But Hungarians prevailed. It must have been a time of utmost misery. WWI was another atrocious, miserable time for many people. In 500 years we might refer to the 20-21th century to a dark era of jewish conquest. An ethnic that was completely wiped out in the 21th century.
So it is really naive to think that we will prevail again as we have done numerous times under numerous circumstances? It's far from over yet.
> “What we’re doing is working, despite it self-evidently not working, because other white nationalists are begging us to stop!”
Some things are working, some aren't. But "working" doesn't mean TND/TKD tomorrow. It means working towards it. I mean 98% of politicians in the US are basically owned by jews... and the EU is ran by communists, so what governmental actions do you expect to happen? It's impossible - yet. And even though the jews own 96%+ of US media and most social media platforms, they aren't exactly doing very well at the reputation front. It's continuously going downhill.
What is left to do? Terrorism, assassinations. Well, yes, but you need a LOT of people for that with a lot of dedication to the cause. So if you expect that, well, it's a little cynical to expect that. It basically boils down to "doing nothing" by setting a bar too high to pass, resulting in not even trying. Or by declaring everything below that as "doing nothing," aka nobody "does anything."
I have a roughly 5% success rate on that.
>You argue that whatever time frame is, it's too late.
Nah, we have a window of about 10 years yet.
>Hey, if Zelensky or Soros or Netanyahu would be in front of me, I would immediately kill them, knowing the sacrifice.
That’s why they never show themselves to the goyim.
>If someone like Asmongold would suddenly talk about jews critically, do you think he would lose viewers?
Yeah, he’d be permanently banned immediately and all of his content removed from every platform. When’s the last time you heard from Kanye West?
>Even if Trump declared war against whatever sandnigger country, the ambition of the people would be minimal.
That’s why they false flag you into supporting their wars. Everyone supported the military after 9/11, right? Jews did it. People just obeyed the kill orders against whomever jews *said* did it instead.
>Further development suggests even MORE opposition to israel, more noticing, more opposition to niggers/pajeets/other subhumans.
That’d be nice, but they’ll just pass a law saying it’s illegal to do that and people will instantly stop.
>namely nigger uprisings for being deprived of infinite gibs.
When Social Security runs out in the mid-2030s, they’ll just cut off white benefits and leave nonwhites.
>And do what instead?
Stop obeying jewish laws. Stop paying jewish taxes. Create communities that actually follow natural law and refuse anything else. The barest, most effortless forms of passive resistance and no one does it.
>We have historically proven to be quite effective in conflicts and wars.
Which is why jews cut the average white man’s testosterone in half in the last 80 years.
>we have expelled jews 1030+ times from 109+ countries.
Maybe we shouldn’t have done that.
>if we'd had true dedication, we could fix them in 2 weeks.
Ever the optimist. I’ve always said five years, worldwide.
>they aren't exactly doing very well at the reputation front. It's continuously going downhill.
How long can the ✡public opinion poll✡ “approval rating” of Congress and the media be 3% before people stop obeying them? Because decades have passed so far and they still obey everything said.
More. There are many rural areas across Europe, Canada, New Zealand, Australia and the US. We can reclaim our countries even in 30-50 years. It will become more and more difficult, but as difficulty increases, the will to fight also does. The US looks a little more dire, but even there it's not hopeless. The ratio of Whites in the US becomes ~35% in 100 years (if everything would continue as it did before). A ratio of 1:20 is enough for Whites to win against niggers and subhumans.
> When’s the last time you heard from Kanye West?
I really do not follow nigger media... so the thing I heard about him before that was gayfish from Southpark.
> Yeah, he’d be permanently banned immediately and all of his content removed from every platform.
Not necessarily. He has quite a large audience, and he'd go to other platforms, which would still host him (Kick maybe?). Of course assuming he approaches the topic smartly and gradually over the span of months. When measures are taken against him (bans), people wouldn't just handwave it away, argue he'd deserve it and jump off. He is clearly not immune to kikery, but he is in a position where he *could* become a major problem to them, *because* he isn't easily depersonable.
> That’s why they false flag you into supporting their wars.
People are also aware of that, even waiting for the next false flag from israel. Even the assassination of Charlie Kirk makes israel highly suspicious. When the israelis try to pull off a 9/11 again, what are the chances that it could backfire and ruin EVERYTHING? It would force the US to immediately nuke the relationship with israel, and no AIPAC money and jewish media propaganda could prevent that. It would also give room to expose 9/11, and remind everyone of the USS Liberty (which was a failed false flag attempt) and the Levon Affair.
In 2001 nobody was aware of the jewish question and israel, and nobody had any idea of the proclivity of jews to do false flags. There was barely any internet use and social media to even bring attention to it. They had full control of the flow of information. If the jewish media said "it was the Arabs", that was taken for granted, and politicians (George Bush) could go with it with a smile. That's no longer the case.
> but they’ll just pass a law saying it’s illegal to do that and people will instantly stop.
It's already illegal, but that's just a hindrance. If I were in Germany and what I said would be leaked, I'd be in jail for decades. Didn't stop me at any point in time.
> The barest, most effortless forms of passive resistance and no one does it.
No government would leave you free or alive for that. If you want to go that way, you'd have to be ready to kill a LOT of police and maybe even soldiers, and to see your family and neighbors die - a lot. You'd need a large fraction of the population to commit to that at once for it to work. Which goes back to having to inform people, possibly even organizing.
Assassinating high-level jews sounds way more lucrative than that - it could lead to immediate, rampant accelerationism, because the government would *have* to respond with authoritarian measures against *all* people. And if they'd see a couple of billionaire jews hanging from ropes and a sign on their neck that says something inspirational, it would strike fear into jews as well - forcing them to double down or retreat, or even be in conflict with each other "stop making us look bad!" And people weren't mourning for the healthcare CEO either, in fact a lot of people would endorse it, especially leftists.
Just a random thought of course... not that I have spent hours thinking about this.
> Maybe we shouldn’t have done that.
The next time will be the last time. The place they'll be moved is called hell. They brought this upon themselves. They raised the bar to deal with our problems (aka them) so high, that IF it gets passed, it will be passed by people so radical, that TKD will look like a walk in the park. Compared to them, we would appear like liberals. Children will play games where they'll tag each other and say "you are the jew now!" and run around having fun. In Hungary right now and decades ago, calling someone a jew can be an insult, and there are words like "don't jew around." So this is not unthinkable. Even in German saying "Jude" isn't particularly "nice" - they rather resort to euphemisms like "person of jewish heritage."
I've never used such euphemism btw. Over a decade ago, when I was more "liberal" (still quite curious and positive about NatSoc/Fascism btw), we talked about gypsies, and he wanted me to say Roma and Sinti instead. Never did it.
> Ever the optimist. I’ve always said five years, worldwide.
Well, Pareto's 80/20 rule. It might take 5 years for the remaining 20%, but I believe, naively, that 80% in a short time frame would be good enough to call it a success.
> How long can the ✡public opinion poll✡ “approval rating” of Congress and the media be 3% before people stop obeying them? Because decades have passed so far and they still obey everything said.
That's a good point. Maybe an event is needed, like a war, or a failed false flag operation where politicians still act as if it wasn't, trying to wage war on behalf of israel. The thing with these events is that they are unforeseeable. All it takes is for them to make a major mistake.
That wasn't the case in the past - and they DID major mistakes - they could boldly try and fail and suffer no consequences. Given their control of the flow of information, it reached barely anyone. Nobody noticed the jew, and israel was basically out of the picture. Today there are countless people (including me) who are eager to point out the jew in the room.
Of course there is still a long way to go. But it's not hopeless at all.
Very true. Look at all the famous battles with Muslims and the ratios they had to have in order to beat whites.
>People are also aware of that, even waiting for the next false flag from israel.
*We* don’t count as people. There are maybe 10,000 of us total, worldwide. Regular people don’t just “notice” false flags; that’s the entire point of false flags.
>It would force the US to immediately nuke the relationship with israel
The US is literally a puppet state of Israel. We don’t have the ability to dictate the terms of our relationship. They openly admitted they killed their own people on October 6 and the US just gave them more support.
>and no AIPAC money and jewish media propaganda could prevent that.
When the media has done nothing but show only what jews want you to see for the last 130 years, they’re obviously able to hide anything they want.
>In 2001 nobody was aware of the jewish question and israel, and nobody had any idea of the proclivity of jews to do false flags.
[Well…](https://archive.is/oOpBt)
“Of the Mossad, the Israeli intelligence service, the [Army School of Advanced Military Studies] officers say: "Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target U.S. forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act." **~ The Washington Times**; Monday, September 10, 2001
>If the jewish media said "it was the Arabs", that was taken for granted, and politicians (George Bush) could go with it with a smile. That's no longer the case.
October 6?
> You'd need a large fraction of the population to commit to that at once for it to work.
Right; so why is this not being worked on?
> not that I have spent hours thinking about this.
[Definitely not me either.](https://scored.co/c/ConsumeProduct/p/13zztEZzuB/on-nonviolent-noncooperation/c)
> I've never used such euphemism btw.
Respect, man. We have to “police our *own* language” first, otherwise we can’t effectively communicate the truth when we’re still talking like puppets. Go out of your way to use the right words to describe something. Someone in a conversation says, “We’re going to have to do something about these zionists…” and you reply, “You mean the jews and their shabbos goyim?”
> Maybe an event is needed, like a war, or a failed false flag operation where politicians still act as if it wasn't, trying to wage war on behalf of israel. The thing with these events is that they are unforeseeable. All it takes is for them to make a major mistake.
The next obvious event is the (purposeful, planned, structured, organized, scripted) collapse of the economy to force the single global digital-only currency tied to your government ID and banning all cash and independent bank accounts.
But Congress and the media will simply pass whatever laws they want and all their enforcers (whose pensions will be digital only and tied to their obedience) will simply do whatever they’re told to the people.