It’s amazing how the establishment is perfectly consistent across its entire propaganda apparatus network, in its endless effort to brainwash people into believing that the only good guy with gun is always authorized personnel in a uniform, or occasionally someone that was once authorized and uniformed — and anything outside of that is deemed unthinkable, extreme, taboo or absurd. You can guess why they want people like you to think this way, it obvious: they want goyim like you to be the Eloi living under their authorized Morlocks.

They’re literally trying to brainwash people into becoming some sort of Eloi from The Time Machine. I used to call these sort of people urbanite bugmen, but Eloi is so much more fitting.

https://news.1rj.ru/str/hapaperspective/7277

The answer here should just be “fuck no” across the board. It doesn’t matter how cute or sexy the woman is, if she’s hopelessly leftist then she’s a liability that won’t accept your views when times get tough, she won’t have your back and be on board with your major life decisions, and she’ll just drag you into situations and around people you shouldn’t be near; not to mention the possibility that she may snitch on you to the authorities if there’s any relationship problems — think red flag laws if you’re in blue state America.

https://news.1rj.ru/str/millennialwoes/5642

No normie needs to care about Taiwan to be sold on a war against a disgusting, evil government that’s obviously turned China into the most contemptible totalitarian freak show on earth. Therefore I doubt there’s much water for shitlibs pundits and influencers to have to carry in the first place.

Other than the dispute over Taiwan, the Western establishment would probably rather not openly vilify the CCP itself, because what the CCP have been doing to their Chinese subjects (many are still under lockdown, extreme surveillance everywhere, social credit, and etc...) is exactly what Western governments are pushing on their respective populations, and I imagine they’d rather not shed light on that hypocrisy.

https://news.1rj.ru/str/MorgothsReview/3054

That illustration of the shitlib caste system pyramid with Jews at the very top was way too accurate.

https://news.1rj.ru/str/Andy_Ngo/4621

"Climate change" summarized

20 years ago. Predominantly White audience not caring one bit about being politically correct.

Important genocidal supremacist Jews compilation.

If you aren’t already, be sure to follow me on Gab, because we may not be allowed on Telegram forever, nor gab for that matter. It’s best for us be on multiple platforms.

https://gab.com/Hapaperspective

The Writers' Bloc had their good friend Hwitegeard over for a friendly, low-intensity chinwag with host Nick Jeelvy, where they also answered listener questions, and it is now available for download and online listening. https://counter-currents.com/2022/08/counter-currents-radio-podcast-no-472-hwitgeard-on-the-writers-bloc/

I highly, highly, highly recommend everyone watch BlackPilled’s Pat-Con series of livestreams. If you want to understand how the deep state has been conspiring against us and killing innocent people, all in an effort to create this illusion that conservative Whites are terrorists, I insist you watch it.

https://news.1rj.ru/str/DevonStack/2156

Too many people in the Dissident Right still have a boner for bigger government and more government power, but what they don’t understand is that larger government inevitably facilitates the deep state.

Hey, anyone remember Sri Lanka and what I said would happen? “No hapa, they are protesting so hard, so many people, we could learn a thing or two from them. They are takin’ back their government for real unlike you lazy yanks! They didn’t need any guns!”

Well well, I was right yet again. They might as well have no protested at all. Protesting and “taking over” state buildings changes nothing. There is no such thing as a bloodless revolution.

“Activists involved in the protest movement have been arrested, but allies of the former president are back in Parliament.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/03/world/asia/sri-lanka-protest-crackdown.html

What the Sri Lankans should have done is raided armories (for guns obviously), locked up the entire political class and put them all on trial, with many facing execution. But since Sri Lankans didn’t do that or couldn’t do that, nothing changed for them. They didn’t “get their government back,” instead it’s back to business with the same people in power minus one guy, the former president, their establishment’s token scapegoat.

https://news.1rj.ru/str/hapaperspective/7292

Duginism is grievance studies for bolsheviks.

It’s as if Knut Hamsun is basically describing the conditions for Caesarism: weak men putting their faith in another man.

https://news.1rj.ru/str/hvitgardr3/5463

"OMFG SO BASED!!"

People often wrongfully accuse me of being a Libertarian for merely supporting the 2A as well as my natural distrust of government. And now it seems “Libertarian” means anyone that doesn’t subscribe to the idea of the state having unlimited, unchecked, god like authority over every facet of your existence — as if the state automatically has a mandate from heaven. I’ve seen people here being accused of being Libertarians for merely wanting Covid lockdowns to end, or believing that individuals have any rights at all. If that’s not retarded, I don’t know what is.

Before half of the Dissident Right unanimously put Libertarianism in their crosshairs, I almost never heard anyone mention actual Libertarians, Libertarianism nor the actual Libertarian party — it was just a fringe, niche political group full of nerds that most boomer conservatives didn’t know about or ignored, and the few conservatives that knew about it laughed at it. Libertarianism now has more attention and credibility as an actual movement partly because the DR has been heavily infiltrated by FEDs that want goyim like you to forfeit your own rights and your own freedom; and Libertarianism serves as the easy strawman to indirectly gaslight many of our people into attacking any notion that the government shouldn’t own them and control their existence — it’s all way too convenient for this establishment that wants to enslave us.

What’s particularly odd is that the accusation of being a “Libertarian” is more of an affront than being called an Anarchist, and no here accuses anyone of being an Anarchist. Perhaps claiming to be an Anarcho-Nationalist in response to being accused of being a Libertarian is the way to go, but in truth I’m no Anarchist either.

My argument as a pro-individual-rights kind of guy is that we’re so far removed from power, and it’s not likely that we’ll have government power we can trust anytime soon, and that limitations on government is our greatest hope for survival.

The only hope the dissident right has of getting its hands on government power is through the greater normie conservative movement, but the vitriolic hatred our movement has toward boomer conservatives and “lolbertarians” has become so aggressively destructive and isolationist, that I don’t see that happening soon enough to matter, if at all. So individual rights against government is really the only thing that we have.

Medieval rebels, noble and peasant alike, resisting the power of the king and central government would probably be denounced as silly liberals.

The idea that the great mass of men should passively conform to the will of a single man, or single clique of a few men, is on its face weak, effeminate, and slavish. It's easy enough for 'influencers' to advocate it and not automatically feel disgusted because they imagine themselves at the top of the pyramid. What's more odd is that there are millions of men who subscribe to this idea and don't feel ashamed, though they are the slavish followers.

We can't all be leaders, most shall be followers, but leadership is conferred by the free consent of the followers. "I follow suchandsuch because I have confidence in his abilities". Confidence should never be given unconditionally, and followers should be prepared to scrutinise and judge the abilities of their leader.

When that confidence is lost, then the follower must be allowed to stop following. Faced with the possibility of loss of support the leader must constantly strive to earn and re-earn the confidence of his followers by producing actual results for them.

A leader attempting to inculcate his followers with the idea that there is no true measure of his performance, that they should follow him no matter what, and that there is no absolute standard of correct interpersonal behaviour (law and rights), is a desperate move to insulate himself from that pressure of having to actually do something good for anyone but himself.

This doesn't just apply to embryonic social movements confined to the internet, it applies to virtually any sphere of social activity. How much better the world would be if people were more critical of the institutions they serve, and the people who hold the reins, whether it's the government, or a bank, or a charity, or a corporation.

If that's libertarian then I'm a libertarian.