Comments on: Post-modernity, liberalism & the collapse of politics

By: Harold Crews

Harold Crews — Tue, 25 Sep 2012 19:45:04 +0000

I’ve ordered my book and it should come tomorrow. Amazon has it for about $20.

Identity is politics. Presently identity (particularly for whites) is limited to meaningless abstractions such as ‘American’. Even in Europe nationality has be so diluted or abstracted to include immigrants from the third world and practitioners of hostile religions. ‘America’ is no more than democracy, progress, diversity, tolerance, pluralism and regulated capitalism. So, truly for whites politics barely exists. We don’t have a dog in that fight. It is no more than rhetorical sparring on different prioritization over the same goals.

I’m looking forward to reading Prof. Dugin’s thoughts.

By: VirginiaCavalier

VirginiaCavalier — Tue, 25 Sep 2012 00:07:50 +0000

VS, I like the idea of ‘the Persian Wars on a massive scale’. I do agree with what you said in that as much as I dislike Dugin it is better to walk the anti-liberal road with him until our paths part. Liberalism is a cancer that destroys the hearts of nations and every weapon must be utilised in a Nationalist defence.

By: Michael

Michael — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 23:21:32 +0000

VS, that’s well-said. and I think that Dugin would agree with a lot of what you said there. He plainly said he is against universalisms and is not attempting to formulate any new dogma. My purpose in highlighting this book is not to try and convince Southern nationalists to embrace Dugin 100% and become Eurasionists. Rather, I thought it was helpful to point to an influential fellow-traveler who agrees with us on many things. Where we agree, we ought to work together, because as you say, VS, none of us are strong enough on our own at this point to oppose liberalism.

By: Virginian Secessionist

Virginian Secessionist — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 22:59:08 +0000

VC, remember also that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.” Even if we may not agree with Dugin on everything, and even if we would prefer Tsarists (and believe me, I do), right now no one ideology is strong enough to oppose liberalism. The first thing that must be done is to defeat liberalism. Then we can afford to disagree with each other. Think of this as the Persian Wars on a massive scale. Nationalists, Monarchists (of all varieties, from Legitimism to Social Monarchism to Constitutional Monarchism), and all others who oppose global liberalism must stand together to defeat it. Then we can go our separate ways. But like the Spartans and Athenians, we must put aside our conflicts and unite to save our world before we are crushed by the advancing onslaught of the liberal juggernaut.

By: Michael

Michael — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 20:05:20 +0000

VC, I can appreciate your concern on this front. I had similar concerns. I can also appreciate your last statement. lol However, I think if you read Dugin that your perspective on him will be challenged.

By: VirginiaCavalier

VirginiaCavalier — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 19:40:31 +0000

Dugin is a Eurasianist fool who is a threat to tradition and true nationalism. Give me a good Tsarist any day.

By: Chad

Chad — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 09:30:44 +0000

Dixiegirl
The reason most people have the rags to riches mentality is due to the excessive tax rates from the federal, state and local theft (Ops I mean “tax”) jurisdiction. The people are pressed into a situation where they can’t live off the land and must submit to slavery (constantly working for someone else) in order to meet the government “tax” burden. There is really no in between for welfare and filthy rich that most people can comfortably live at without being a slave. This is why there is so much glamour and excitement around lottery winners and sports/entertainment celebrities because it is seen as a way to have enough money without working your fingers to the bone to satisfy taxes.

By: Michael

Michael — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 01:00:16 +0000

Dixiegirl, that does bother me. I dislike it when visiting someone if they have the TV on in the background. I don’t wish to talk over a TV. The same is true in the car. If we are not talking, then fine, turn on the radio. However, I detest talking over a radio. Why must these things be turned on all the time?

By: Dixiegirl

Dixiegirl — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 00:54:05 +0000

Don’t forget the Tribunal-Court T.v., that socializes everyone into courts where they stand in front of a caustic judge, for “justice,” and the shrink-and-drugging t.v. Doctors, who show us how to handle “problems,” in a “post-religious society.” Contests and NFL seem to condition us to the welfare-state- lottery mentality, with it’s rags-to-riches Cinderella themes.

Amazing how many people you visit just keep t.v. on all day in the background. It’s like Farenheit 451 or something—all the dystopian novels where people have wall-size t.v.s. The only difference is the people are seen to be “choosing” to watch. They buy the big t.v.s themselves.

Reminds me of how people would talk, years ago, of going to communist countries, where “only cheap goods were available in warehouse style stores.” This was seen as awful. But now the public has “voted this in”—- because there is no difference from those stores described in the past and the current “box store” experience. All the same effects— but done by conditioning and “soft” not “hard” methods.

By: The New Silence Dogood

The New Silence Dogood — Sun, 23 Sep 2012 21:49:55 +0000

I think you are right.

I also think it’s a double edged sword.

On the one hand, it does make it easier for movements like the southern nationalist movement, otherwise none of us would have the info. and be able to connect with one anther like we have.

On the other hand, I also think it makes it much easier for the opposition to maintain control and surveillance over the entire population. The amount of technology that usurps our time and controls us now is spooky, and very Orwellian.

While it may work for us well in the short run, I believe it will be our downfall in the long run….basically the downfall of mankind…..