hanikrummihundursvin
No bio...
User ID: 673
Nuclear AI drones, the news is taking Facebook by storm.
But you raise a very good point. The resolution of this war doesn't do anything to resolve the conflicting interests that caused it. Something has to give.
hanikrummihundursvin
3d ago
Counting on Iran to respect the invisible lines globohomo relies on to survive is a fools gambit given Iran exists in its current state precisely because it did not respect those invisible lines. It's a pillar of their identity. On the flipside, the west is losing their identity fast through nothing but their own inaction and stupidity. What globohomo will be left to subjugate Iran in a 100 years?
I think the US and EU should recognize that the market centric self hating mass migration fueled jew worshipping ideology they've been holding on to is a dead end. Sacrificing more white men to keep this satanic third world welfare program running is not better than the alternative. I'd think the horrors from Ukraine exemplify what can happen when an empire in name only tries to flex its 'might'.
The west needs to think inward. The leaders are weak, the people even more so. Foreign policy is just a cope for this state of affairs. The concept itself becoming incoherent and absurd when the people running the show are either zionists or third worldist at heart. It's a big theater to make the dead ends of humanity feel like they are a part of some forward momentum, some progression. When in reality they sold their future out for the promise of cheaper strawberries and the emotional warmth and moral superiority the TV gave them when it desecrated their ingroup in the name of a morality where everyone can be good so long as we all hate white people. The future doesn't concern the people of the west. They've morally abdicated from it. Black women should just run everything.
America has been an empire in name only for some time now. It doesn't export Americanism. It exports the poison that is killing it. The elections are becoming fake, the leaders foreign ideologues. The walls are closing in. People wish for one last hurrah directed against a manufactured enemy that exists because of an incoherent foreign policy dictated to the Americans by foreigners.
It's all tits up and we need a mental reset. And whilst the best we've gotten so far are Alex Jones edits and looks obsessed men suntanning their taints, there was a time when things were different in spirit, even if just for a little while. But recognizing that would require some humility and courage, which is a big thing to ask of Americans and Europeans.
These claims would be meaningful since they're coming from the US and seem to represent some major concessions. But Trump has in typical fashion said that some aspects of the deal, such as the 300bn reconstruction plan, are not real. So despite all this information coming out we are sadly not that much further along from where we started. Trump seems perfectly willing to flaunt his executive authority over anything, and the republicans seem to have no capability to rein him in.
That being said, the 300bn might just be a negotiating tactic. A giant carrot that Trump can chop up as needed. But as you detail, the rest of the deal is hardly a win for the US either so...
On the flipside there is no telling what is going on in Iran right now. The Americans manipulating their own markets whilst getting lost in their own fog of war has been shielding the Iranians from making any definitive decisions. I mean, it's not hard to imagine some Shia hardliners salivating over the potential economic turmoil that could be unleashed if the strait remains closed. Militant factions within Iran might see this as a once in a lifetime opportunity. Perhaps there is still chance for the Iran regime to tear itself apart over the deal, and we can all declare Trump the greatest president in US history. But that's wild speculation.
The only clear signal coming out of all of this is from the zionists. They are not happy. And it's easy to see why. But this began years ago with zionists railing against the JCPOA. The Republicans along with Trump tear the deal to pieces as zionist strategy dictates. They then attack Iran. Now we are here and regardless of how one imagines the war effort went, we are looking at a negotiation that begins with terms so much more favorable for Iran than the JCPOA ever was that one has to wonder: What was the meaning of all of this? What did anyone ever expect to gain? Was this all just a half court hail Mary throw to win the game with 30 minutes left on the clock like we're in some Disney movie? No really, what is this? I'm so confused.
hanikrummihundursvin
4d ago
Again, we are making a statement that applies to both sides in equal measure.
hanikrummihundursvin
4d ago
Given the conflicting claims of Iran and the US, that doesn't change anything. You don't know the terms of the deal, but are giving the US side rumors more credence, and are declaring the alleged deal a victory. You then complain that someone takes the Iran side more seriously and declares them the winners. Unless we are not reading about the same deal and you consider a 300bn aid packet to Iran a win.
hanikrummihundursvin
4d ago
So nobody knows what really happened, but at least we're having fun.
I read this as: We don't know what's in the deal, but lets pretend to. Since you then wrote a post that declared the deal a victory and a vindication of Trump without knowing what was in it.
I mean, what was the point of the original comment if you were going to pull out this stop, which applies to everything you've said in equal measure?
I don't disagree. My point was that the state of affairs Farage represents is what got us to this point in the first place. And as your post implicitly reiterates, Farage doesn't pose any threat to that state of affairs. Instead he is riding the wave of suffering and strife it creates, without any logical recourse to end it.
If the British public is not ready to assert their claim as the rightful and sole owners of their lands, then that's a problem that needs to be realized and solved. But as I said, Farage does not represent any move towards that direction. The realization I'm trying to convey is that the best case scenario for a Farage government would be a more skillfully managed decline of the British nations. It's better in the short term, but the long term result is the same. The end of the British people.
This is an established paradigm in modern right wing politics. Historically there are two camps that believe in some form of solution to this existential crisis of the west. The Secretly Based Camp and the Accelerationist Camp. The SBC believes that there are secretly based politicians that are playing electoral politics, hiding their power level just enough to get elected so they can save the country. The Accelerationist camp believes that the accelerated deterioration of the native populations QoL is a mechanism that can wake them up to act in a more radical way in their own self interest.
To summarize, Farage represents the worst option. He's neither secretly based nor trying to upset the status quo. Instead he is cashing out on all the pent up pressure that the negative effects of the status quo create without representing any chance to correct the course.
Now, maybe Farage represents something different and new that exists outside this paradigm. One can only hope. But I don't see why one would think that considering we now have an established history of SBC candidates failing to live up to the hopes that were tied to them. Farage seems to fit neatly into the established paradigm as what's commonly referred to as a Release Valve. I don't think that's an unfair description until proven otherwise.
I'd think that the example of the old lady refusing to rent to non-whites would be particularly pertinent given the modern dynamic where hotel owners rent out every room to the government so it can house migrants in them. And then these migrants rape women and children. Just search 'uk migrant hotel rape'. It's practically a sport at this point.
I think you are not paying the respect prejudice deserves. And that this is a cognitive and moral failing on your part. You are looking at the words, not the emotion.
I saw this a lot in the aftermath of the big purge of the Alt-Right from YouTube. Where lefty youtubers could claim, after the fact, that they ultimately won and that the alt-righters had always been kind of stupid. And to an extent that's not an inaccurate observation. There were a lot of 'vapid' and 'stupid' creators in that space. They didn't really understand HBD to any relevant extent, they didn't do well in debates and they certainly could not predict how bad things could get. But they did get an audience. How? Principally because their attention was on the same gut wrenching worry others felt. That the current state of affairs was bad. They could not necessarily articulate why. But they had a gut feeling and others could emotionally resonate with that.
To that extent, it should be a source of embarrassment, continuously, for every person that was more intelligent, erudite, or otherwise better equipped to handle reality, that they are continuously shown up by random racists when it comes to identifying threats. The trajectory of the western world has been so comically bad the past three decades that it's hard to imagine how it could have gone worse.
Turns out, almost every economist is a retard, actually. Along with every educated person that can read, write and reason yet fail to recognize that no, importing the third world will not be an economic benefit, colonialism didn't make Africa poor and 'poverty' doesn't make black people rape. The racist could not necessarily articulate why he knows what he knows or believes what he believes. But they had a gut feeling that has outshone every alternative. Sure, they continuously fumble the moment, make bad arguments and otherwise embarrass themselves, but ultimately they've not been the ones who've been wrong when it counts.
Farage has been saying things for a long time. So far he has only proven to be a populist voice with the very same 'moderate' anti-white policies of Labour and the Tories. Ready to play the respectability politics and then lose when push comes to shove and his party is faced with the same problems that have driven the majority of the west towards the now typical anti-white solutions.
Without a worldview that is a hardline fact based contradiction to the blank slate alternative and without the moral backbone to stand by a specific people, there will be no positive change. Reform has explicitly rejected all avenues that can logically lead to success. They can win elections, but what will they resort to when the left political machine re-asserts their claim on the moral mandate that Reform refuses to contest? When the sheer weight of demographic change starts impacting every aspect of political life? Will Reform really get a steady enough supply of ethnically motivated rape gangs, murders and other crime to challenge the moral narrative that every western media outlet is churning out to their captive audience 24/7?
Reform is not fighting a war. They're an informal surrender. Be prim and proper, don't rock the boat, keep a stiff upper lip and don't look at the endless horde of foreigners waiting on the horizon that are all motivated by an ethnic ideology that demonizes native Brits.
hanikrummihundursvin
29d ago
I'm all for accepting that people can change, but if it's a choice between a person who has shown they are capable of being a Nazi and a person who hasn't done that, well it's a pretty big disadvantage.
What's the functional difference between being a nazi and being a zionist? Or is this just a metric dependent on what is further outside the Overton Window?
Outside of that you're not offering anything concrete here that relates to the tattoo that rises above class sneering. To that extent you answer your own question. A peachy clean political candidate that looks like they were cooked up in a lab is the exact aesthetic someone like Platner counters.
tl;dr: Trump was told to jump higher than he could. His knees buckled on the landing and now he's crawling around telling the zionists that he's sorry he can't stand up to Iran. The zionist response when he asks for a hand is to spit on him for being weak. Genuinely, even the antisemites are shocked.
I feel like there was an old white nationalist 2.0 cope around the time where ISIS was at its peak about AIPAC and Israel that ran somewhere along the lines of: AIPAC has a better grip on America than America has a grip on the middle east.
I think the truth of that observation is unfolding in front of us to a certain extent. The weakest link in the Israel/AIPAC dynamic is Israel. AIPAC can still unseat elected representatives at will. Most recently demonstrated with Massie. American politicians still dance to their tune. It's Israel, whose actions became incoherent after Oct.7, culminating with this Iran ordeal, that's the problem in this dynamic.
I think the only interesting answer to the question can come from zionists and adjacent folk. Nigh every other group that's not zionist, from progressives to regressives, wants to dump the Israelis tomorrow. The entire world is getting sick of Israel and its behavior. So from a zionist perspective: What ever was the plan here?
Like, zionists have this iron grip on US foreign policy. What did they want the US to do? Unless the plan is to literally genocide every single Arab via US military might so that Israel can do whatever it wants in the region, then US involvement stops making sense very quickly. The US can bomb things. They can do economic coercions, they can occupy big buildings in cities, build FOBs in valleys and patrol roads in Humvees. But they can't do much else. As Afghanistan and Iraq have demonstrated.
Americans have thousands of their soldiers dead, tens of thousands if you count the suicides, trillions spent, and nothing to show for it. And now we are reading that Israel, not just the 'Netanyahu government' but a sizeable portion of the Israeli public and America based zionists, wanted America to commit to another middle East war effort with no explicit end goal, no theory for victory, and no discernable US gain outside of rank delusions that Iran intends to nuke Huston and Vienna if ever given the chance. We don't even have the pretense of regime change anymore.
The cost of this war, however, would be enormous. Not just in direct military spending, but with every economist (spit) sounding the alarm bells that this would prove catastrophic for global markets. Countries most affected, including some US allies, have already started rationing programs. Meanwhile Russia, US's geopolitical enemy, has been making bank month over month due to this war and the oil/gas market disruptions.
This comes across as incoherent lunacy. Destabilizing the middle east? Eh, on some level that makes sense, even if I oppose and abhor it and the negative consequences it has had for not just the middle east but Europe. But if this is the continuation... What's the plan, where's the big picture everyone's missing? I can't even put together how zionists are pretending to be allies with the US at this point. That they even attribute a theory of mind to Americans.
In defense of the zionists, AIPAC is still so strong they can be forgiven for thinking less of Americans. So if there is any weight behind these events, it will come down on Netanyahu first, Israel second, AIPAC a distant third. So long as the Israeli lobby holds the keys to a plurality of public offices in the US, they will remain strong. But Israel needs to find some stability fast. Maybe Netanyahu is playing the role of a future sacrificial chicken perfectly. Sin as much as you can before the head goes off.
To that extent the answer to the question is clear. Let Netanyahu take as much as he can before we give the Western cattle a new shepherd.
More options
Context Copy link