That really does make sense. That's probably why the Alt-Right always seems bigger online than IRL. I suspect a lot of these people would recoil in horror if they actually had to rub shoulders with actual Klansmen or Neo-Nazis, simply because the type of WigNat trash that gets drawn to those groups are a significant part of the reason why they aren't influential at all.
As an unironic fan of RAC, I never once had such hang-ups. Such revulsion from these people speaks to their social class and upbringing.
No, you're mistaking cause and effect. You're failing to understand the nature of Total Propaganda. Nothing that is counter-narrative is particularly influential, and it doesn't matter at all what the facts are or who champions the points. Naturally, anyone taking an anti-narrative position will be atypical in a variety of ways. Klansmen and "neo-nazis" are irrelevant, except perhaps as a meme used to demoralize any type of pro-white organization.
Says the man who proudly drapes his avi in a Swastika and talks about killing Jews a whole lot.
I checked out the link in that thread to a topic on The Phora where a very familiar face can be seen.
As for the avi, I think the joke is pretty straight-forward. As for talking about killing jews a whole lot, I'll need references.
Idiocy. UTR showed the actual truth of the situation. The system is so dead-opposed to any sort of pro-white organization that it brutally and illegally suppressed free expression in such a way that hundreds of people were wounded and one woman died. This was done with the express purpose of making any sort of open, pro-white demonstration impossible going forward. Most people in pro-white circles don't want to inflict damage on non-whites, unless you define separation from non-whites as inflicting damage -which the system does. Meanwhile, how are the endless anti-white hate-hoaxes treated? How are the people that are actively trying to libel the entire white race treated when they are exposed? We had yet another one exposed today in NASCAR. Do you figure the perpetrator will be punished with all-out ostracization, as one would if he spoke ill of BLM? We both know the answer to that.
So the "pro-white" groups are so persecuted that most people who stick their heads above the proverbial parapet are "Screw the optics!" retards with nothing to lose?
Literally, yeah. The ironic thing about all of this, is that if people were able to speak their minds, there'd be less terrorism. It's one of the counter-intuitive things about the current system; it claims "diversity is our greatest strength," yet instead of the sort of diversity one would expect from that credo -diversity of opinion- it simply means "fewer whites." Actual diversity of opinion is brutally suppressed, as we've seen from all the firings associated to anti-BLM posts. Not only do I not share my thoughts on my normie facebook account, I don't dare comment on anything or oppose anyone, regardless of how idiotic their post is. I'm not going to gun down people, but it's easy to see how this situation results in that sort of thing, and it's actually surprising how rare it is. The difference in treatment between gunning people down and being anti-BLM is insanely small. That, combined with the idea that whites are inherently evil is going to result in a very large amount of bloodshed very soon. The sane path would have been to attempt to talk it out, but that didn't happen, so my only advice is to leave the cities if you're currently living there.
I see we have a student of the @BoxerShorts47 school of debate.
"Degenerate" practices existed in White societies well before the first melanin-enriched or nasally-embiggened man turned up on their shores. Socially-accepted ones at that: see the Greeks and eromenos (are Greeks White this week?) or the shockingly egalitarian domestic structure of the Scandinavians (rape of any Scandinavian woman by anyone was punishable by outlawry in pre-Christian Scandinavia).
freedom of speech ≠ freedom from consequences.
I have a lot more respect for the genuine weirdo wignats than the species of imageboard trash that inhabits this website, because members of the former group actually have interesting insights once in a while. I also respect honest-to-god provocateurs (like Boyd Rice and Jim Goad, mentioned in T777's post), because they admit that their intent is to piss people off without trying to force some ideological message.
Most non-white cultures see wh*toids as bumbling idiots. It's only in places with seriously fucked-up histories of ethnic oppression (like Zimbabwe and South Africa) that they're given the treatment they deserve.
You are making the mistake that I am engaging you in good faith. I tried that several times about... oh, I think 2 or 3 years ago. By this point, I've figured out that we can't have a dialogue and now just try to see how quickly I can make you chimp out.
