Confusing language is causing useless debates in AmNat circles. Here's how to fix it

RedPillStormer

♫♪♬ I bless the rains down in Africa ♫♪♬
Old World Underground
👑
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻⛪️
I noticed a common trend. 90% of debates that happen in AmNat circles on any topic from "Christianity" to "normies" to "left vs right" is 90% of the time just talking in circles due to confusing language. People talk about different things and talk past each other. I think once we add clarity, 90% of "debates" will fix themselves.

Here's a few examples :

Communism vs Capitalism

The rising cultural norm that will emerge from the decimated economy will be communism.
Capitalism and communism are both materialist philosophies that disregard or outright deny any spiritual, higher nature of human existence. So despite being very different, they often produce the same dehumanizing results.

I believe in private enterprise and I believe someone should be able to become wealthy if they're good at what they do, but it has to be within a framework of rules to protect the decency of the nation and natural world.
There was a lot of talk recently about how the right is going to lose because of emerging "communism" and how the wignats were one step ahead. Anglin replied :

No one cares about economics. Leftists support multinational corporations because the corporations promote trannies. Rightists support Donald Trump's attacks on Reaganism. No one cares about any of this bullshit because it's just a bunch of dumb bullshit. People care about social issues. They only care about economics so much as economics means they have the ability to buy the things they want to buy.
Here's the thing to understand, this is all caused by bad imprecise language. Communism and Capitalism are outdated terms.

When people criticize "capitalism" and say "but look at international corporations fucking us over" what they are really talking about is "elite parasitism".
When people criticize "communism" and say "but look at all the minorities getting welfare before young White people" what they are really talking about is "underclass parasitism".

Once these two terms are used the discussion becomes clear. That's what people mean when they say that "both communism and capitalism are bullshit". They are saying they are opposed to both elite and underclass parasitism. Once these 2 terms are used the discussion here is clear.

Most people here are ok with some form of free market, they are simply opposed to unchecked corporations violating national health and fairness by undercutting wages and building monopolies, AKA "elite parasitism".

Use these two terms instead "underclass parasites" and "elite parasites" instead of "Capitalism" and "Communism". This will fix most of the confusion.

Left vs Right

Another example are the terms Left vs Right. A lot of people are arguing that the country will turn "left" due to poverty. This makes things confusing, because as Anglin said


No one cares about economics. Leftists support multinational corporations because the corporations promote trannies. Rightists support Donald Trump's attacks on Reaganism. No one cares about any of this bullshit because it's just a bunch of dumb bullshit. People care about social issues. They only care about economics so much as economics means they have the ability to buy the things they want to buy.
Here's some clarity. The Grassroots Right, including the internet one stand for :

1) opposition to elite and underclass parasitism
2) pro-White ideas (even if in a more moderate form)
3) social conservatism (opposition to public gay parades, belief in traditional gender roles, masculine thinking, etc.)

The Grassroots Right is not opposed to "socialism" if it means relief for people who deserve it. It is opposed to "underclass parasitism" (illegal immigrants getting welfare) and "elite parasitism" (big firms getting bailouts).

Once this definition is understood, there will be less confusion about the US "drifting to the left", i.e being ok with some welfare. That is not "left" in the current context.

The Left stands for :

1) underclass parasitism
2) anti-White ideas
3) social progressivism (support for everything LGBT, woke comics, etc.)

With this understanding it's a lot clearer what is being talked about and that America is not "drifting left" because it is more ok with some welfare.

Grassroots vs Establishment

Another important point.

There is a distinction between the Dirtbag Left (Bernie types, Antifa) and Establishment Left (Pelosi, Biden). The first doesn't support elite parasitism only underclass one, the second also supports things like wars, while the first is apathetic on those issues.

The same distinction exists on the right. The Grassroots Right (Fuentes, Tucker) is different from the RINOs. The first doesn't support endless wars, corporate parasitism, etc. The second does.

That is an important distinction to understand when talking about issues like "hurr durr, the right is cucked on X". Do you mean "the establishment" or "the grassroots" ? because clearly there is difference between Denis Prager and Fuentes. Try to clarify the issue by using the terms "Grassroots Right" and "Establishment Right / RINO".

Turbo Cucks vs Semi-Cucks

Another important point. Oftentimes people mention that "the right" is cucked on X. And that normies are such cucks. But here's the deal. There is two types of cucks.

The first is the turbo cuck. This is usually people like Turning Point USA who push gay support as conservativism.

The second is the "semi-cuck". These are people who don't really like the LGBT agenda and endless wars, but they support them or stay silent "by default". For example, most people are not Evangelicals and are not ardent zionists. Most grassroots Republicans look at Israel and say "they are fighting muslims, guess they're good" and don't look further than that, but they are not turbo commited to it like John Hagee.

The semi-cuck can be redpilled sometimes, because he is not ultra-attached to the issue. He is just not opposing it, but doesn't care much about it. Therefore, it is important to make the distinction between a John Hagee type and a regular Joe who just plays along but doesn't care much. These are two different level of things.

This can bring confusion when people talk about "but Republican normies support Zionism !" because they pretend that the regular Joe is on the same level as John Hagee. It's a typical blackpill fallacy.

The Semi-Cuck is a potential recruit to AmNat whereas the Turbo Cuck isn't. And all it takes is just a greenlight from Tucker or a nice speech from Fuentes to "give him permission" to be "racist"/"sexist", etc. (see his speech in a church in front of normie boomers).

The Establishment Christians vs Grassroots Christians

This is another topic of confusion because people don't make distinctions. They will say "All Christians are cucked, look at the pope !". This is another fallacy caused by not making the distinction between the Grassroots and Establishment.

"How can you believe Christianity will save us when the pope and X church promotes gays ?!"

Of course once you understand there is a distinction between the Grassroots Christians who are opposed to mass migration and the LGBT agenda at the grassroots level (see Poland, Salvini, Greece) and the Establishment (the Pope and other types) this becomes a lot clearer. Just like Grassroots Right vs RINOs.

Conclusion

I think we can avoid 90% of confusion and useless discussions, since these points come up again and again, if we just fixed the language we use. Once the language is fixed, things clarify themselves naturally.
 
Last edited:

V.I

Thanks greatest ally for this incredible bargain
Old World Underground
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
⏰☕🚬🚽
Communism vs Capitalism debates almost always turn on a faulty premise and basic error in the definition of Capitalism: that the presence of markets ipso facto equals a capitalist system. In reality, markets have existed since beginning of history: i.e the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi regulated markets. Does the existence of markets mean that ancient Babylon was Capitalist? Obviously, it was not. Capitalism is the large-scale private ownership of the means of production, which has only existed for around 300 years. This erroneous premise makes most of the debate flowing from it essentially invalid.

Also, there is no such thing as a free market. Markets are structured by laws. Laws flow from the State. Therefore, markets are always a subordinate institution to the State.
 
Last edited:

RedPillStormer

♫♪♬ I bless the rains down in Africa ♫♪♬
Old World Underground
👑
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻⛪️
Communism vs Capitalism debates almost always turn on a faulty premise and basic error in the definition of Capitalism: that the presence of markets ipso facto equals a capitalist system. In reality, markets have existed since beginning of history: i.e the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi regulated markets. Does the existence of markets mean that ancient Babylon was Capitalist? Obviously, it was not. Capitalism is the large-scale private ownership of the means of production, which has only existed for around 300 years. This erroneous premise makes most of the debate flowing from it essentially invalid.

Also, there is no such thing as a free market. Markets are structured by laws. Laws flow from the State. Therefore, markets are always a subordinate institution to the State.
Either way, technicalities don't matter. For most people capitalism means "private enterprise" as opposed to "state-run economy". Of course there are gray areas since there is no pure system ever, but at the end of the day, when people say "Capitalism is bullshit" they mean that elite parasitism is bad.
 

Highlander

✝️️ Sword of Christ ✝️️
Old World Underground
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻⛪️
There's Theological Meritocratic Marcionism and there's being a godless heretic who hates competition.
 

Lassitor

Well-known member
Old World Underground
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
⏰☕🚬🚽
Capitalism is just the art of exploiting others for your own personal profit. How well you exploit is the measure of how successful you are.

Communism is just the STATE exploiting everyone.

What we currently have in this world is:
Crony capitalism and crony communism is just Private corporations in league with the State to exploit everyone.

But what happens when the population is so large (7.2 BILLION) where only less than half of the population is productive.

The answer is to reduce the population, cut the dead weight.

Solution:
Well, here it is...you are living in the solution now.
 

Harkon Ripsplitter

Uses Scalps as Cumsockets
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻
The confusing language starts to make more sense when you see it as religious sectarian schisms. It makes more sense to view politics in general as surrogate religion.
And religion is always an easier topic for most people because it leaves room for spiritual abstractions like feelings and acts of penance what is often called virtue signaling.
Just compare any topic that goes about debating christianity vs. anything concrete about how to be a subversive, lawfare, concrete kind of things. This useless toxic nerd debate shit has to stop.
 

RedPillStormer

♫♪♬ I bless the rains down in Africa ♫♪♬
Old World Underground
👑
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻⛪️
Capitalism is just the art of exploiting others for your own personal profit. How well you exploit is the measure of how successful you are.

Communism is just the STATE exploiting everyone.
This is my issue with this type of language. People say very generalized statements like

"Capitalism is the art of usury" etc.

The issue is that everyone is coming with their own definitions of "capitalism".

Then there is a stupid debate because someone says : "but wait, communism was even worse, do you want to stop people from having their own companies ? " and it goes in circle.

I think it is less useful to talk in terms of communism / captialism but rather in terms of "elite parasitism" instead. Since that encompasses all types of elite cronyism under any particular flavor be it "capitalism" or "communism".

I think we would be better off without using such vague language. On the previous forum we had a stupid debate with a Striker fan who was saying "Capitalism is bullshit" and when pressed he just kept saying "my neighbor has an expensive car, that's bullshit !!", and when we asked him "but what about Hitler supporting certain rich people ?" he started running around circles.

Let's use more appropiate terms "elite parasitism" when talking about rich people being parasites and "underclass parasites" when talking about illegal immigrants getting state benefits.

I think that is much more clear language and makes the issue much clearer. We really need to move away from the terms "Capitalism" and "Communism". These frames are outdated and only confuse people.
 

Highlander

✝️️ Sword of Christ ✝️️
Old World Underground
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻⛪️
The answer is to reduce the population, cut the dead weight.

Solution:
Well, here it is...you are living in the solution now.
Please Jesus, let the nonwhites be the dead weight in this scenario.
 

V.I

Thanks greatest ally for this incredible bargain
Old World Underground
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
⏰☕🚬🚽
Either way, technicalities don't matter. For most people capitalism means "private enterprise" as opposed to "state-run economy". Of course there are gray areas since there is no pure system ever, but at the end of the day, when people say "Capitalism is bullshit" they mean that elite parasitism is bad.
That’s propaganda rather than a definition: Centrally-planned run by State = bad. Centrally-planned run by Wall Street = good. Everything is “centrally-planned” in reality, but you’re supposed to have faith that shareholders and executives that only see the future in quarters and measure it by the stock price will always and everywhere produce better results for everyone than the State. Of course, if making the stock price go up this quarter means issuing bonds (debt) to buy back shares, or offshoring jobs to China, or importing foreign workers to undercut domestic labor, or leaseback agreements to sell off capital and rent it back to free up more liquidity to goose stocks, or any of the myriad ways that “private enterprise” puts a premium on short-term gains in exchange for long-term suicide; it is all necessarily good because “private enterprise” Wall Street did it rather than the State.
 

RedPillStormer

♫♪♬ I bless the rains down in Africa ♫♪♬
Old World Underground
👑
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻⛪️
That’s propaganda rather than a definition: Centrally-planned run by State = bad. Centrally-planned run by Wall Street = good. Everything is “centrally-planned” in reality, but you’re supposed to have faith that shareholders and executives that only see the future in quarters and measure it by the stock price will always and everywhere produce better results for everyone than the State can. Of course, if making the stock price go up this quarter means issuing bonds (debt) to buy back shares, or offshoring jobs to China, or importing foreign workers to undercut domestic labor, or leaseback agreements to sell off capital and rent it back to free up more liquidity to goose stocks, or any of the myriad ways that “private enterprise” puts a premium on short-term gains in exchange for long-term suicide; it is all necessarily good because “private enterprise” Wall Street did it rather than the State.
As long as we refer to this as "elite parasitism" instead of "capitalism" I don't really care to argue the details.
 

Harkon Ripsplitter

Uses Scalps as Cumsockets
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻
Also i recommend everyone reading The Rats of Nationalism, which is a really good work about basically Twitter Nationalism and the sectarian debate culture on the right.



From the Book:
The Feds, the Government, the Powers that be, promote various factions and subfactions of political dissidents as if they were marketing sports teams in a diversionary game, that is essentially what they're doing covertly. However, when one of these political figures starts to attract a little too much of a following the Feds direct their energy towards reining that person in. They mobilize their resources to play these factions against one another until these groups are reduced to rocking back and forth harmlessly like children on a teeter-totter. Social Media Platforms are modern forms of competitive gladitorial social spectacles, as is street activism. Ultimately the Feds want you to participate and be invested in the game, to a degree. To have fun, to attain popularity, but only within boundaries which disable your ideas from ever posing a serious challenge to the system itself.
...
The Feds also want you to entertain yourself into irrelevance. So much on what is pushed on social media is a fatalistic notion that there is very little that you can do to affect political change.
 

V.I

Thanks greatest ally for this incredible bargain
Old World Underground
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
⏰☕🚬🚽
As long as we refer to this as "elite parasitism" instead of "capitalism" I don't really care to argue the details.
So you’re only concerned about semantics in messaging rather than formally proposing a system to replace the current one that’s about to catastrophically fail? I’m not saying semantics don’t matter, but I am saying that the details of the system matter more.
 

V.I

Thanks greatest ally for this incredible bargain
Old World Underground
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
⏰☕🚬🚽
This is my issue with this type of language. People say very generalized statements like

"Capitalism is the art of usury" etc.

The issue is that everyone is coming with their own definitions of "capitalism".

Then there is a stupid debate because someone says : "but wait, communism was even worse, do you want to stop people from having their own companies ? " and it goes in circle.

I think it is less useful to talk in terms of communism / captialism but rather in terms of "elite parasitism" instead. Since that encompasses all types of elite cronyism under any particular flavor be it "capitalism" or "communism".

I think we would be better off without using such vague language. On the previous forum we had a stupid debate with a Striker fan who was saying "Capitalism is bullshit" and when pressed he just kept saying "my neighbor has an expensive car, that's bullshit !!", and when we asked him "but what about Hitler supporting certain rich people ?" he started running around circles.

Let's use more appropiate terms "elite parasitism" when talking about rich people being parasites and "underclass parasites" when talking about illegal immigrants getting state benefits.

I think that is much more clear language and makes the issue much clearer. We really need to move away from the terms "Capitalism" and "Communism". These frames are outdated and only confuse people.
The problem with your position is that rather than use the formal definition of capitalism “private ownership of the means of production”, you seek to sidestep the entire debate and ask that everyone adopt Mussolini’s distinctions of parasitic elements inside every class as a sort of rebranding to avoid the emotional load that people have in terms like “Socialism” and “Capitalism”.

This is fine if you’re solely concerned about forum debates. If you’re building a party program, however, you’ll need to confront all these misconceptions rather than just sidestep and rebrand.
 

RedPillStormer

♫♪♬ I bless the rains down in Africa ♫♪♬
Old World Underground
👑
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻⛪️
So you’re only concerned about semantics in messaging rather than formally proposing a system to replace the current one that’s about to catastrophically fail? I’m not saying semantics don’t matter, but I am saying that the details of the system matter more.
Semantics matter because almost no one is using your definition of "capitalism", you may be invested in that definition and feel strongly about it. You may even be correct on the topic.

But dictionary definitions don't matter. Words like "feminism", "nazism", "fascism", "racism", "sexism", "capitalism", "socialism" are magic words with their own definition in popular language. Using them will unfortunately always bring confusion.


Instead of focusing on the "autistic details" we need to make things simple first at the higher level. We are opposed to elite cronyism, be it capitalist or communist. We are against elite parasitism. Period. Once that simple frame is accepted it makes all the other discussions much clearer and easier. That is a 3000% better frame for explaining things to normies and discuss between ourselves.

Magic words bring confusion. We need to fix the confusing language as a priority for productive discussion.
 
Last edited:

RedPillStormer

♫♪♬ I bless the rains down in Africa ♫♪♬
Old World Underground
👑
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻⛪️
The problem with your position is that rather than use the formal definition of capitalism “private ownership of the means of production”, you seek to sidestep the entire debate and ask that everyone adopt Mussolini’s distinctions of parasitic elements inside every class as a sort of rebranding to avoid the emotional load that people have in terms like “Socialism” and “Capitalism”.

This is fine if you’re solely concerned about forum debates. If you’re building a party program, however, you’ll need to confront all these misconceptions rather than just sidestep and rebrand.
The party program is a different question. I was talking about the fact that people are using these terms and they are confused because everyone has his own definition.

We need to start with making simple understandable language to make discussion clear on forums.

The details of the "party program" are a completely different question. And of course there will be "nitty gritty" there.

But first and foremost, at the high level, we need to bring clarity to discussion and that starts with stopping the usage of "magic words" and starting using more appropriate and easily understandable words instead.
 

Flash McQueen

America First
Old World Underground
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
⏰☕🚬🚽
I noticed a common trend. 90% of debates that happen in AmNat circles on any topic from "Christianity" to "normies" to "left vs right" is 90% of the time just talking in circles due to confusing language. People talk about different things and talk past each other. I think once we add clarity, 90% of "debates" will fix themselves.

Here's a few examples :

Communism vs Capitalism
I'm glad someone else is talking about this terminology problem.

I've been trying to get people to understand this point for years. -- It's insanely frustrating.

I tried to explain the optics of language to Matt Heimbach, long before the cuckbox broke.

Heimbach, of course, didn't understand -- or pretended not to understand -- and then he went on a podcast and called me a "civic nationalist" -- because all wignats are filthy liars.

The point is, you're exactly right when you say that we need to use terminology, like "capitalism", in the way that our target audience defines it.

And our target audience of NormieCons likes their definition of "capitalism", because they think of the term to mean the ability to start a hardware store, or a lemonade stand, or whatever.

Trying to force some arcane, commie/wignat definition of the term "capitalism" on the NormieCons masses is a sure-fire way to lose the propaganda war and turn your entire audience against you.

You're never going to win over the NormieCon masses by attacking "capitalism".

But you'll win them over by attacking "crony capitalism".

NormieCons immediately get it when you attack "crony capitalism".

However, I'm not on board with just using the Propertarian-cult term "parasitism". -- It just isn't explanatory enough.

Calling Heimbach and Striker "promoters of underclass parasitism" is too confusing to people, and involves too much explanation.

But everyone gets it if you just call them communists.

I do see where you're coming from with your promotion of the term "parasitism" though. -- I just think we can do better.

But that's just a small point.

I agree with everything else you're saying.

Great post, man.
 
Last edited:

Kalli

ᛇ ᛈ ᛉ ᛋ ᛏ ᛒ ᛗ
Old World Underground
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓
One of the obstacles that we are facing today is that the meanings of words have been changed in order to make struggling against the status quo impossible. A lot of this began right after WWII. it's like they have been planning all of this for a while or something.
 

RedPillStormer

♫♪♬ I bless the rains down in Africa ♫♪♬
Old World Underground
👑
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻⛪️
I'm glad someone else is talking about this terminology problem.

I've been trying to get people to understand this point for years. -- It's insanely frustrating.

I tried to explain the optics of language to Matt Heimbach, long before the cuckbox broke.

Heimbach, of course, didn't understand -- or pretended not to understand -- and then he went on a podcast and called me a "civic nationalist" -- because all wignats are filthy liars.

The point is, you're exactly right when you say that we need to use terminology, like "capitalism", in the way that our target audience defines it.

And our target audience of NormieCons likes their definition of "capitalism", because they think of the term to mean the ability to start a hardware store, or a lemonade stand, or whatever.

Trying to force some arcane, commie/wignat definition of the term "capitalism" on the NormieCons masses is a sure-fire way to lose the propaganda war and turn your entire audience against you.

You're never going to win over the NormieCon masses by attacking "capitalism".

But you'll win them over by attacking "crony capitalism".

NormieCons immediately get it when you attack "crony capitalism".

However, I'm not on board with just using the Propertarian-cult term "parasitism". -- It just isn't explanatory enough.

Calling Heimbach and Striker "promoters of underclass parasitism" is too confusing to people, and involves too much explanation.

But everyone gets it if you just call them communists.

I do see where you're coming from with your promotion of the term "parasitism" though. -- I just think we can do better.

But that's just a small point.

I agree with everything else you're saying.

Great post, man.
Thanks, I agree with you. Great point about using the terms in the way your target audience uses it. You are absolutely right. The target audience associates capitalism with lemonade stands, but they do get it when you attack "crony capitalism".

I am also not attached to specific term "parasitism", a bit fancy, it's not the worst, but it could be improved. But as long as the general idea is followed we can pick on some "synonym" that works better.

I think if we hammer this discussion it would definitely lead to less distraction. The only reason Striker even has any relevance is because of this language issue. If we used the term "crony capitalism" from the start to distinguish from "lemonade stand capitalism" than Striker would have appeared as what he obviously is, a filthy commie.

But instead, because there was this confusion, between "Crony capitalism" and "Healthy Capitalism", Striker used that confusion to push bullshit.

This is btw one common pattern of wignatism rarely discussed. Confusion. These people use arcane definitions and theories that confuse the issue. Once the language is made clearer they are obviously seen as the commie rats and lunatics that they are.

Given how easy it is to fix this issue with some small linguistic tweaks I really hope we get to working on this. It is such an easy thing to do and it would have solved so many issues, it's incredbile we didn't get around to it soon enough given how simple it is.
 
Last edited:

RedPillStormer

♫♪♬ I bless the rains down in Africa ♫♪♬
Old World Underground
👑
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻⛪️
One of the obstacles that we are facing today is that the meanings of words have been changed in order to make struggling against the status quo impossible. A lot of this began right after WWII. it's like they have been planning all of this for a while or something.
Well, it's our job to bring simplicity and clarity to language if we are to improve things.
 

RedPillStormer

♫♪♬ I bless the rains down in Africa ♫♪♬
Old World Underground
👑
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻⛪️
Spinning yourself into intellectual philosophies is a grave where smart people go to die or spend their lives smelling their own farts and complaining that everyone else is stupid.

We need to use people's pre-existing language
I don't care about "philosophies" as much as I care about "strategies".

And language use is a big part of strategy. Just the fact that the Trump used words like "I am a Nationalist" strongly shifted the cultural winds. Or the label "AmNat" and "America First" use to describe these new brand people are working with as opposed to the outdated and non-descriptive term "Alt-Right".

We do need to work on strategies. And proper language use is core of that strategy. Which is why leftists spent so much creating buzzwords like "racist" , "homophobia" , "undocumented migrant" in order to win debates by manipulating language.

It's essential. And I agree we need to try and use as much "popular language" as possible to be as natural and as easy to understand as possible.

Most people got the right worldview by now. We just need to focus on bringing clarity. Clarity of language would solve many stupid "ideological" fights.
 
Last edited:

Flash McQueen

America First
Old World Underground
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
⏰☕🚬🚽
The only reason Striker even has any relevance is because of this language issue. If we used the term "crony capitalism" from the start to distinguish from "lemonade stand capitalism" than Striker would appeared as what he obviously is, a filthy commie.

But instead, because there was this confusion, between "Crony capitalism" and "Healthy Capitalism", Striker used that confusion to push bullshit.

This is btw one common pattern of wignatism rarely discussed. Confusion. These people use arcane definitions and theories that confuse the issue. Once the language is made clearer they are obviously seen as the commie rats and lunatics that they are.
You totally nailed it, man.

Striker intentionally used twisted definitions of words and terminology to do his Marxist entryism into the pro-White sphere.

Striker used the fact that Hitler called his movement "National Socialism" in order to push socialism/communism into the "Alt-Right".

He did the same thing with the socialist/communist Trojan-horse called "Third Positionism".

And he tricked countless, low-IQ wignats into Strikerist, "garage sale permit" Marxism.

Strip away Striker's deceptive language and he's just a basic-bitch AntiFa commie.
 
Top