/pol/ - Politically Incorrect

Political discussion of ideology, history, and [current] events.

Posting mode: Reply

Check to confirm you're not a robot
Drawing x size canvas

Remember to follow the rules

Max file size: 350.00 MB

Max files: 5

Max message length: 4096

Manage Board | Moderate Thread

Return | Catalog | Bottom

Where everyone with an ounce of jew blood and traitors are public toilets
Logs can be found here: https://endchan.net/logs.js
Insulting National Socialism or Hitler or promoting jews will be banned immediately.

Expand All Images

Anarcho-Primitivism and National Socialism Anonymous 12/09/2020 (Wed) 10:12:10 Id: 07c963 [Preview] No. 83193
This thread is not to contrast with NatSoc ideology. A National Socialist society is the only one that an Anarcho-Primitivist lifestyle is compatible with, so obviously establishing that society would come first.

Are there any other AnPrims out there? If so to what degree do you support it and why? Do you think that National Socialism alone can combat technological overreach and oversocialization?

Personally, I believe that National Socialism and Anarcho Primitivism are ideologies that can coexist. For those of us that wish to live among nature, a National Socialist society is our best bet, seeing as NatSoc is the only ideology that does not call for endless expansionism and will therefore protect nature while providing a state and borders, which are needed to protect nature from predatory individuals(jews).

One living a good life away from technology will not pollute a NatSoc society, and would serve as a good example of what its volk are capable of when left to their own devices, so from the NatSoc perspective it's desirable to have us around as well.

AnPrim is a way of living rather than a way of governing, and people don't understand this largely because of the fact ISAIF poses as a manifesto when it is really more of a guide to rooting out the poison in an oversocialized mind.

Some men are meant to be wild, not within the confines of a socio-technological world, but the current system punishes them. I believe that NatSoc as a governing system is the only way that we will be able to truly live free of the poisons of post-industrial society without destroying our culture and history like some cucked "primitivists" would like.

Anonymous 12/09/2020 (Wed) 15:40:47 Id: 2efa30 [Preview] No.83202 del
Is that a thing? This is the first time I'm hearing about it

Drop Anarchy. Keep Primitivism. Anonymous 12/09/2020 (Wed) 22:08:53 Id: ae408c [Preview] No.83205 del
I'm certain I've discussed this topic before, and from that, I believe I may know who you are (to the degree of this board's history not personally). So again - I was an Anarcho-Primitivist in my teens and early 20s until I settled on National Socialism as a better result. Also when I followed the former ideology, I wasn't JQ aware. I dropped Anarchy long before I discovered it's jewish transformation from the intent of the original Greek Anarchos - meaning without a leader. The transformation was intented for the lure of the destruction of society, to rebuild from the ashes. The first (wave detached from the Greek) anarchist group was created by jews in Bialystok Poland in 1903 to "bring anarchism to Russia". It wasn't their real goal. Never is. The goal of jews is always to become the dominating race, as of course you know they believe they're "chosen". There were others such as Emma Goldman (anarcho feminist), Alexander Berkman, Martin Buber, Paul Goodman, Murray Bookchin (anarcho communist), David Graeber (Occupy protests), Noam Chomsky (anarcho syndicalist), Bernard Lazare, Isaac Steinberg (anarcho territorialist), Gershom Shcolem (anarcho zionist), Abba Gordin (anarcho universalist), Erich Fromm (anarcho kabbalist) and Rabbi Yehuda Ashlag (anarcho communist "based on Kabbalah principles"). Every one of them were jews. And Jacques Ellul the anarcho non-conformist's jewish wife was Yvette Lensvelt.

So no, anarchy is not compatible with National Socialism in any form. It's intentionally destructive and calls for the abolition of all authority which includes the state (some forms of Anarcho- are oxymoron combinations such as Anarcho-Capitalism or Anarcho-Bolshevism), while the National Socialist state is tasked with what does not happen with modern states. Serving the people while propping up the workers as the backbones of society. In an Anarchist society, there would be lawlessness, obviously unchecked murder, rapes, cannibalism, bestiality, pedophilia, mutilations etc. Every degenerate scenario not permitted in a lawful society. You're better off dropping the "anarcho-" precedent of that compound adjective.

As for Primitivism, which is fine to follow that ideal, it's also not entirely compatible.
The incompatibilities of Primitivism with National Socialism: The rejection of industrialization, technology, employment structures, scientific advancements (which NS Germany provided), the working class system, distribution of goods and services plus the state.
The compatibilities of Primitivism with National Socialism: Accepting of nature. Learning how to be a survivalist to fend for yourself and strengthen familial bonds.

A National Socialist society wouldn't restrict the ability of individuals or groups intent on returning to the primitive. The Völkisch movement was similar.

Anonymous 02/18/2021 (Thu) 10:35:35 Id: db67f7 [Preview] No.84000 del
>Are there any other AnPrims out there?

>If so to what degree do you support it and why?
I support it as an alternative to national socialism. With the obsolescence of the proletariat though automation and globalism the only options for most people are socialism or to reject modernity. If the socialism isn't looking out for the well being of whites it will probably force whites to become domesticated livestock for the jews. Sadly, fighting for white nationalism isn't a inevitably going to workout, at least not anytime soon. That's the great thing about AnPrim, if you can get by alone you don't need to worry about the culture or the government.

>Do you think that National Socialism alone can combat technological overreach and oversocialization?
In a perfect national socialist government the technology and culture wouldn't be designed to destroy us so this wouldn't be as much of a problem.

Anonymous 02/18/2021 (Thu) 18:32:56 Id: 220bce [Preview] No.84003 del
(94.39 KB 480x550 3323570.jpg)
(223.60 KB 960x628 2974571.jpg)
Anarchy is jewish. The post proving this is directly above yours. It's very odd that you didn't see it. Anarchy represents chaos plus the tearing down of states and nations. Self sustaining is not anarchist. There is nothing wrong with primitivism, as there were old culture following Volkische movements existing before and during the Third Reich who were all about ancient methods of survival. Don't go to kikepedia to find truth about them. That's impossible with Hasbarats crawling the site. You can sustain yourself without kike ideologies added in. Once again, drop Anarchy, keep Primitivism.

Anonymous 02/19/2021 (Fri) 18:29:11 Id: 7a2bd3 [Preview] No.84013 del
All (((enlightenment))) based egalitarian-liberal ideologies are judeo-masonic. Democratic capitalism, communism, anarchy, libertarianism. Kikes hate natural hierarchy and authority.

Anonymous 02/20/2021 (Sat) 15:04:19 Id: 6facf9 [Preview] No.84038 del
<kikes smirking as Socrates drinks hemlock

Anonymous 02/20/2021 (Sat) 20:13:22 Id: b513a2 [Preview] No.84054 del
(497.36 KB 2225x961 Bakunin on jews.jpg)
(315.00 KB 768x832 bakunin just knew.png)
Since this is a thread about Anarchy, I'll share some interesting things. Not all of the ideologues preaching it were necessarily kiked. One of the Anarchists in Russia, Bakunin, actually called out Marx and his jewery. He wrote an entire book analyzing his retardation. I suggest some people from Eastern Europe lurking here to check his work out. No English translation of the book though, unfortunately.


As for Anarchism in general, I think it'd work if the people were good-natured, traditional, racially homogenous and willing to help each other out. Some kind of a system Aryan tribes before had. But, a society like this, simply cannot emerge without an authoritarian shtick to it.

Anonymous 02/20/2021 (Sat) 22:34:13 Id: 220bce [Preview] No.84058 del
That was a brief period of time when Bakunin was furious with Karl Marx. Mikhail was a Communist before choosing Anarchy. Next in the 1900s when hatred of jews began rising, kikeroaches latched onto Anarchism as a desperate measure. It has been theirs since the French Revolution led by jewish influence with cries of anarchie gave birth to it with pro-jews like Adrien Jean Francois Duport, a freemason and member of the Jacobin Club. Kikes ran both. Other older societies with "anarchist thinkers" weren't specifically labeled Anarchy. Those were "Enlightenment thinkers", Stoics and Cynics of ancient Greece or when Athens had no leader in 404BC it was known as anarkhos - without a leader. Even Mazdak the Zoroastrian whom invented Socialism (which obviously was stolen and repurposed by Marx) is often labeled as an "Anarchist". None of those ancient men where about smashing the state, turning it to ash, rebuilding from the rubble and trusting society to run free of law. Anarchy has been hijacked for too long. It's modern interpretation having been corrupted since the early 1900s. That's why all that remains is colored spiked hair, "sex and violence, oi m8 take ya cheesy grin off ya gob or eyl sock ya one! anarchy in the UK, smash the state eat the rich" pure Communist shit.

Don't get me wrong. The ZOG state needs to be smashed, but another state must take it's place in order to guide the removal of jews from the infested nation. National Socialism is the only way forward.

Top | Return | Catalog | Post a reply