"Just put a swastika over it, and then the city will have to cover it up!"
Timeline
Post
Remote status
Context
13
@WandererUber Why is he such a 50/50 Person to me?
@Waldbrand He has a very crass sense of humor and he is a weirdo. And if that crass sense of humor doesn't land, or his weirdness doesn't line up with one's own, that makes him unlikeable. My best guess at least.
I mainly watch him for the analysis, but I love his humor too and if I didn't he would probably be unwatchable for me.
I mainly watch him for the analysis, but I love his humor too and if I didn't he would probably be unwatchable for me.
@WandererUber He makes me laugh a lot.
@Waldbrand hm, then idk what the other 50 percent are.
Perhaps his takes you don't agree with? I found some of them stupid or uncomfortable before, but I've come around to most of them. Most recent in my mind was the Epstein stuff, which I'm thankful for, because people became really fucking rabid and insane in their rhetoric and I almost fell for it. They were all TALKING as if they really believed every single politician in the West regularly hunted and grilled infants but they were not acting like it at all. 3 months later, they moved on to the next outrage farm. I really appreciated that he was ridiculing the excesses, though him joking about it didn't sit right with me at the start.
Perhaps his takes you don't agree with? I found some of them stupid or uncomfortable before, but I've come around to most of them. Most recent in my mind was the Epstein stuff, which I'm thankful for, because people became really fucking rabid and insane in their rhetoric and I almost fell for it. They were all TALKING as if they really believed every single politician in the West regularly hunted and grilled infants but they were not acting like it at all. 3 months later, they moved on to the next outrage farm. I really appreciated that he was ridiculing the excesses, though him joking about it didn't sit right with me at the start.
@WandererUber 50/50 was extragated.
@Waldbrand okay well if you couldn't guess I was fishing for ideas about your question ("Why?") I'm not hellbent on the actual ratio
@WandererUber Okay, I do like that he hates most of his Fans, I understand that.
I don't believe in Elite/Infiltration Theory.
His Epstein Shit was weird.
I don't believe in Elite/Infiltration Theory.
His Epstein Shit was weird.
@Waldbrand Yeah that's what I'm saying. It was weird but he turned out more correct than the others in the end. And it's obviously super unpopular saying that there is a difference between using 17 year olds and literally raping a child, and uncomfortable to hear, but there IS a difference and he was dead on the money that people did spiral into believing the latter, though there was zero evidence.
>I don't believe in Elite/Infiltration Theory
okay well maybe that's also something he will be vindicated on, maybe not. I like that he has an actual plan though, in any case. People accuse him of "not doing things" and then when you look at what they're "doing" it's just "raising awareness" so idk. Maybe, maybe not.
> I do like that he hates most of his Fans, I understand that.
it's a super funny bit and it gives me hope that his fans also understand that and can laugh about it.
>I don't believe in Elite/Infiltration Theory
okay well maybe that's also something he will be vindicated on, maybe not. I like that he has an actual plan though, in any case. People accuse him of "not doing things" and then when you look at what they're "doing" it's just "raising awareness" so idk. Maybe, maybe not.
> I do like that he hates most of his Fans, I understand that.
it's a super funny bit and it gives me hope that his fans also understand that and can laugh about it.
@WandererUber @Waldbrand What's "Elite/infiltration theory"?
That the ruling class are just retards who don't know they are serving jews when they vote for banning anti-semitism?
That the ruling class are just retards who don't know they are serving jews when they vote for banning anti-semitism?
@Jens_Rasmussen @Waldbrand No, not really. Sometimes they do say that current elites are not all there, sure.
For Nick, that's about the strategy of few good men in right places being way more important than "convincing the masses"
Infiltration = getting groypers into the Republicans long-term.
For Nick, that's about the strategy of few good men in right places being way more important than "convincing the masses"
Infiltration = getting groypers into the Republicans long-term.
@WandererUber @Waldbrand It's not exactly hard to believe that having some of [yourguys] in the halls of power is important. But I wouldn't say that's an alternative to "convincing the masses", in fact I'd say it's a necessary requirement to be able to do so.
The question is whether it's possible at all, or if the system is either able to sniff "groypers" out and deny them entry, or alternatively, that the "groypers" would have to compromise so much to get where they need to be, that they are effectively "broken" by the system by the time they get there.
The question is whether it's possible at all, or if the system is either able to sniff "groypers" out and deny them entry, or alternatively, that the "groypers" would have to compromise so much to get where they need to be, that they are effectively "broken" by the system by the time they get there.
@Jens_Rasmussen @Waldbrand gimme a sec I'm looking for another clip right now
@Jens_Rasmussen @Waldbrand can't fucking find it but he had another great one about how there needs to be a core to call them into action etc. I think it was on KaizerRev but I lost it sorry
Replies
17
@WandererUber @Waldbrand He underestimates the corrupting power of money. Zoomers can't comprehend a well paid position, until they suddenly are in one and will do and say whatever it takes to keep it. Same as everyone else.
@Jens_Rasmussen @Waldbrand He literally mentions this in the clip. You need ideologues in the positions, then opportunists will have to "do and say whatever it takes to keep it" and that will all be nationalism. This is a long term thing
Argument for this succeeding would be:
The Jews did this. If it was only about "corrupting power of money" they would have put their head down and just said what White people wanted, many many times. Especially considering how stingy they are. The Broederbund in South Africa did this too. Anyone with an actual conviction does this. Woke did it. Labour in UK has an extreme faction that has a wolf in a sheep pelt as a logo.
also, nihilist "power corrupts all" believers ever explain how it is that the state actively pushes ideology right now, even to economic detriment. Impossible challenge
Argument for this succeeding would be:
The Jews did this. If it was only about "corrupting power of money" they would have put their head down and just said what White people wanted, many many times. Especially considering how stingy they are. The Broederbund in South Africa did this too. Anyone with an actual conviction does this. Woke did it. Labour in UK has an extreme faction that has a wolf in a sheep pelt as a logo.
also, nihilist "power corrupts all" believers ever explain how it is that the state actively pushes ideology right now, even to economic detriment. Impossible challenge
@WandererUber @Waldbrand I'm not saying it's impossible, but if your plan is to install double agents in the system, then don't forget that a double agents literally also works for the other guy.
A good portion, more than half, of "your agents" might betray you if the alternative is losing their cushy job.
A good portion, more than half, of "your agents" might betray you if the alternative is losing their cushy job.
@Jens_Rasmussen @Waldbrand if you're a "double agent" because you have to hide your beliefs from your employer, then the "mass movement" strategy holds equally little water.
@WandererUber @Waldbrand Infiltration is about more than being a guy with a normal job and a political opinion unrelated to that job.
If you get a job in politics with the intent of subverting a political organization to your belief system, that's ties your political opinion and income security together.
@Jens_Rasmussen @Waldbrand how is it more tied together than for a normal guy that will get fired if he publicly states his political opinion?
@WandererUber @Waldbrand Because stating his political opinion isn't something the normal guy does at work.
The infiltrator, on the other hand, makes it his goal to change things in his workplace to be more like his ideology.
The infiltrator, on the other hand, makes it his goal to change things in his workplace to be more like his ideology.
@Jens_Rasmussen @Waldbrand I don't understand. So?
>makes it his goal to change things in his workplace to be more like his ideology.
this is just restating what it means, yes.
>makes it his goal to change things in his workplace to be more like his ideology.
this is just restating what it means, yes.
@WandererUber @Waldbrand You asked:
>how is it more tied together than for a normal guy that will get fired if he publicly states his political opinion?
And I answered "it is more tied together because the infiltrator has to spread his political opinion at work, whereas the normal guy doesn't".
The implication being that the infiltrator, in order to do what he set out to do, will have to risk his job, or be consumed by the system in order to keep his job. If he gets cold feet at that risk then all he has done is work directly (as opposed to indirectly, as a taxpayer) for the opponent that needed to be subverted.
>how is it more tied together than for a normal guy that will get fired if he publicly states his political opinion?
And I answered "it is more tied together because the infiltrator has to spread his political opinion at work, whereas the normal guy doesn't".
The implication being that the infiltrator, in order to do what he set out to do, will have to risk his job, or be consumed by the system in order to keep his job. If he gets cold feet at that risk then all he has done is work directly (as opposed to indirectly, as a taxpayer) for the opponent that needed to be subverted.
@Jens_Rasmussen @Waldbrand oh right well Nick at least specifically says you should not try to "pill the normies" etc. just be there and be competent. The point about neocons having nobody is that if the only reliable people are your guys, then you have bargaining power, and at THAT POINT you can then start pushing an agenda.
There are factions already, btw.
Banal example: There was a faction that won out in 2015 that allowed an open primary (Trump allowed to be candidate), they pushed internally. Any number of those could have been Nazis, Commies, etc. Likewise on the other side. They didn't get fired for pushing in a direction though, because they just didn't root their argument in their ideology, they rooted it in something else. So it is possible to push without reveal. Again, Jews did this all the time. They didn't sue for porn to be legal "because we are Jews and we want Goys to jack off and not have kids" they said "It's free expression!"
There are factions already, btw.
Banal example: There was a faction that won out in 2015 that allowed an open primary (Trump allowed to be candidate), they pushed internally. Any number of those could have been Nazis, Commies, etc. Likewise on the other side. They didn't get fired for pushing in a direction though, because they just didn't root their argument in their ideology, they rooted it in something else. So it is possible to push without reveal. Again, Jews did this all the time. They didn't sue for porn to be legal "because we are Jews and we want Goys to jack off and not have kids" they said "It's free expression!"
@Jens_Rasmussen @Waldbrand and once again, a normal guy also carries that risk because public advocacy for his position (joining a party, doing flyers, media whatever) also risks his employment
@WandererUber @Waldbrand Getting to that point without being sniffed out is kinda difficult though. Is it really the most realistic way to do things? I am not certain. Especially because it involves deceit, which is a jewish specialty, so it's gonna be very difficult to beat them at their own game.
@Jens_Rasmussen @Waldbrand regarding the overall, I have been arguing this strategy in contrast to mass movement / "open advocacy" or whatever you'd call it. Most shade thrown towards specifically Fuentes came from the TRS / NJP camp. So is that a strategy you'd think is more realistic (not trying to go for a gotcha because they fumbled it, just in general)
regarding specifically the J thing: The Jew is VERY reliant on the goys not realizing he is Jewish / thinks like a Jew / etc. So a groyper would not be very susceptible to it. Look at the Republicans that were exposed for that group chat a couple months ago. They invited a Jew into the chat. The Jew leaked it.
Look at The Order, decades prior. A Hispanic betrayed them (insert Fuentes joke HERE!)
These sorts of tactical blunders could not happen to actual right-wingers
regarding specifically the J thing: The Jew is VERY reliant on the goys not realizing he is Jewish / thinks like a Jew / etc. So a groyper would not be very susceptible to it. Look at the Republicans that were exposed for that group chat a couple months ago. They invited a Jew into the chat. The Jew leaked it.
Look at The Order, decades prior. A Hispanic betrayed them (insert Fuentes joke HERE!)
These sorts of tactical blunders could not happen to actual right-wingers
@WandererUber @Waldbrand I don't think one strategy excludes the other, and it is silly to think that [we] shouldn't try every avenue that seems even slightly possible.
With that being said, there's the big question of whether the people who like [commentator you dislike] can be considered a part of [we].
With that being said, there's the big question of whether the people who like [commentator you dislike] can be considered a part of [we].
@Jens_Rasmussen @Waldbrand Okay but then I don't see your point beyond "It's hard"
You criticized a strategy, which implied you think the resources are misallocated when doing that. So how would you allocate them to alleviate your concerns?
You criticized a strategy, which implied you think the resources are misallocated when doing that. So how would you allocate them to alleviate your concerns?
@WandererUber @Waldbrand I am open minded. People who say the strategy has no chance of making a dent are as silly as Fuentes saying that small aspiring nationalist political organizations have no chance of making a dent.
This is a criticism of Fuentes thinking it is the only way, not the suggested strategy itself, which I see as equally as difficult to pull off as "right wing organizations" becoming the de-facto political force in more than a few localities around the country through part community action and part intimidation.
This is a criticism of Fuentes thinking it is the only way, not the suggested strategy itself, which I see as equally as difficult to pull off as "right wing organizations" becoming the de-facto political force in more than a few localities around the country through part community action and part intimidation.
@Jens_Rasmussen @Waldbrand idk if he is saying that. His recent criticism for example of Bilzerian's campaign focused more on him not knowing what the fuck he is talking about, not putting in the work (lives in Nevada, runs in Florida, never goes there though) and not knowing the issues.
His people campaigned for Joe Kent and others before, too.
His people campaigned for Joe Kent and others before, too.