/fascist/ - Surf the Kali Yuga

Fascist and Third Position Discussion

Want your event posted here? Requests accepted in this /meta/ thread.

Max message length: 5120

Drag files to upload or
click here to select them

Maximum 5 files / Maximum size: 20.00 MB

More

(used to delete files and postings)


Open file (430.31 KB 480x321 linkola forest.png)
Open file (769.96 KB 2993x1691 ted and his cabin.jpg)
Open file (440.56 KB 464x730 ecofascism revolt.png)
Open file (1.05 MB 1500x2247 deep ecology reading.jpg)
Ecofascism, Tech Critical Blackshirt 04/29/2020 (Wed) 00:43:52 ID: 5c5f5b No.13
I think it would be best this time around to merge deep ecology and anti-tech into a single thread since there is so much overlap. Old thread archives: https://web.archive.org/web/20190804033752/https://8ch.net/fascist/res/13412.html https://archive.fo/XQMX7 CORE READING >Technological Slavery by Theodore J. Kaczynski (2019 edition) >The Technological Society by Jacques Ellul >Industrial Society and Its Future by Theodore J. Kaczynski >Anti-Tech Revolution: Why and How? by Theodore J. Kaczynski >Can Life Prevail? by Pentti Linkola >Man and Technics by Oswald Spengler >The Collapse of Complex Societies by Joseph A. Tainter A good channel with a lot of videos on Ted Kaczynski, Linkola and Ellul: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJIIMmCfJxBv5-jGTK3iIMw
Open file (1.50 MB 2048x1492 1495744327740.jpg)
Open file (223.79 KB 1341x536 Question and Reply.png)
Open file (620.29 KB 1341x878 Reply to reply.png)
Should the first reply be this belligerent? No But while I do not believe in the complete abolition of Technology I am interested in knowing diverting ideas. Both out of healthy curiosity and knowing that I may need to deal with Autismo Primitivists in the future, so information is always welcome. My question is: >BRRRRRTTTTTTT What do? Here is a response I got alongside my answer, to that I would like to add; while the collapse of the technological and interconnected society may hinder our enemies' efforts too by not giving them access to the chain of supply I posted, I believe it is a healthy assumption that: >They have access to a stockpile of materials in order to deal with complete isolation >They also have manny different —and more durable— chains of supply and the means of quickly rebuilding them So either way we may be fighting agains a technological foe, so countermeasures are a must.
>>34 We're on this ride until the end, I think. What you point out with BRRRRRTTTTTTT is one reason why this is so. Unless you could somehow selectively retain different types of technology and methods while rejecting others, the more technologically advanced and organized power will always subdue the weaker. Might makes right - and I say this in a descriptive sense. Man is the highest animal, and he has stepped outside of the bounds of Nature, and with every fresh creation he drifts further and further away from it, becoming more and more its enemy. This is the tragedy. Nature is stronger than man, we're still dependent on it and in spite of all of our technical progress Nature embraces all within it. Spengler recognized this too, he said that the fight against Nature is hopeless and it will still be fought to the bitter end, and that man has a soul ever hungry, a will never satisfied. We're tied into a Faustian bargain, and if we or any other group backs down to save itself for posterity the others will tear it apart and destroy it. Unless some Linkola-tier future comes about where eco-totalitarians put the boot down and magically fix our problems, this developmental trend will play itself out. Even still I remain tech-critical, although I embedded within it. I do seek to live a lower tech and simple life, and I do think that our current conditions are damaging psychologically and in other ways, but I am less optimistic than Ted in thinking that there will ever be any sort of "revolution" against this. The masses have already hitched their cart on technique and its ability to bring about a sort of "Earthly Paradise" of universal tedium. Marxists were decisive in this shift in attitude, as was the growing material prosperity.
Those autistic ramblings, while identifying many of the flaws of the modern society, fail to offer a viable alternative. Getting rid of tech would only set the clock back, it won't stop it from emerging again. And again. Our civilization(s) was too weak to properly handle and steer emergent phenomena and technology, becoming entirely consumed by it in the process. The reason for this was Jewish infiltration, whose primitive brains sought power brought by technology while failing to truly understand any of it, making it entirely subject the their animal, or rather, insect tier consciousness. Everything bad that you assign to technology, is a sole result of it's bad application, and a lack of proper social, philosophical and spiritual framework that would steer it in the right direction. TL;DR Jews are the great filter , stop blaming the technology.
>Getting rid of tech would only set the clock back, it won't stop it from emerging again. And again. Disagreed. I reject this sort of Abrahamic, teleological view of history which adheres to false ideas of "progress" and views this current world as contained in embryo within all preceding societies. >Our civilization(s) was too weak to properly handle and steer emergent phenomena and technology, becoming entirely consumed by it in the process. >Everything bad that you assign to technology, is a sole result of it's bad application, and a lack of proper social, philosophical and spiritual framework that would steer it in the right direction. This type of thinking has been addressed by thinkers time and time again. Kaczynski devotes an entire chapter of ''Anti-Tech Revolution: Why and How" to his idea that the development of human society can never be rationally controlled. He does not deny that in specific contexts with abundant empirical evidence that it might be possible to achieve fairly accurate short-term prediction and control of a society's behavior but outside of these contexts he lays out a fairly sound case foor why successful prediction and successful management of a society's development is extremely difficult if not impossible, and how failure to control it or predict it is far more often the norm than the opposite case, providing numerous examples from throughout history. The reasons for this are many, but among them are the fact that human society is extremely complex. For example he gives the example that the modern economy can never be rationally planned out to maximize efficiency, since calculation of a rational system of prices for the US economy would require the manipulation of 6x10^13 (sixty trillion) simultaneous equations. He also cites things such as chaotic behavior in both simple and complex systems, stuff such as the butterfly theory and how even figures who seemed to have unlimited power within a society are actually quite powerless even to implement even modest, small-scale changes. He cites the biographies of numerous presidents from a variety of countries making such statements. Theoretically just or needed policies of course also run into the problem of the commons. It's beneficial for the whole now to alter its behavior for the good of everyone and future generations, but it's of course also beneficial for each individual to keep up their behavior. No one will created the world we have today, and even the Jews are less powerful than we often think. History results from the interweaving of countless individual interests and intentions, whether tending in the same direction or in divergent directions, with the end result being something that was neither intended or planned by none of these individuals, yet has emerged from their intentions and actions. >The reason for this was Jewish infiltration, whose primitive brains sought power brought by technology while failing to truly understand any of it, making it entirely subject the their animal, or rather, insect tier consciousness. Implying 99.9% of white people understand technology. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic and might as well be. >TL;DR Jews are the great filter , stop blaming the technology. Jews exacerbate existing problems and are strengthened by the power technology gives them over modern societies.
>>109 >magically fix our problems That's the problem with most ideologues, there is a huge gap in the methodology that bridges theory and practice, this gap is usually filled with either magic or some specific vague event that will make their ideas possible within a lifetime and gives them the excuse to sit-down and do nothing. Waiting for things to come to you is classic slave-behavior, no wonder the left if plagued with this phenomena. My ideal is —somewhat ironically— to merge with nature and technology. I do not mean disgusting transhumanism, or the memetastic Transhuman-primitivism, but to: >Understand that technology is based in the same laws that reign nature, rejection of the gap between technology and ourselves >In order to further the demystify technology we will embrace concepts such as Open-source software and the right to repair hardware. Ideally you should fix your own devices and so you should only own what you can service, or at least understand. But the most realistic approach is to make service more easily available since people will need technology to work, and I rather have my farmers farming and not giving their tractors mayor repairs >Hardy, durable technology should be the norm; complete rejection of disposable items unless it is absolutely necessary >To respect the life of others by reducing the technological requirements in society, absolutely nothing in your day-to day life should obligate you to acquire a cellphone or similar, personal technology should be a choice >Abolish the idea of ur activities not being part of the natural world, the idea of a « Natural world » at all as it implies there being anything in the universe that is not part of nature It is a huge change in paradigm, not only in how we use technology, but how we see it, quite frankly a few aspects would be very difficult to achieve, specially the last one, but the main idea seems very feasible to me. A concrete philosophy would be the first step
Open file (339.24 KB 1600x1200 linkola inside 2.jpg)
>>191 Maybe I denigrated Linkola (RIP) a bit too much in that post. His solutions would work but his solutions are so extreme that it would be hard to find enough people untainted by natural humanistic inclinations to care out what man needs instead of what man desires. Linkola rightly points out the absurdity of political systems built on human desire like democracy. Often what one needs is not what one desires, especially collectively, and especially when faced with many of the issues that we are faced with. Would it work? Yes. Will it happen? Probably not in the way that he prescribes it or to the scale. Still he is an important figure, no doubt about it. Compared to many people today who simultaneously want their cake and eat it too when it comes to environmental issues, he is remarkably prescient, and that is why kikes hate him so much. >Understand that technology is based in the same laws that reign nature, rejection of the gap between technology and ourselves Spengler wrote something interesting in his book Man and Technics where he described technics as the tactics of all life utilized in the struggle which is identical with life itself. According to this life even animals use technics, but theirs is a type which is instinctual and set in stone, not inventive or capable of development. Meanwhile with humans technics is independent of the life of the species and is conscious, creative and personal, learned and improved. Man creates his own tactics for living. He says that this is both our grandeur and doom. It was interesting because he can then say that this is ancient and not unique to humans, which is kind of like you say an abolition of this gap. >Hardy, durable technology should be the norm; complete rejection of disposable items unless it is absolutely necessary Agreed >Abolish the idea of ur activities not being part of the natural world, the idea of a « Natural world » at all as it implies there being anything in the universe that is not part of nature Definitely agreed. The other ideas, especially the one about certain types of technology is a nice idea, but I don't know how that would work in practice. None of the stuff obligatory today was ever really consciously made obligatory, it merely became so due to the ease they presented users (for better or worse), and thus became expected parts of modern life. It really is a hassle to people today if you do not have these devices which everyone is expected to have, and I feel that these people would always be picked over in hiring and certain other things due to the mere easy of contacting and dealing with these people in contrast to others. Ellul made a good point that today man either adapts completely, or he becomes more and more unadapted, neurotic and inefficient, whatever his talents, before being thrown on a social rubbish heap.
>>193 Do not expect society at-large to sign-up for this, but if you are mostly interested in developing a relationship with nature and technology as a way to increase your quality of live, and not to save the planet then this will not be much of a problem. But since we are affected by society then we should seek to improve it, and luckily our problems with technology are also our problems with money, government an other systems. so it is to expect that if you tackle the root-cause of one it will spread into manny areas, so social change is not as hopeless of an ambition. Although I much prefer the cabal idea I thew back at Hoppe. >I wrote « ur » I swear this was a mistake, how can I be guilty of the very same thing I have reprimanded so much, I bet the jews are behind this, there is no other explanation
Are there any resources for partisan communication networks? We're getting de-platformed, censored and spied on so pervasively that we should be ready to start hardening communications.
Open file (139.47 KB 1009x1500 19148330066.jpg)
There's scuttlebutt on mobile now too https://www.manyver.se/
Open file (164.13 KB 927x1500 81Gd6gNL7RL._SL1500_.jpg)
>Civilization and Transcendence https://b-ok.cc/book/5280523/11ea38
>>13 I am convinced the best way on is to go Green Feudalist. Feudalism was very good and lasted for a thousand years. By Green Tech, I mean sustainable energy like Wind Turbines and Solar, which is in line with use of the Waterwheel and windmill in antiquity. See Feudal Society by Bloch and Cathedral, Forge, And Waterwheel by Gies for why Feudalism wasn't remotely how it's portrayed by capitalists and hollywood.
>>1398 I'll concede that the average feudal peasant, even from the little that I know, lived a better life than the average wage-cuck today given the fact that he worked far less and was rooted in a community. Capitalists have an obvious ax to grind against feudalism for various reasons, but personally I'm not too concerned with having a specific name for the system of the future that I see as necessary. I think it would be silly to explicitly have it as a goal to "restore feudalism", especially when the world we live in now is entirely different from that of the Middle Ages. Coming from a global capitalist context, it's hard to say what the future will look like. We know though that to save the planet for the long term, it will require massive changes in lifestyle that probably will result in many, many people returning to subsistence agriculture and the coming to power of a government (or governments) that explicitly strive to bring about not just a depression, or another Great Depression, but the Greatest Depression
>>1407 Government is already failing worldwide. Balkanization is already in primitive steps. See how the States defy the Fed regularly now in the US.
>>1426 Yes, you're right. It's for the best too, the break-up of political centralization, at least for the world as it is, is very harmful for the Jews, who have been progressively centralizing government under the control of smaller and smaller numbers of states for over two hundred years now. Of course, part of it is due to capitalism, but that does not mean that we cannot see a hidden hand at work side-by-side.
Open file (88.79 KB 640x279 iu.gif)
Open file (335.38 KB 1000x1001 IMG_1157.JPG)
>Totoaba, Endemic species of the Cortés Sea (Gulf of California if you want to be PC) >Get fished by indigenous peoples for centuries >Really good meat >Suddenly the Chinese come because they believe their bladders make their dicks bigger >Overfished to the point of endangerment >About to go extinct >Ban on their fishing >Organized and unorganized crimes take hold of the fishing operations to sell to the Chinese >At the same time the federal government is trying to stop them >Each president cuts the environmental protection budget so good luck with that >Gulf Cartel realize that selling fish to insecure Chinese makes them more money than drugs >Kidnap an acquaintance of a teacher of a friend >Have him do studies and design a sustainable conservation program >Cartel bankrolls said program >The Totoaba's conservation status is about to be updated to Vulnerable >mfw M É X I C O . M Á G I C O A G I C . M E X I C O
What measures do you think that a National Socialist government should implement if it comes to power? I'm going to keep my suggestions practical - I could go full Linkola mode but I'm mainly thinking of small and easily doable fixes: >ban kosher and halal slaughter >ban vivisection and animal testing >end factory-farming in its present form and focus on giving animals a better quality of life while alive >mass reforestation of trees >outlaw planned obsolescence and mandate that tools and products have to be more durable >full-on eugenics program (positive and negative) >>1643 Based ecofascist cartels
>>1646 They did it because they wanted a healthy population to sell to the chinese, so I would say AnCap. The real « Based » part about it is that they tough about a sustainable model instead of doing what most capitalists do—nothing—. >Ban Kosher and Halal Slaughter Just ban Jews, is not like you can just take any piece of non-porc mead and ay a rabbi to make it Kosher (Wololo at the food), so te label is meaningless. And a lot of modern hygienic practices come from Kosher handling of food, which is about the only jewish-created thing I would not get rid of. >mass reforestation of trees I would add to this the abolition of the idea that Nature, Man and Technology are separate. No more nature put behind walls to protect it from us, we should make all nature and us live in it Just imagine all the beautiful, young skin your population will get because of all the shade
Open file (363.68 KB 462x259 ClipboardImage.png)
>>1652 I don't know, I think it should be banned as part of a larger effort to put pressure on Jews, as well as an animal welfare measure. I see no reason why we should slit an animal's throat, hoist it up by its hind legs and let it thrash around until it dies while spurting blood. This is the Jewish way. Another good way to fight kikes will be to ban their genital mutilation obsession, but that's for another thread. >I would add to this the abolition of the idea that Nature, Man and Technology are separate This is essential, at least when we're talking about the man and Nature. The idea that we have 'conquered Nature' is arrogant at minimum. If anything, we have alienated ourselves from Nature and ignored its laws, all to our detriment. With technology, I can't fully agree. To an extent it is natural to humans. We are unique in the sense that, unlike bees or beavers who work according to instinctive techniques that are incapable of development or innovation, human techniques are capable of development and creativity separate from mere instinct. I think that an over abundance of technology can though separate man from the world around him and have certain negative effects on man. I say this because I believe that we have a certain human nature and are adapted to certain modes of living that our modern society, through its perverse and decadence organization, has alienated man from. From the 19th century onwards there has in particular been an acceleration of this process of mechanization, regimentation, and organization unlike anything ever seen before, leading towards a bugman world
>>1655 >as part of a larger effort to put pressure on Jews That I agree, but that would not be for moral reasons, I would just use morality to fuck them over >slit an animal's throat That's the fastest and easiest way of disposing of an animal with minimum equipment. I visited a slaughterhouse in Mexicali, it is fully industrialized but you could say it was more human that way since they first stunned them, then hanged and slit their throats. But mass slaughter of cows should stop, so this set-up is not an option I am considering. I suppose there are stunning devices which would be accesible for small communities. >Technology How I see technology is as working under the same laws that reign nature, technology is like digging a ditch to change the course of a river, we are not inventing anything, nor there is anything unnatural about the river nor the ditch, we are just arranging natural elements so they behave in a certain way. I feel that by making technology mundane it's charm and wonder would be lost, replaced by a practical approach and wonder which extends to human achievement and the laws of nature, not a non-existent third-party.
>>1657 >How I see technology is as working under the same laws that reign nature No, I agree With this in mind though, I do believe that there are certain environments more conducive to healthy and happy humans, as I'm sure you'd agree. This is the first time in history that man has been so affected in so many untraditional ways. I won't go full autism mode yet and churn out some comprehensive essay on my beliefs here, but to give a few examples of the profoundly unnatural lifestyles of today, we see men living lives where they spend their days at desks instead of working with their muscles, they no longer breath the good air of nature, but dirty air infused with gas fumes, foul smells and smog. Urbanites in particular, but to a lesser degree even those outside of the city, no longer live in living environments, but instead of some lunar world of stone, cement, asphalt, glass, cast iron and steel. It's a dead world inhabited by rats, men and insects. The man of today lives in a Skinner Box and is enslaved to over-organization according to clocks and a multiplication of other means, making him into a passive being who only responds and never acts. In fact the vast majority of things today that are just according to the Jews and other corrupt oligarchs running the society as their personal cash cow are directly hostile to the Laws of Nature, and we ignore them to our own detriment, leading to a world of decadence, neurosis, mental illness and nihilism. Now is all this necessarily a result of technology? I'd like to think no, and it is only a fact that our conventions have gotten so out of harmony with Nature, and that with a comprehensive and revolutionary reorganization of society according to different priorities outside of the daily grind for shekels and consooming that we could bring about a mode of living that is far more beneficial and fulfilling to the average man.
Open file (175.83 KB 255x396 ClipboardImage.png)
Open file (414.75 KB 357x556 ClipboardImage.png)
I just purchased this since I was able to order it cheaply. It's supposed to be a "critique" of deep ecology which points out all sorts of links with National Socialism and German Romanticism, and how all of this questions the ideals of the Enlightenment. Of course it's written from a negative perspective but this sounds like it's only going to make me like deep ecology more.
>>1749 You should get Ecology Of Freedom by Bookchin
>>1753 I probably will get around to reading this eventually. It probably won't hurt me to read the ones I'm less likely to agree with
>>1749 >>1753 >>1754 Indeed, if you don't know both sides of an argument you know little of yours.
>>1749 >Animal trials. See: Can Animals Commit Crimes? Historia Civilis https://invidio.us/watch?v=ALWLELLlv6E The sources in the description are pretty interesting, as well. We need embed's.
>>2209 Interesting video, the sources too. I might have to check out that first book too, 'The Criminal Prosecution and Capital Punishment of Animals'
Open file (71.28 KB 766x720 1509905385187.jpg)
>When you go to his house and he does not have a compost bin I seriously hope this never happens to you
>>2285 Does a compost heap count?
Open file (195.49 KB 500x279 elsie fingers.gif)
>>2285 >tfw no compost bin or heap But once I get a more rural place of my own I'm gonna go crazy with gardening. Corona has shown that we are too dependent on corporations for sustenance and basic upkeep for our own lives.
>>2319 Sure >>2321 I use a plastic tub, but plan on upgrading to a proper trash-bin to increase mass and make turning easer, I have being running out of space since I started comporting whatever trimmings I cannot turn into vegetable stock (and even with that I should be composting what I use too). Is not ready yet, but I am starting to worry that I will not be able to use it as fast as I am producing it since I have no garden, I should get some low-light plants and fill my house with them as I upgrade my composting set-up, . I am also currently growing from seeds Dahlia and Gypsophila, you can use disposable cups, like the ones they give you at take-out for sauces, to germinate them, kind of like a micro green-house
>>2404 How necessary is turning? I have a bear problem in my neighborhood and I was planning to make a stone/cinder block enclosure for my compost. Ideally I would keep it covered as much as possible and avoid turning so the smell won't attract any bears.
We can't go back. Humans are social beings who use tools by natural law, it's what we do. We are social, so we will always form bigger and bigger communities until cities form. We improve things, so we will always improve our tools, until the tech and the urbanization mix, and industrial factory lines are formed again, and Ted's cycle repeats itself. Ted's books are a framework to view history that is unique and important, but to believe there is an off ramp of human nature doesn't sound correct. The real issue is over population. That's the issue with everything. I hate the globohomo, but they're right, the answer to pretty much every issue facing the human species and every individual race is global over population.
>>3015 I will agree with you completely that we are social beings who seem to utilize and create technology by our very nature (from the most primitive to most advanced, it doesn’t matter), and as I have pointed out under one ID or another ITT, technique isn’t limited to just humans, but in humans alone it is changeable, creative and inventive. What I am left wondering was whether this technological world today was 100% unavoidable – when I speak of the “technological world” I mean one in which the domination of techniques has taken over essentially every aspect of human society, mechanizing it, regimenting it, snuffing out all spontaneity and the irrational, bending humans to its own laws rather than how it ought to be, the opposite. From my reading of Ellul it seems as if he places a lot emphasis on the morality of a given society and how much it becomes penetrated and subjected to rampant technique. For example early in The Technological Society he discusses the Greeks and their scientific inquiry, noting in particular how the Greeks didn’t seem to really apply their scientific discoveries. There was a separation between science and technique, unlike today. Greece at this time, he notes, had ideals of contemplative intelligence, a scorn of material needs, manual labor (due to it being the work of slaves) and a system of virtues which exalted self-control, moderation and harmony. He quotes one modern author on the subject: >Did the Creeks, obsessed with harmony, check themselves at the very point at which inquiry ran the risk of going to excess and threatened to introduce a monstrosity into their civilization?" If we accept this type of idea, something happened where all boundaries were removed, all systems of virtue discredited and shoved aside and science became united with technique, application becoming imperative. The Amish are one (cliched at this point on /fascist/) example of a system or morality which has checked rampant technique. They’re not a utopian society, obviously, but much healthier than mainstream America. Anti-tech will only come to fruition provided there is a revolution in thought, otherwise the system will play itself out to some sort of final destination. Ted neglected this type of thinking too much, I think.
>>2449 It speeds-up the process by a lot, but there are manny composting set-ups that skip this feature. Another way of speeding the process is by trapping the heat generated by the compost and keeping it at a cozy 60°C. Maybe the cinder blocks will be able to retain some heat. Keeping it covered will also help to retain moisture so you should do it anyways. >Bears The closest bears to where I live are in San Francisco Haha, get it? and I know they have a very good sense of smell, but in theory, if you achieve the proper 1:2 ratio of nitrogens and carbon your compost should just smell like fresh soil, a rotten smell means that you are adding too manny fruits and greens and not enough dead plant material like twigs and dead leaves.
At what point do you fags plan to actually abandon modern technology and go live in reservations? I could make some extra money by organizing tours, people could have some fun pointing fingers at you and laughing from the other side of the enforced glass while you fling shit, rocks, spears and arrows (if spears and arrows aren't too high tech for you) at them.
>>3025 to respond to your shitpost, I don't anyone is seriously proposing abandoning all modern tech. you can't stuff the genie back in the bottle. what we can do is alter our lifestyle and social organization to be more sustainable and in balance with nature, which does not preclude technology.
>>3025 Technology effect | ecological | social beneficial | use encouraged | permitted harmless | permitted/avoid | avoid harmful | abandon | abandon that's about it, so plenty of tech left to use shitty table because excel is ebil tech lel t. eco-fascist caveman
Open file (15.24 MB 480x360 greta is amazing.mp4)
>>3027 >what we can do is alter our lifestyle and social organization to be more sustainable and in balance with nature I agree, but that's not saying much since every idealistic Greta Thunberg tier zoomer zombie agrees with you there too. >>3028 Can't it just be summed up in "use technology (or anything else in life for that matter) responsibly"? Not sure if one needs an ideology/system for that. Greed will still prevail over utopic ecomarxist ideals. Yes i said "eco-marxist", because this eco-marxist bullshit serves as a tool for jews to lure in out-doors fetishists with no grasp of economics or dynamics of civilizations, in order to further weaken white people while actual power keeps accumulating in hands of people from Silicon Valley like Jeff Bezos. You fags think you're woke, but you're cattle.
>>3030 >eco-marxist Sum it up all you want, that most people can't handle their enviroment or anything else responsibly is pretty much a given but just one thing, tell me what Marx wrote about environmentalism, cuz shit I don't remember anything. What I do remember is a lot of stuff by the NSDAP, not surprising for a movement that believes in natural law to take pride and care for the environment, so cut the crap about Marxism and Jews. Jews are just parasites who never care if their host dies.
>>3031 I don't know what Marx or Engels wrote regarding ecology or much else, but if they lived today i'm pretty sure they would be quite keen on selling the idea that europeans should compromise their economic power in order to save the fucking planet, because niggers in third world can't stop reproducing. Smells like marxism to me. I don't feel like "planting trees in a jew garden so that jews can profit from lumber". Europeans must rise to power first, through economic power, worrying about the environment is a luxury right now.
>>3030 >eco-marxist Marxism is all about progress, technological advancement and turning the state itself into one giant technical organism. In fact it was ideologies like Marxism which actually began to win over the masses to technology. Before Marx and socialism in general there was at least a degree of suspicion towards machines, but once they were told / reassured that the machine would be the liberator of the proletariat rather than the instrument of its total enslavement, they wholeheartedly jumped on the side of the "progress" and technical advancement. This process was likewise helped along by rising living standards, consumer goods and the like, which is a whole other topic. Materialism triumphed. >>3033 >I don't know what Marx or Engels wrote regarding ecology or much else, but if they lived today i'm pretty sure they would be quite keen on selling the idea that europeans should compromise their economic power in order to save the fucking planet, because niggers in third world can't stop reproducing If you'd read the thread or some of the thinkers discussed in this thread you'd realize that these issues have been discussed ITT, along with the fact that White technology and industry has disseminated into the hands of non-Whites, and how this is a tragedy for all of us. Also, since Linkola is a prominent figure ITT it's clear that no one is planning to just allow niggers to breed with abandon if they have anything to say about it. Linkola goes as far as to propose germ-warfare and nuclear bombs to reduce the population. And since the majority of the growth is in the third world, it's clear who will need reduced the most. If a deep ecology-based government comes to power, it will be White Nationalist, I can guarantee it. You seem to have a strawman idea of what anti-tech means, especially when put into place on a societal-scale.
>>3046 >Marxism is all about progress, <stoppedreadingthere.jpg kek, surely no lies being spouted here.
>>3092 You would only have a problem with this statement if you believed in the lie of "progress". Marxism is undeniably a progressive ideology which sees history advancing towards a global communist utopia, hence why they use terms such as "reactionary" and the like.
>>3107 I couldn't care less what they style themselves as. The simple fact is they are absolutely destructive, not progressive. Degenerate, not moral. You're apparent promotion of them and their agenda here in this place certainly puts you on the watch list here.
>>3108 Oh no, not the watch list!
Open file (120.16 KB 800x800 urbanite linkola.jpeg)
>>3108 I don't believe in the myth of "progress", so I don't care what they style themselves as. Of course their idea of "progress" is destructive to nearly everything we hold dear. My posts in no way promote Marxism, which has nothing at all to due with deep ecology, a movement with roots in German Romanticism, National Socialism and similar reactionary causes. Likewise, actual Marxist regimes have horrible environmental records. I'll try to be a good goy and keep off your watch-list. Have mercy
Open file (3.44 MB 3840x5120 adxdzJl.jpg)
>>3025 I don't plan to abandon modern high tech while civilization is still functioning (hopefully it won't last for much longer). If SHTF, then I guess we'd all have to abandon high tech. I still use high tech often, but try to learn how to handle situations the old fashioned way.
>>3138 That’s what I think a lot of anons against this stuff don’t realize, is that if SHTF – and truly hits the fan – a lot of their technical luxuries will become unusable or have few ways to be repaired if broken. Simple technologies almost never regress, only the organization-dependent like Ted said. I would like to live a comfy life in a low-tech environment though, either alone or with my future family or even better with a few families sharing a similar vision. In many ways I see rejecting many forms of this stuff as a form of self-mastery, not always taking the easy way, and of having control of the machine and not being its slave.
Open file (247.47 KB 1080x1350 6EThu4l.jpg)
>>3140 Agreed. Although a SHTF scenario may not happen instantly, we need to know how to grow/forage/hunt our own food, and create and repair our own technologies (tools, shelter, clothes, etc) before things get really bad. The good thing is, I think a lot of young people are seeing the failures of this high-tech civilization and they're becoming more interested in DIY projects and sustainability. >I would like to live a comfy life in a low-tech environment though I'd enjoy living with low-tech, too. If it were possible for me to live 100% autonomously, I'd use my paper money as fire kindling and give up all my modern technologies in a heartbeat.
Open file (687.51 KB 900x1600 girl nature.jpg)
>>3260 I don't know about you, but for me this Coronavirus thing (regardless of origins) has really underlined for me the overdependence of the population on supermarkets, supply-lines and and the like. With the first sign that people might not be able to get to the store easily back in March the shelves were wiped out and items were all in shortage. I had thought of what would happen in a bad scenario before with the stores, but this was the first inkling that I was thinking along the right lines. If SHTF literally millions of people would die because they just expect that food will magically show up on the shelves. As times get rougher (and they will), food independence will become more important, and I hope more redpilled people will start to realize this. You touch on a lot of this in your post, especially with the other important topic of repair and creation of our own stuff instead of expecting everything to be done for us, which weakens us. Individuals are of course not atomic units, but at a local level of course we need a much higher degree of self-sufficiency in the most basic (and thus most important needs). In this direction I haven't taken many practical steps yet, but as I'm undergoing /sig/ in general it will come sooner or later. >I'd enjoy living with low-tech, too. If it were possible for me to live 100% autonomously, I'd use my paper money as fire kindling and give up all my modern technologies in a heartbeat. I hope you are able to live out your wish one day, anon. For myself I know for a fact that I will never resign myself to a lifetime of meaningless wagecucking. As far as I know we only live once, and for me that does not mean hedonism, but having a fulfilling life, even if it is impoverished by the standards of a materialist. My problem is the procurement stage, because unless I want to pull a Chris McCandless I'd like to own some land and have enough shit to get off the ground
Alt-kike: White women in wheat fields Ecofascists: White lolis in nature Dare I say based?
Open file (632.83 KB 2550x2630 njQUFS5.jpg)
>>3282 >As times get rougher (and they will), food independence will become more important Yes. Even though shit hasn't totally hit the fan yet, I'm sure it's difficult today to maintain a balanced wild/natural diet even for the hardcore survivalists. Most human-habitable places in the world are lacking in wild foods because they're developed and over-populated, polluted, or have degraded wildlife habitats. I don't know how long it will be after SHTF and the human population significantly drops until most natural systems are restored and we can easily obtain our own food from nature. The best shot we have nowadays at food independence is to grow fruits and veggies with permaculture and humanely keep some animals. Or if you don't own any land, try guerrilla gardening in secret locations. I'm not suggesting to do anything illegal, but it's probably not going to hurt anyone if you get excited and accidentally drop a few vegetable seeds out in public/private property ;) >In this direction I haven't taken many practical steps yet Same, I feel like I have A LOT to learn regarding self-sufficiency. It may sound silly, but I sometimes go out in the woods and LARP as a primitivist or a hunter-gatherer. It's a fun way to evaluate your strengths and weaknesses, and to practice your wilderness skills. >having a fulfilling life, even if it is impoverished by the standards of a materialist That's a great mindset to have. For a many years, we've been conditioned to always want more, never be satisfied with what we have, and to believe that we can't do things ourselves in this consumerist society. We need to reverse this conditioning. I wish you good luck in your journey as well, Anon. >>3286 There's nothing quite as good as a happy White loli in nature.
>>3286 And who you think produces the lolis?
Open file (231.51 KB 242x398 ClipboardImage.png)
Open file (178.42 KB 213x283 ClipboardImage.png)
Open file (525.47 KB 750x1125 girl outside white 3.jpeg)
>>3845 >Same, I feel like I have A LOT to learn regarding self-sufficiency. It may sound silly, but I sometimes go out in the woods and LARP as a primitivist or a hunter-gatherer. It's a fun way to evaluate your strengths and weaknesses, and to practice your wilderness skills. Kek that sounds like fun actually. I own a few books on edible wild plants in my region that I've really been needing to put some time into studying and memorizing. It will be fun to go out in the woods sometime soon and try to identify some plants and try not to poison myself. Another book that someone recommended recently is the first pic I have attached. I don't own it but it looks interesting and very useful to people like us. Eventually I need to try increasingly long camping trips to test my mettle. Even if I move out somewhere eventually I'm definitely going to slowly wean myself off the outside, otherwise I'll probably starve to death knowing me. Like you said, practice! >The best shot we have nowadays at food independence is to grow fruits and veggies with permaculture and humanely keep some animals. That's basically my plan, assuming all things go well. I'm definitely interested in keeping animals too. If you haven't read up much on them yet, I recommend the book shown in my second attached pic. It's a pretty big book and goes over every animal shown on the cover in some good detail (for beginners), telling you what type of food they need, the different varieties of each animal, basic medical care, shelter, birthing and the like. It doesn't deal with butchering though, if you're interested in that. Personally I'm interested in goats and chickens the most, and with goats in particular it seems like the females give so much milk that it's better just to keep them for that purpose, not to mention that they can haul light loads as well.
>>3846 >And who you think produces the lolis? Loli-producers, of course.
Open file (75.54 KB 600x486 naruhodo.jpg)
>>3848 I see
Open file (396.96 KB 1080x1077 1x9Gq2e.jpg)
>>3846 The loli's parents. >>3847 >try to identify some plants and try not to poison myself Lol please don't poison yourself. If you have a smartphone, I'd highly recommend downloading a plant ID app and ID'ing every plant you find in your region. Also take note of any plants that have medicinal uses. When I first started really researching plants, it was amazing discovering how many common wild plants had potent medicinal uses. >books Thanks for the recommendations. I'd like to have a cow or goat, as I can't imagine life without cheese, milk and butter.
>>3851 So... you and your milf
Open file (205.30 KB 1136x1568 hitler little girl 5.jpg)
>>3851 I hadn't even thought of looking for a phone app that could help me with plant IDs, that's a good suggestion and I will have to look into that here soon. I'm sure that once one really begins to learn about what is growing around them in an area that is more or less untouched by humans (i.e. no development or major disruptions, truly pristine stuff is super rare) they'd be stunned how many useful things are growing around them, whether they have, like you said, medicinal properties, or whether they're edible. That's one thing that I do admire in hunter gatherers and other people of a similar level, with this area in particular they are much more in connection with the nature around them, and not as utterly pathetic and helpless as a modern human would be if removed from his excessively artificial milieu. >>3851 >I'd like to have a cow or goat, as I can't imagine life without cheese, milk and butter. Goats honestly seem like a great investment. I alluded to this in my previous post, but apparently according to the book I recommended, during the peak of production a doe in her prime should give at least 8 pounds (1 gallon) of milk per day and 2 pounds (1 quart) per day by the end of her lactation cycle. During the entire lactation period the average doe will give about 1,800 pounds worth of milk (900 quarts). That's insane, I don't even know what I'd do with that much. Unfortunately you can't really sell it because Jews require you have to have all sorts of state-approved and expensive equipment for storing, processing and packaging this shit.
>>3868 the bark of some trees is edible, and pine bark is said to be best. there's a soft layer underneath the woody part called the cambium, which if gathered and prepared can help keep you alive if you have nothing else (just make sure not to strip a ring off the trunk). you can also make tea out of pine needles. but as the other anon said, be aware of poisonous plants/fungi. yew trees in particular are deadly, I believe only the arils (red fruits surrounding the seed) are edible, but you have to remove the seed since it's the most poisonous of all. gathering mushrooms takes alot of knowledge, especially since the poisonous and edible species often look similar (but are not identical).
>>3882 Yeah with mushrooms I've learned firsthand how wild that can be. Late last year a family friend looked around with me and my father for some chanterelles in the woods, which look extremely similar to poisonous jack-o'-lantern mushrooms. He offered us the plastic bag we filled up with mushrooms since he was "pretty sure" they were chanterelles but we were like "nah" because pretty sure isn't good enough with something like that kek
Open file (1.63 MB 1800x1200 drNcTi_.jpg)
>>3868 >goats That's incredible, I didn't know they could produce that much milk. Goats are a good natural lawn mower, too. I'd really like to learn more about caring for farm animals, although I can't own any with my current living situation. Selling the excess milk sounds like a good idea, but like you mentioned, it's tricky to sell it, especially when its raw and unpasteurized, in its most nutritious form. >>3882 Good info. To add on, wetlands have some good carbohydrate food sources like wild rice (Zizania), the tubers of duck potato (Sagittaria latifolia) and various parts of cattail (Typha). I've heard that sources of carbohydrates are often overlooked or hard to obtain in survival situations, so it'd be wise to research other wild carbohydrate sources as well. >mushrooms I've had luck finding morels in the spring and chicken of the woods in the fall. They taste great and are fairly easy to distinguish from poisonous lookalikes. Great mushrooms for a beginner to look out for.
Edited last time by FashBO on 08/06/2020 (Thu) 16:35:44.
Open file (179.66 KB 880x1319 meadow girl.jpg)
>>3942 Yeah out of everything to try raising, goats seem like the easiest starter. They can weigh up to like 150 pounds according to the breed, but compared to a cow or a horse it's not a massive animal. The biggest issues are having enough space. My book says that you need around 200 square feet of outdoor space per goat. In a nice place in a rural area that's nothing, honestly. The worst part seems to be the prospect of trimming their hooves: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ya17IujktZM
Edited last time by FashBO on 08/06/2020 (Thu) 16:35:31.
>>3966 200 sq ft per goat doesn't sound too bad tbh. I suppose for a single family, you'd probably only need one or two goats. By the way, I'll attach an infographic of average yard sizes in the US. It might help a fellow eco/fascist/ in the US trying to decide where to buy cheap land for a homestead. >vid Yikes, I'd be afraid to cut too deep into the hoof and hurt the goat. But of course, you'd get more confident trimming their hooves the more often you do it.
Open file (1.18 MB 900x3349 Yard Size.png)
>>3993 Retrying pic upload
Open file (267.13 KB 620x350 couch cow.png)
>>3994 >>3993 That was a good infograph, and it really shows how bad I was at visualizing what 200 sq ft looked like. I figured it would be much bigger, since that's why I brought it up in the first place, but now that I see that it's basically nothing. To contextualize a bit more, my suburban driveway on Google Earth is something like 670 square feet. Also I'm surprised lots are so big in Vermont and so much smaller in Alaska. Personally I'm most interested in Montana.
>>3942 for sure. you need carbs, protein, and fat to survive, and fiber is also important. if you're catching fish & game, you need to balance the meat with plants/mushrooms. also beware of rabbit starvation, this happens when you don't have any fat in your diet (so-called because rabbit meat is too lean to subsist off of). in general, an unbalanced diet is a bad thing.
Open file (525.08 KB 750x768 house cow.jpg)
Open file (129.30 KB 696x928 indoor cattle farm.jpg)
Daily reminder that you don't need to wait to keep cows or goats. The Jew fears the indoor farmer.
Open file (237.80 KB 905x787 pagans jews.jpg)
It's so funny that there is a term "environmental antisemitism". HISTORIC ENVIRONMENTAL ANTI-JUDAISM >A third theme, which emerges in rational European 19th-century letters is the concept that Judaism or the Jewish people are "unnatural" or exist outside the realm of healthy nature. Johann Gottlieb von Herder deemed the Jews "an alien Asiatic people" and called them "a parasitic growth on the trunk of other peoples" >Hegel, in "The Spirit of Christianity and Its Destiny," viewed the Jewish people as arising from the essence of their cultural origins. Jewish essence was "an aloofness and a possible estrangement from the world, physically as well as socially. Abraham was a stranger on earth, a stranger to the soil, and to men alike." Jewish separation extends past the physical earth into the sphere of metaphysics. Hegel held that "Abraham regarded the whole world as simply his opposite ... he looked at it as sustained by a God who was alien to it." This approach of course made the Jew the special favorite of his one god, but it gave Judaism "a contempt for the whole world." >Ludwig Feuerbach considers polytheism superior to Judaism because "the polytheist approaches nature as it reveals itself to the senses and conceives of it as an object of aesthetic admiration as well as of scientific observation and inquiry. The Jew, on the other hand, in his conception of nature transcends its immediate appearance and projects behind its creator" (Katz, 1980, p. 163). The Jewish creator God manipulates nature at will for the benefit of his elite nation of priests. These unnatural acts benefit only the "selfish" chosen people. Feuerbach thought Judaism was based on two major qualities: utilism (Utilismus, the desire for profit) and egoism. http://www.jstor.com/stable/40338956
Open file (61.28 KB 523x800 1595822748284.jpg)
>>4137 It's so stupid that a term like that even exists. I don't revere nature to spite the Jews.
>>4150 I am the same. Though I was not let to deep ecology by my awareness of the JQ, I soon realized that I was on the right path when I saw certain more radical strands of environmentalism slandered (or should I say “honored” with the label of “antisemitic”. They fear the White man returning to Nature, honoring its Laws, for wanting to conserve it for reasons beyond pure anthropocentric greed.
Open file (1.59 MB 1603x1194 Pollinator garden.jpg)
>>4151 Absolutely. I care about environmental issues because I want a better future for our children and all other living creatures on Earth. But I guess we're antisemitic for wanting that. >They fear the White man returning to Nature Anything not in line with their beliefs is antisemitic. Just like when Iceland proposed a bill to ban male infant circumcision and of course it didn't pass because it was antisemitic. I'm sure there's millions of other cases of "antisemitism" like this.
>>4163 >I care about environmental issues because I want a better future for our children and all other living creatures on Earth Same. The 14 words are inseparable from making sure that the environment remains livable for future generations of White children. And even beyond this, I think that modernity is so ugly—asphalt hellscapes, seemingly cloned clusters of suburban developments, stripmalls, etc. No war has ever led to wastelands such as these. >I'm sure there's millions of other cases of "antisemitism" like this. Millennia of being kicked out of their host nations has made their danger-detection instincts hypersensitive. This is why even the most benign of statements or proposals can drive them absolutely mad.
>>4164 >>4151 >>4163 I'm guessing not only the jews will be affected when the Whites become eco fascist.
>>4166 Of course it won't only be the Jews. Kikes will need to get the gas, I'm sure that everyone can agree on that at this point. I'm not even just saying this to be edgy, I have come to the realization that making the Holohoax a reality is an imperative for the White races. For millennia now there has been a cycle of subversion and kicking out the subverters. The scale and power of subversion too has grown over the centuries with the development of more and more advanced technologies. Now the area of subversion is positively global in scope (minus a few countries). How long will we tolerate this? Other races will be affected as well. Just look at the demographic predictions for the Third World, Africa especially. If climate change is true even in the most benign sense we'll be seeing tens of millions of Africans pouring into Europe late this century. The population growth needs controlled. Not necessarily Ethnoglobe, but if nothing is done the White race is toast. Ethnoglobe is certainly a possible future, but probably unlikely. It always makes me laugh when guys on our side talk about how the elites want depopulation, as if we should hate depopulation because of this. In reality, if you oppose depopulation, that's tantamount in my mind to saying "I love shitskins". We need to return to about one billion people on this planet.
>>4166 multi-millionaires and billionaires running industries are the single biggest threat to the environment, most of them are White. greed isn't a purely racial trait.
>>4167 All one billion of them White Aryans.
>>4181 That's right. Just imagine such a beautiful world emerging out of the mess that we inhabit now.
Open file (827.22 KB 1020x651 Capture.PNG)
We need eugenics fast. Why the fuck do people still oppose it? Even the most liberal and left-leaning individual needs to realize that even without muh inbreeding, genetic diseases and horrid phenotype are cropping up in the gene pool fast without natural selection. It doesn't even have to use genocide to be put into place. Just chemically castrate individuals, tranny faggots already do that by their own accord.
Open file (26.85 KB 373x266 eugenics supporters.jpg)
>>4187 >Why the fuck do people still oppose it? There is a whole load of reasons. One has to do with the legacy of the Third Reich. It has become taboo. Eugenics used to be a mainstream idea. My favorite example of this is that it was mainstream enough where fairs used to hold "Fitter Families for Future Firesides" contests to promote eugenics education. The winners had their pictures published in the local newspaper and received a medallion. The first one of these was in a Kansas state fair sometime around 1920. Can you imagine that happening today? Likewise many states passed sterilization laws. But all of this was slowly overturned in the decades after WWII. Alongside this, there is Christcucks. I do not say this lightly when I say that Christians loved deformed and unhealthy babies. In the US state that I live in, it is a felony to knowingly abort a fetus with Down Syndrome. This is exclusive due to Christcuck "pro-Life" efforts. Abortion (for Whites) in general is a bad thing, but when it goes so far as to preserve the unfit, it's degenerate and harmful to our society. The third factor is leftism / slave morality. They love the lowly, downtrodden, and degenerates of all kinds. Cucked as they are by fictions such as "human rights", they cannot help but value each and every abomination that comes out of a womb. They wouldn't blink an eye if a mother aborted a healthy fetus, but they'd cry out in anger if someone aborted a fetus with defects. Until this is fixed, our people will continue to decline, to grow weaker and weaker, more and more sickly, mentally ill and fucked up. http://eugenicsarchive.ca/discover/connections/535eebfb7095aa0000000228
Open file (12.02 KB 1084x144 ClipboardImage.png)
I have removed a handful of posts ITT and edited >>3942 and >>3966 to remove some discussion that is against global rules. Sorry for the inconvenience, anons, but it's best not to go against what the admins want if we want to keep the board. Try our bunker for debating this topic if you must. See: >>4616
>>4814 Apologies. I haven't been to this thread in a while and am just now seeing your post. I can stop posting lil girls altogether if you think the board's safety is at stake.
>>5277 No worries, anon. The posts ITT weren’t even the ones deleted. It was all in the QTDDTOT, mainly graphs which demonstrated links between the number of partners and marriage stability, some sorts of redpill graphs on the AOC and the like, not actually the pics as far as I understand. It’s most important to just make sure we’re in accordance with global rule two “Do not advocate or assist real paedophilia or child abuse”. Posters can’t argue for certain stuff (“loliwives”) Regardless, while I wouldn’t say you have to completely stop, just try to minimize it. The loli debacle was recently a huge shitstorm over on our Neinchan bunker as well, it’s pretty funny.
Edited last time by FashBO on 08/12/2020 (Wed) 04:44:14.
What is eco/fascist/'s view on managing non-native/invasive plant or animal species? I don't know whether it's better to let nature go wild and possibly get overrun by invasives or to intervene by removing them. I want to believe that every plant/animal species regardless of its invasive status has a place in nature, but sometimes they can hinder the success of other beneficial native species.
>>5278 Understood, thanks FashBO. Glad to see you like my OC as well
>>5279 If we look to Linkola himself, he was very much opposed to invasive species of both plants and animals. In his view these things should be removed due to the damage that they can cause to the native ecosystems and biological diversity. One example of Linkola’s that a lot of people may have heard is his hatred of house cats for the destruction of local bird populations and endangered mammals such as the mink. I have to agree with him I think, in so far as removal is possible, they should be removed, especially if they are harmful. With some species there is little effect, just look at Starlings. They’re native to Europe but now live in North America as well. They’re messy eaters and a bit noisy but hardly destructive on a large scale as far as I’m aware.
>>5280 I’m not surprised it was you kek. Very nice and time appropriate in light of recent events though
>>5281 I'd remember he wanted some species to go extinct.
>>5279 Can this be said the same for the human races?
>>5284 Yes, I think he has said something like that. Knowing him, it would not seem too out of the ordinary. >>5285 All of this can be applied to humans. Non-Whites in White lands should be considered a form of invasive species. Different racial groups inhabiting the same territory will inevitably lead to tensions and competition over resources and jobs. The problem is now that our countries are controlled by globalist social engineers who want these foreigners and want to force us to like them against all instincts and inspite of all of their behavior, which further goes to show that they are destructive to a cohesive society. Given the fact that a lot of ecofascists support eugenics as a matter of course, preventing inferior elements into the national body is also pretty much a given. Though the invasive species analogy isn’t 1:1, it can make sense to refer to them in such a way and show that removal is necessary.
>>5289 Honest question in regards to this applying to human races, do Whites who arrived in the new world count as invasive species? I don't mean to sound Anti-White here but a lot species like the buffalo and passenger pigeon were greatly reduced or outright extinct due to excessive hunting. Also, a lot of forests and other natural land has been cleared to make way for farm land, farm land that would have never existed if Whites had never gone to the new world. Once again, I really must reiterate this, I am not trying to sound anti White. Whites took north American by might and might does make right. North America rightfully belongs to them. What I'm trying to say is their previous actions almost make them look like an invasive species
Open file (10.83 KB 594x118 ClipboardImage.png)
>>5292 I think the case could be made. I wouldn't even say that it's necessarily anti-White to say this. What happened in the past happened, but it's going forward that we can fix things, attempt to replant trees, adopt healthier practices and live more in harmony with our natural environment and nature in general. With regards to the Natives, this was basically (as I'm sure you know) natural selection at work given the fact that they could not resist our diseases.
>>5292 >do Whites who arrived in the new world count as invasive species? I would say so, yes. Also I haven't researched it and I could be wrong, but I heard somewhere that there were strong Jewish ties to the colonization of the Americas. So I'm not sure if the first colonizers were actually European Whites. Maybe someone with more knowledge can confirm or disprove this claim. IMO being born in America with European ancestry, I sometimes feel like a guest on someone else's land. My real home is in Western Europe and I would gladly move back if the opportunity was available. But while we're still in America, we can try our best to take care of the environment by picking up litter, planting trees, and only taking what we need from natural resources.
>>5365 >strong Jewish ties to the colonization of the Americas With spaniards there was that factor, they like to vehemently deny it but the fact is the discovery of the new world was at the same time Spain had won their Reconquista and wanted to dispose of all the strange caste groups that happened in the moor ages, like the half-arabs, the jews hiding as spaniards (marranos) and some mulattoes in the south coast (those ended up in Morocco). It can be said that most troops that came from spaniard ships were mercenaries and cannon fodder, Cortez being one of them hence the crown always throwing him under the rug despite his notorious underdog achievements, later on when things needed to be settled many of the merchants and legal men were marranos, hence their excellent management of gold and even smuggling of it for their own purposes (funding of their own provinces). Many famous names in many regions were jew of origin and history says they were treacherous as fuck, sometimes they got wiped out, sometimes they were successful but intermarriage with other powerful families ended up making them catholic of christian, which in turn made them destroy themselves in family wars like a cousin coming to power thanks to the patriarch, but then making a coup to expel all jews from a province which ended up kicking out the said patriarch and all his sons. In terms of the english colonization, it's well noted that the first explorers were cautious about how to approach this new world but when they reported the findings, the royal court went all out with soldiers even when the explorers already had achieved trade deals with the injuns for tobacco and other goods in exchange of cheap stuff. Greed was obvious but that's more of an eternal anglo thing than jewish antics even when they are the same thing It's not all bad for european settlers, in injundom many nations are seen benevolently or at least not as bad as the other ones. Castilian and Anglo people (Irish, British, Scots) were very badly seen but the Basque, the Canarians, the French, the Germans, the Italians (Savoyards, Milanese), the Dutch (Mennonites) and even the war refugee Slavs (Serbs, Prussians) are usually seen as neutral or bringers of good things due to their explicit nature in the new world (either clerics, skilled engineers, adventurers with particular knowledge, refugees escaping war and living peacefully). Ironically by some europeans these guys who were seen as good were vilified for whatever reason (Italian workers were proud and did not mingle with anyone in particular, Canarians were serfs, Basques were hateful mercenaries, >the French, Germans were jerries, the dutch trusted nobody who spoke english, serbs were White injuns, etc)
I sincerely believe the only sustainable mass societies are pyramid builder ones like Old Egypt or Neolithic Europe.
>>5524 You're probably right. The biggest issue though is that once you board the modernity train, there's no getting off. It's adapt or die, if you don't adapt the newest and most efficient methods, you will be destroyed. This applies whether we're talking about businesses or nation-states at large. And as Ted said, there is a marked tendency for groups to favor their short term well-being over their long term, even if there will be negative future consequences. The only way it will end is with a catabolic collapse. It's a strange place to be in that I can recognize the superiority of more primitive civilizations but it is also incompatible with the survival demands of our people, or that of any organized group for that matter.
>>5526 The problem with your argument is that it presumes Globohomo is both eternal and run by hyperskilled statesmen. It's not. Demographics. Breeding. Others. These will all combine to ensure collapse. The elites are too much coomers and Jews to care.
>>5538 So no globohomo m and no vidya?
>>5556 Means no Vidya*
>>5495 Lots of good info, thanks Anon.
>>5538 I agree with you actually that collapse is more likely than long term survival. I just don't know how long it has to go before it actually does collapse. I don't think we can count on it going any time soon, but I don't think it has more than a century or so left in it. Like you said, the Jews are actively undermining themselves in their frenzy to destroy our people and enrich themselves. >>5556 >>5557 We can only hope.
I love nature, I really do, I love animals so much and every day I feel horrible about the plights they go through because of the global mass of degenerates. I just cannot agree with abolishing technology. The issue is kikery, simple as that. African niggers have received approximately 1 trillion in aid, according to conservative pro-nigger estimates. That's enough said. Imagine half of that being given to help the oceans, and letting the subhumans die. It's really just this. Now, make the fat people starve to death and nature is already relieved of so many burdens. We need technology to fight the jew and its slaves. Hitler himself accused Strasser of being crazy when he asked of Hitler to turn his back against Germany's heavy industries because of ideological reasons, and we all know he cared about the environment. You need that power. It can be used for good. It just needs to be used well, right now it is being used to feed niggers and enslave the White man. Once the degenerates are dealt with, many anti-tech radicals will change their mind as they see the problem being solved without renouncing technology.
>>4150 those are some beautiful flowers
>>5662 I don't think the solution is abolishing technology, either. My view of this is personally more in line with Linkola. I have concluded that there is certainly a problem with the modern mindset and its approach to technology, more specifically the behavior that leads to the unthinking application of technology in every field of life without thinking of its potential repercussions on societal stability and health. Once people were wooed out of techno-skepticism in the 19th century, they became thoroughgoing techno-optimists and believed that it was some sort of key to a better life and better humanity. Both Communists and Capitalists share the same foundation here. Now some people are realizing that technology is not the answer for everything, and in fact that it is leading to many harmful developments as well. We need to be more selective and restrained, and it is this that will lead to greater freedom and fulfillment in life rather than instant gratification, striving after greater and greater efficiency and relieving ourselves of the need for manual labor. It needs sidelined and reduced, but kept where it is essential and not in conflict with environmental and social concerns. See also: >>3016
>>5662 >many anti-tech radicals will change their mind as they see the problem being solved without renouncing technology. I'd still encourage people to minimize their use of most modern tech that we currently rely on. Some tech we use everyday like calculators diminish our ability to calculate simple math problems in our head. GPS impacts our navigational skills. Even older technology like shoes weaken our foot musculature. I think it's foolish to be against ALL modern technology though. For example scuba diving gear (since you mentioned oceans) could help us better understand the oceans. >>5663 Can't hurt to beautify the thread with flowers. >>5680 >believed that it was some sort of key to a better life and better humanity My parents are stuck in that mindset. I tried to justify why I'm against most modern tech and told them how we're quickly depleting the earth's resources, and they said it's up to our generation to discover some alternative to fossil fuels (lol). It's just not worth arguing with these techno-optimists.
>>5701 Killing all shitskins would be a great alternative to massive fossil fuel consumption
>>5713 Killing is not the solution here. Just cut off all aid and let those who are too weak to survive on their own to die naturally.
>>5701 >and they said it's up to our generation to discover some alternative to fossil fuels (lol). It's just not worth arguing with these techno-optimists. Peak boomer. A lot of people with this mindset are going to be in for a rude awakening in a few decades or a century from now when their comfy lives fall apart. Not that anyone will care now or want to adopt such a long term policy to avoid this. >>5713 >>5722 At some point there will likely need to be some killing. I'm just stating what seems to be an unavoidable fact, this isn't some sort of gleeful thing, it's a matter of survival if growth continues at the rate it is, especially in places like Africa. >>5722 is right to an extent that cutting off aid will likely do some good in thinning them out since they are already very reliant on White aid, but I can't help but think that we will need to go a lot further in some areas. There are a lot of ways that we could totally cripple fragile non-White countries. For example, biological warfare. Taint their water supplies, infect them with viruses or bacteria, release insects to eat all of their crops, etc. All fairly hands-off methods.
>>5722 Yeah I mean whether you take away their food or shoot them you're still killing them, like if you suddenly stopped feeding some dogs you raised. It's all wordplay anyhow. What matters is the end result, which is as close to zero of these useless resource hogs as possible before they completely destroy our planet. They breed like rabbits and consume like locusts, without even inventing anything. Just leeching off of our technological progress and leveraging it to eat nature.
>being unironically pro-tech At least you have to outlaw much of it and lynch the men pushing it. Not just the most obvious degenerates like Pharma for their ties to trannies/faggots and the entire birth control industry (both having hideous impacts on water life) but social media, transportation (not only from the use of boats to transport Niggers but the airplane industry for being propped up by Globohomo cash), entertainment, NASA...
>>5731 OK hipster, good luck resisting other military powers without the technology of clothing forks guns and bombs
>>5731 So long as our enemies operate technologically, we are forced to do the same, at least on the societal level. Might makes right. I hope one day that we can have a low tech all White future, though. I understand where you are coming from, but personally it is impossible to reconcile with the imperative of preserving our people in the short term against White Genocide.
Open file (182.96 KB 1000x665 Oil Painting Technology.jpg)
>>5752 All technology isn't the same either. The luddite trend of not being able to delineate what is "good" or "bad" tech lowers the value of their arguments. They still live in houses (a technology), they still cultivate crops (a technology), they still hunt with weapons (a technology). So even beyond the obvious and most pressing issue of defense, where you need technology to survive and eventually transform into an anti-technology utopia, there is still the issue of determining what is allowed or disallowed technology. It seems to me that a more useful approach would be to control our use of technology instead of letting it control us. Once you wield a technology it will always have a symbiotic relationship with you. But as the other anon said, we don't have to use Instagram with women uploading pictures of themselves like a marketing tool. Or just because you have the technology available to distribute porn doesn't mean you should use it like that. Just because you have heroin technology doesn't mean you should inject it, etc. If one thinks of technology as a word that merely covers over the more informative "technique", then you realize that banning all techniques is a fool's errand, and a more informed and nuanced approach is needed. And of course there is the third issue of needing technology to colonize outer space which in my mind is absolutely a worthy goal for our race.
>>5777 Good post. Stuff like what you said here is why I am personally so interested in the Amish - not for their Christianity or pacifism of course, but for their approach to technology. It's of course ludicrous to say that the Amish "reject technology" when in reality they are incredibly selective and view many modern forms of technology as "worldly". They are actually very selective in what they choose to use, and they seem to keep what it is conducive to preserving their way of life and keeping things small scale, and rejecting that which is the opposite of these. And due to this selectivity and common worldview, they are far, far healthier than the rest of America. They are a great example of an actual group mastering technology and still flourishing by any reasonable standard. I can't tell exactly what poster you are due to Tor, but again I'll point to >>3016 for the importance of rejecting this worldview which demands application of everything we can possibly create, and which seems to have no self-control or forethought. Regarding outer space, I'm not sure what to think. I think there is some form of kikery going on there. The moon-landing seems to have been pretty clearly a hoax, NASA is involved in all sorts of image fakery and seems to be little better than a blackhole for the goyim's money. Either it's impossible / extremely difficult or they're hiding something, because the elite would not back away from exploiting space.
>>5777 >And of course there is the third issue of needing technology to colonize outer space which in my mind is absolutely a worthy goal for our race. >of course Yeah, about that Anon... Being that A) Space is an exceedingly hostile location to any life, and B) Every other location outside the Earth is also highly hostile to life, and C) Long-distance space travel conditions are impossible for men to stay alive for long under, then D) The only 'outer' space 'colonizing' we'll ever be doing is in LEO, where we're at least somewhat safer from deadly space radiation, inside the /comfy/ magnetic bubble God crafted for us to live within. And, since E) Micro-gravity conditions are also eventually (on the order of 2 - 3 years) untenable for advanced life such as homo sapiens sapiens to live in successfully then F) We're already colonizing the only 'spaceship' mankind will ever colonize in this universe. And it's a beautiful blue dot, no where better! :^)
>>5792 It's Earth. Now the thing is what do we do if we start colonizing other countries. What about the peoples over there?
>>5792 Agreed with this. Wanting to colonize other planets is foolish when we already have this planet to take care of.
>>5792 Good points. But I'm not convinced it's all so impossible as you think, in the long term.
>>5792 Mostly this. I agree with >>5780 too. The elite are hiding something. Remember that they literally claim that they "LOST" the technology to get back to the moon magically. I'm increasingly convinced that sci-fi and Hollywood movies are shilling for the 'colonize the stars' angle.
>>179 >Kaczynski devotes an entire chapter of ''Anti-Tech Revolution: Why and How" to his idea that the development of human society can never be rationally controlled. He does not deny that in specific contexts with abundant empirical evidence that it might be possible to achieve fairly accurate short-term prediction and control of a society's behavior but outside of these contexts he lays out a fairly sound case foor why successful prediction and successful management of a society's development is extremely difficult if not impossible... This might warrant a proper reading of this chapter because the field of speculation of the chances of natSoc survival on the long term are very interesting. I am of the opinion that it is possible to have a form of high technology as long as it stick to the Laws of Nature and provide the most stringent control over the excesses of electro-mechanized production, striving for quality instead of quantity. It really blends into the science-fictional ideal of a great city of subtle but powerful technology surrounded by vast and beautiful areas of pure land. In the 50-60s, I think a lot of people believed this could be the future. Archeofuturism tends to suggest something of that vein too. I find it depressing that we're condemned to find our best liveable ecosystem if it never goes beyond the advances of Hellenistic times. There, where does stand the proof that NatSoc would not be able to work well beyond a decade of activity?
>>5810 Whether it's bull or not, we know space is dangerous but we have also largely theorized how terraforming works. We know how to produce EM fields, we're about to be able to cast them around vehicles, we got a set back of one century or so because of faulty quantum physics (mostly due to the fraudster Einstein). I think we can produce a powerful and magnificent civilization that would provide all we need, from good life to real means towards true godhood, not that of machines, but of real minds of a greater power and nature, as explicitly described in older myths and legends. >>5792 You ironically provide the best arguments for transhumanism, if all there is to life is live like a woodnigger for eternity, here or on any other planet. Yet these two opposite sides represent a false dichotomy. Fuck it, let's be gods!
>>7615 >muh quantum physics >muh EM fields >muh terraforming >shilling transhumanism Sci-Fi movies and video games have rotted your brain. The real redpill is that there is little impressive about being able to manipulate matter. It should be no surprise that the most "advanced" civilization on the planet today is also one of the materialistic, hedonistic, degenerate and decaying. Jews are a symptom of an even deeper problem.
>>7626 This, I honestly don't believe the whole technology will be so advance that most science fiction are a now a reality. It just seems unlikely especially when you consider the incompetence and the fact that we are barely able to make fully working robots that doesn't need manual maintenance every 20-30 minutes. If science fiction levels of tech is possible, then it's definitely not going to be achievable in era.
>>7631 It should surprise no one here, but a large amount of popular tech shills are Jews. Ray Kurzweil comes to mind first and foremost. Back on JulayWorld someone had a good image which laid out exactly how Jewish most of these people actually are, I wish I had the pic. Transhumanism in particular is an atheistic Jewish religion founded on the conceit of "godhood" or "immortality". They hate the human body and the soul, because they don't have a soul. It's why they want to pervert everything beautiful about humanity into something ugly, so I say to the transhumanists, go ahead and start throwing away your humanity, best goyim, get a hole drilled in your skull so you can get more FUCKING AWESOME gadgets and frivolous conveniences with Neuralink that will merely enslave the people more and more, giving the elite direct control over your brain and body. People watch these sci-fi movies and think that this is actually something that humanity is heading towards, and not just are we heading towards it, it will work out great! We can't even salvage our environment on fucking Earth and still retards come in here and think that we can turn some rocky shitshole millions of miles away into another Earth just because they saw Black Science Man say it or saw that humans did it in fucking Halo. I'm not even convinced we went to the moon.
>>7633 Honestly we don't deserve transhumanism White or not, Humanity should evolve to protect and harmonize with nature, otherwise if we just become superhuman because of tech then we will forget and really have no desire to protect the thing that protected and created us in the first place. Transhumanism, DNA splicing, etc it's all degenerate and we don't deserve until nature and the God(s) say we do. >People watch these sci-fi movies and think that this is actually something that humanity is heading towards, and not just are we heading towards it, it will work out great! This is what I like to call the "cult of entertainment and science". >We can't even salvage our environment on fucking Earth and still retards come in here and think that we can turn some rocky shitshole millions of miles away into another Earth just because they saw Black Science Man say it or saw that humans did it in fucking Halo. And the ideas that intergalactic colonization is even reaching the minds of scientists despite the issues going on today is further proof that they don't give a shit about Earth.
>>7615 Anon most of what you said is not likely gonna to be possible until like at least a hundred or a thousand years. I really wouldn't go around trusting and believing modern science, considering that a large number of Jews are a scientists and a large number of frauds are also Jewish like Einstein.
>>7615 >You ironically provide the best arguments for transhumanism, if all there is to life is live like a woodnigger for eternity, here or on any other planet. To think that this is a sad way to live life is in itself saddening to read.
Open file (104.06 KB 780x628 girl flowers.jpg)
>>3286 >implicit supporters of industrial agricultural have shit taste in general No surprises here. >>7634 >This is what I like to call the "cult of entertainment and science". I've used similar terms before myself, because that is really what it is. You put a man in a White lab coat, throw him on TV and then all of the sudden lemmings will eat up whatever he says because he's a "scientist". The same has happened with politics. I can't tell you how many people getting most of their political information from those late night comedy shows, and yet they are still allowed to vote. Democracy was a mistake. >>7639 I wouldn't mind a comfy woods life, either. I am almost sure that it would be more satisfying, tight-knit and healthy than anything today or any sort of (((transhumanist))) wet dream.
>>5777 >All technology isn't the same either. The luddite trend of not being able to delineate what is "good" or "bad" tech lowers the value of their arguments. They still live in houses (a technology), they still cultivate crops (a technology), they still hunt with weapons (a technology). Ted covers this in ISAIF. >209. The reason why technology has seemed always to progress is >that, until perhaps a century or two before the Industrial Revolution, >most technology was small-scale technology. But most of the technology >developed since the Industrial Revolution is organization-dependent >technology. Take the refrigerator for example. Without factory-made parts >or the facilities of a post-industrial machine shop it would be virtually >impossible for a handful of local craftsmen to build a refrigerator. If by some >miracle they did succeed in building one it would be useless to them without >a reliable source of electric power. So they would have to dam a stream and >build a generator. Generators require large amounts of copper wire. Imagine >trying to make that wire without modern machinery. And where would >they get a gas suitable for refrigeration? It would be much easier to build >an icehouse or preserve food by drying or pickling, as was done before the >invention of the refrigerator.
>>8166 >210. So it is clear that if the industrial system were once thoroughly >broken down, refrigeration technology would quickly be lost. The same >is true of other organization-dependent technology. And once this >technology had been lost for a generation or so it would take centuries >to rebuild it,just as it took centuries to build it the first time around. >Surviving technical books would be few and scattered. An industrial >society, if built from scratch without outside help, can only be built in >a series of stages: You need tools to make tools to make tools to make >tools .... A long process of economic development and progress in >social organization is required. And, even in the absence of an ideology >opposed to technology, there is no reason to believe that anyone would be >interested in rebuilding industrial society. The enthusiasm for "progress" is >a phenomenon peculiar to the modern form of society, and it seems not to >have existed prior to the 17th century or thereabouts.
Open file (159.00 KB 768x514 ted kaczynski smile.png)
>>8166 >>8167 >criticism of Ted prospectively refuted by Ted Many such cases
>>4190 >They wouldn't blink an eye if a mother aborted a healthy fetus, but they'd cry out in anger if someone aborted a fetus with defects. What? I have never heard of someone being pro murdering healthy babies but against it for defective ones.
>>8178 If you told some leftist that you aborted a healthy baby because you didn’t want to care for one or you were unable to, they’d pat you on the back and say that it’s in your right as a woman to do so, but if you were a mother and told them that you had a baby aborted *because* it would be retarded or deformed, they’d probably get more uncomfortable. We have to remember that they believe that even abominations like this life: https://youtu.be/j4PTf7LgsIE This is the logical conclusion of man-centered creeds. Even abominations like that have more worth than forests, wild animals, clean environments. Just remember how there was even a bit of controversy, if I remember correctly, over the fact that Iceland was making progress towards potentially eradicating Down Syndrome through selective abortions.
>>8179 >If you told some leftist that you aborted a healthy baby because you didn’t want to care for one or you were unable to, they’d pat you on the back and say that it’s in your right as a woman to do so, but if you were a mother and told them that you had a baby aborted *because* it would be retarded or deformed, they’d probably get more uncomfortable. Thanks for explaining, that makes sense. I am against all abortion, but I can at least understand aborting defectives (although I don't agree with it), but not women's rights nonsense. Leftist "morality" is nonsense. Down syndrome would not be a problem if women married and had children at an earlier age. The system pushes them to go to school and get a career instead. Delaying having kids increases the risk of all sorts of problems. >>4190 >In the US state that I live in, it is a felony to knowingly abort a fetus with Down Syndrome. I thought abortion was legal in all states?
>>8183 I'd be fine with non-White abortions. I mean sure it's nice to have a baby and all but like population numbers are a thing.
>>8183 >but I can at least understand aborting defectives (although I don't agree with it) Why should we strive to preserve defectives at all though? Starting from the hypothetical individual themselves we’re talking about, they exist in a state essentially worse than animal, just take a few moments to watch these videos and reflect on the quality of life that such people have. If I was reduced to this state, I would want to die: https://youtu.be/cyxFDwBuaXA https://youtu.be/j4PTf7LgsIE And then we have to think of the burden that is put on the parents by being forced to deal with such a person. And not just for eighteen or twenty years, but for likely most of their lives, especially in more severe cases like I have linked in the two videos above. And above the level of the family there is the burden incurred by the state and society at large in having to deal with people like this as well, and we can only imagine the financial burden of this. Disposing of such defective individuals is the most ancient form of eugenics. >I thought abortion was legal in all states? It is, but the laws vary depending on what state you’re in. In some states it is more strict than others and conservatives periodically try to make it as difficult as possible to actually get one, as close as they can to banning it without actually banning it. I’m sure this will keep happening until Roe v. Wade is turned over (doubtful). Here’s the law I was referencing by the way: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/down-syndrome-abortion-fight-ohio-takes-legal-twists-n1155276
>>7626 Non sequitur. Where do you draw the line? You assume that totally based people suddenly lose all interest for modern science and technology and want to live like hermits in caves? Are you going to rely on the hypocritical appreciation of tech like the Amish do? When Germans corrupt because they actually invented stuff? >>7626 >Sci-Fi movies and video games have rotted your brain. The real redpill is that there is little impressive about being able to manipulate matter Says the jaded one. If we wanted, we could build a good many things that come close to what is seen in hard science fiction. This goes even without talking about all the senseless gatekeeping managed by holders of patents. We do have robots. We do have laser cannons and coilguns. We do have tablets that hold millions worth of book in their memories, all accessed through ever moving screens. We do talk to people on the other side of the planet in near realtime. We do print impressive structures from plastic to biological compounds. We do send strange ships into the sky and beyond. We do have the power to create suns in the middle of nowhere that can level cities and scorch entire lands. We do have devices that can see through flesh and stone. If we were to refine all of this over the next century, at the same pace as we know now, and then roll it all into one big suit driven by a human, and were to send that back in time even to people who lived, say, 1000 years ago, would you tell me they would not be impressed, when on the other hand all they can obtain when praying is barely noticeable effects and lots of speculation? >>7631 You are talking of advances that are extremely young. We are still making refinements to sewer systems that became mainstream during Roman times. >>7633 >It should surprise no one here, but a large amount of popular tech shills are Jews. >large amount Jews hate Nature and revel in variants of technology that allow them to extract wealth in exchange of very little effort. Not that it's entirely a bad thing in itself, but in the rigged world we live in with those financial 0s and 1s, they will obviously regroup in financial technologies and related fields. Big data and legalized spying need not be obligatory. Nor is transhumanism. >>7634 >DNA splicing, etc it's all degenerate and we don't deserve until nature and the God(s) say we do. In certain myths regarding human origins, it seems we do come very close to DNA splicing written in different terms.
>>8212 >Are you going to rely on the hypocritical appreciation of tech like the Amish do? Hypocritical? You mean reasoned and intelligent application? The Amish are the masters of their technology. It bends to their will, they don't let it run rampant in their society and don't feel obligated to apply each and every new invention shit out by someone regardless of the consequences that it will have for their way of life and society. It's a mistake to think that Amish "reject technology". They are unashamedly selective, and this is why they are so interesting and worthy of admiration in this particular sense. For example, while cars are shunned, they will accept a ride in a car. They don't use telephones, but they'll keep a telephone in the barn. They'll use farm equipment, but only so long as it is able to pulled by a team of horses. These restrictions, it has been noted by some, have done a remarkably good job of keeping Amish society close-knit and healthier than the surrounding America. Read 'The Riddle of Amish Culture' by Donald Kraybill.
>>7639 >I love to poop behind bushes and get rekt by asteroids. >>8166 >>Tedious: >>building temples, cathedrals, castles and city-wide sewers didn't need organization(s) >>icehouses everywhere (fuck Meds) so let's freeze our asses off in repetitive pine woods covered in snow 200 days out of 365 >>let's be anarcho-ironites so when niggers come with guns given to them by kikes we will win because our ways are highly pure and of the greenest green Fucking aye! God knows why I didn't think of it already... >>8167 >>(same): >>centuries of continuous technological progress prior to the 17th century were achieved by depressive monks who didn't give a fuck about having better tools yet managed to build better tools just because before they suddenly liked having better tools in the 17th century and got excited about it and became degenerates And he killed people to give us this? Man... that's so fucked up.
>>8217 Go back to Cuckchan
>>8214 >masters of their technology. We did too not so long ago before ((we)) let all of it slip through our fingers. Besides, do you think every single one of them knows how to do and produce all their community uses and relies on? >bend it As if kikes had not infested our governments and academic centers to push for more unrestrained spread and use of tech, to better tag and document people, forcing more bureaucracy to facilitate greater taxation. We could have advanced technology for a small fraction of the useless hassle. >artificial technological cap Perhaps fine as long as the guys on the other side of the river play by the same rules. Otherwise you can only eat bullets and then cry, but decide to reject violence and revenge, mostly because you couldn't even enact it even if you wanted to, therefore settling on loving your enemy and hugging him. Until you're all dead because, you know, shit happens and being pacifists is not really an efficient way to guarantee your survival. Even our distant ancestors were not that foolish. >For example, while cars are shunned, they will accept a ride in a car. That's like saying you reject usury but let kikes practice it in your own town, right down the street. Or what? They go like "this ride sucks this ride sucks this ride sucks" in their heads until they get out of the car? Imagine if they ever were to... appreciate the ride! Then go for another ride, and another, etc. >They'll use farm equipment, but only so long as it is able to pulled by a team of horses. I suppose they extract and work all the iron by themselves. Same with paint and veneer, all Amish-produced? I also venture that they have books too. How are they produced? Where are they printed? The problem here with this thread is how ecofascism and inawoodz lifestyle is raised as the best model ever, when in fact if you want to go the Ted-Linkola way, there is no problem, it's fine, but don't ever think it bestows you some kind of moral ascendancy. You are simply adopting a simpler lifestyle that is simpler to manage and that's fine by itself. Period. >>8218 >wah wah
>>8223 >We did too not so long ago before ((we)) let all of it slip through our fingers Not so long ago? This problem is a worldwide problem that has its origins over two hundred years ago at this point. It slipped out of our hands before we even knew that something was wrong. Also, no one is advocating for pacifism here, so I'm not sure why you're alluding to it. That's like saying that just because one appreciates their lifestyle that one must like Christianity too. It's silly. Accepting car rides is no problem. They don't own the cars themselves. Cars have dis-embedding effects on a community and lead to its dispersal and the spread of individualism. It makes lots of sense to allow people to ride but not own. >I suppose they extract and work all the iron by themselves. Same with paint and veneer, all Amish-produced? No one claimed this. And back in the day they didn't even use this stuff, so they adapt to the extent that the community deems necessary. Again, they only avoid certain types of technology, and even this varies among Amish groups. Some use more than others.
>>8228 pretty palin >Not so long ago? This problem is a worldwide problem that has its origins over two hundred years ago at this point. >It slipped out of our hands before we even knew that something was wrong. The corruption was already nested in our countries, Jews and their liberal lackeys were there for more than two hundred years, it's correct, but it had not yet fully blossomed. It took several decades for the dark forces to show their entire face in broad daylight as the (((CFR/Globohomo))). All the high tech at some point was offhanded to the nips, as if it were an obligatory thing, only to pave the way to a full transfer of electronic technology to Asia in places where the idea of recycling and ecologism were and still are entirely unheard of. I'm certainly not saying it's a paradise here, we unfortunately have so many cases of big profiteers being reckless about the environment simply because there is a total derth of proper authority to jail them or hang them the way it should be done. But we simply cannot deny that there was a time when powerful computers and most of their components including the primary ones were built in the US and to a lesser extent in Europe. >Also, no one is advocating for pacifism here, so I'm not sure why you're alluding to it. The Amish are rather hot on it. It got to the point of being ridiculous when some retard went into one of their communities, entered some small building and killed something like five people. The rest of the story is embarrassing. >That's like saying that just because one appreciates their lifestyle that one must like Christianity too. It's silly. Not so much considering they're Anabaptists, therefore Christians. They include Christian principles in their way of life so whether you like it or not, if you appreciate it then you'll be certainly be appreciating these specifically Christian elements too. It's a rather mixed thing. >Accepting car rides is no problem. They don't own the cars themselves. Cars have dis-embedding effects on a community and lead to its dispersal and the spread of individualism. It makes lots of sense to allow people to ride but not own. If this is not confusing, I don't know what is. Picking on your telephone example, it clearly lies within one of their buildings. It might even be grounded to the line. By all means, they do own it, but they don't use it. Then, we have the case of the car which they use but do not own. It's absurd as their restriction only triggers when they both own and use some service or tool that's modern. It really sounds awkward. I'd rather they say yep, modern tech is fine in some ways, there's comfort and even fun in it, we have them devices because they can be useful sometimes, say literally helpful, but we prefer to reduce their use at close to none if possible because we prefer taking our time and using old school stuff, demonstrating every day our superior will over the electro-mechanical temptation; we call it [insert fancy zen name for their socialisto-discipline motto]. Many people already live that way btw, free of the hypocrisy, they're not full blown Amish.
>>8228 >No one claimed this. It's pretty much implied. Some of the tools I have been able to see are clearly not man-made. The topic about industrial and post-industrial technology is where one finds the hinge. On what basis could they object to the very existence of such industries other than claiming it's somewhat bad, or corrupting? They move goalposts with the ever growing "non-essential" excuse condition, which is even more hypocritical and quickly enters the pilpul dimension as one could look at all the things they use and could be declared non-essential. So planes, trains, boats, cars, buses and phones are non-essential until they suddenly become essential, i.e., practical. One of my favorites is this one: amishamerica.com/can-amish-fly/ >For the most part, Amish abstain from flying, though certain groups of Amish do permit it. Also, most Amish do allow air travel in extraordinary situations. >Amish objections to air travel are mainly based in the idea that air travel is not considered essential. Amish do make allowances for other forms of travel out of a recognition of a need to journey further than a horse-and-buggy allows. This may include visiting family in other settlements, sometimes out-of-state, or on business purposes. >Air travel may help a person arrive at a destination faster, but a car, bus, or other vehicle will get one there just the same. >Air travel is also expensive, symbolic of a fast-paced lifestyle, and connected with luxury and worldliness in the minds of many Amish. That's pretty much the way it's understood by 99% of the population too. Let's not get started on how they actually pay for these tickets. Obviously not with coins (which despite being the most primitive looking aspect of minting, are produced in factories because it's just faster and more convenient to do so). >Regardless of affiliation, most Amish permit flying in emergencies. This comes into play most often when accidents require rapid transport, often by helicopter, to distant hospitals. An Indiana Amishman described how his young son was transported to a hospital in Michigan after a serious buggy accident. Oh look, a flycopturr. Hey, lookie! A big hopital with tech and stuff. Wow, daddy, I'm being corrupted by the Machine God. amishamerica.com/how-do-amish-travel/ >Automobile-most Amish permit riding as a passenger in a car or bus, but not driving DONT TOUCH THE WHEEEEEL!!!1! >Bicycle and scooter-both are used by Amish, depending on the community >Rollerblades-rollerblades and skates are used as a form of recreation and short-distance travel in communities such as Lancaster County >Train-Amish take both long- and short-distance trips by rail >Boat and ship-Amish occasionally travel by boat, often for recreational purposes All man made. >amishamerica.com/how-do-amish-travel/amish-black-buggies/ Look at all these man made buggies! Totally honest LARPers.
>>8246 > It took several decades After WWII
>>8247 You're literally not worth talking to about the Amish if you don't understand why they do what they do. Read the book I recommended. "Muh LARP" shows that your brain is rotted by Cuckchan speak if you think that a group that has existed for centuries is "LARPing"
Daily reminder to have as many children as possible regardless of overpopulation concerns.
>>8510 those ten would be more beneficial to the environment than ten of that shitskin
I have a question why are kikes and niggers biologically so different that they always destroy their environment and exploit it until it's none sustainable their must be a logical reason for it.
If I can't find a girl that wants a dozen kids I will be very sad. >>8518 Niggers lack the capacity to postpone gratification for any significant period of time, or to plan ahead, solve complex problems or to conceive of anything more abstract and less tangible. They're like a goldfish compared to a high-quality White man, whose ancestors evolved in harsh environments where there was a selective advantage to all of the capacities listed above that niggers lacked. With this in mind, it is quite easy to see why niggers, once given access to modern technologies, destroy their countries and leave garbage and filth wherever they go. They can hardly understand why this is bad, or even if they do they don't care. Whites have of course brought a lot of environmental damage and waste into the world, but the difference with us is that we are able to comprehend that there is a problem, and put forward solutions which need to be adopted. The problem is of course the masses, which are addicted to their extravagant materialistic lifestyles and over-consumption, but with the proper government in place this can slowly be fixed and a truly green ethnostate will come into being more in tune with Nature. There would not be such thing as environmentalism or conservationism without the Völkisch movement, people like Madison Grant, etc.
Open file (206.54 KB 600x450 jew mosquito.gif)
Concerning Jews, I am less sure. But I do know that they themselves are a degenerate form of life, like all parasites are. Their only concern is to suck the blood out of other races, and lord over things in the here and now, they can plan ahead on how they will destroy the entire civilization, but it hardly occurs to them to think of what happens after they've destroyed the very foundation they've hitched their wagons to. Their materialistic worldview doesn't consider the consequences, they're hardwired to destroy other peoples for short term benefit alone
>>8520 >>8521 thank you for your response anon
>>8521 Can this mean that jews are THE enemy or one of the enemies?
>>8518 >implying Whites didn't pioneer the industrialization that has completely fucked up the world Salvaging what's left of our ecosystems isn't a racial issue. It's a sociopathic capitalism issue. The post above touches on some real issues but it's dangerously arrogant to believe that lack of delayed gratification is just for niggers. Even asian, jewish and White CEOs can't fucking do it. I would even say it's not about delayed gratification at all, it's about a human instinct of selfishness. That's how businesses often choose who succeeds and who has power. In most nations there are no regulations to stop a powerful company placing their leaders over the nations or peoples best interests.
Open file (20.54 KB 1033x598 jew eggs.png)
>>8542 >implying Whites didn't pioneer the industrialization that has completely fucked up the world See the third paragraph of >>8520. You're right though that capitalism is a key part of the problem. It isn't just destroying our environment, it's the key force behind globalization and mass immigration (Jews aside, obviously). The very logical of this system is anti-national. >>8541 There are multiple enemies of our people, the Jew sitting at the top of the hierarchy. Most of the lower levels of the pyramid are products having fallen under Jewish influence, either in origin, or through co-option and weaponization of once independent ideas and movements. For example, environmentalism was co-opted by Jews and watered down into a kosher variant that involves no more than slapping green stickers on consumer products and telling the goyim to recycle their plastic. Or to look back even further, the complaints of workers towards capitalists regarding low pay, dangerous conditions and long work hours was weaponized by people like (((Marx))) into a revolutionary internationalist ideology. It never had to be so, but it was co-opted and turned into a golem. A final example is the "struggles" of other races against Whites. Again the Jew supplies the intellectual backing, the funding and the propaganda, and places himself firmly at the head of their movements. I'm not saying that literally every ill we have is the fault of the Jews or that the world would become a utopia if we removed them, but they are the greatest enemy of our race and have been for over two thousand years at this point.
>>8250 >cuckchan cuckchan cu-cu-cu-cuckchan! Good arguments there m8. They're total hypocrites, changing their moral sets when they find the industrial advantages of modern life more convenient. If you're going to have a negative moral judgement on the post-industrial technological achievements, then you're ought to be coherent with such ideas. For fuck sake, that's like saying you're against pedophilia but sometimes it feels good to shoot your stuff into a kid's anus when there's no one else around to stuff. It's like Christcucks who stand against usury (muh whipping saviuh) but actually let kikes do it on their own Christian lands. >>8510 Nice kids but I don't think it's a sustainable model. We need cannon fodder though so it's still better today to have more of them. >>8520 > They're like a goldfish Goldfish can actually swim. >Whites have of course brought a lot of environmental damage and waste into the world Most of it comes from Asia and Africa, and only a very few oligarchs are perfectly happy wrecking the environment. If one thing is sure is the huge quantity of eco-friendly people found from the left to the right. >>8521 They actually think they can rule the world but since they're incapable of realizing their parasitic nature, they cannot foresee the tragic consequence of their warped will to power. >>8548 >I'm not saying that literally every ill we have is the fault of the Jews or that the world would become a utopia if we removed them, They surely did all they could to destroy the one system of government that would have solved all the problems. Of course, it included solving the JQ so...
Open file (4.58 MB 720x1280 JzlQq6X.mp4)
>>8510 Absolutely. I care about the environment primarily for the well being of my future descendants. I do a lot of work to help the environment, and I will teach my kids to do the same. >>8518 Jews are greedy and simply don't care if they destroy the environment so long as they get money out of it. They will continue to exploit the planet until there are no resources left, down to the very last shekel. Niggers, many other shit skins and White trash are stupid, lazy, careless and trashy. I notice they frequently litter, probably because they're lazy, just don't care or they expect someone else will clean it up. I always imagine these types having piles of trash in their living space and being completely fine with it all piling up. And like >>8520 pretty much said, they are exploitative and over-consumptive because they seek instant gratification.
>>8548 >Again the Jew supplies the intellectual backing, the funding and the propaganda, and places himself firmly at the head of their movements. Yeah that's quite funny. It can be interesting to see nonWhites lead their own movements.
Open file (1.08 MB 1920x1280 girl flower.jpg)
>>8554 >Absolutely. I care about the environment primarily for the well being of my future descendants. I do a lot of work to help the environment, and I will teach my kids to do the same. Based. Sacrificing the future for the present is degenerate, just as is sacrificing the well-being of the collective for the desires of individuals. I'd like to do more work to actually help the environment. I live very frugally compared to the average person and occasionally try to grow some stuff out back but it's really not as much as I'd like. Let me know if you know some things that people should be doing. Of course I do want to cut back even more in the future and go off the grid, especially before I have a family. I think it would be much better for their development to live away from all this shit around today. >I notice they frequently litter, probably because they're lazy, just don't care or they expect someone else will clean it up. I always imagine these types having piles of trash in their living space and being completely fine with it all piling up I've noticed the same things. I think you're spot on when it comes to why they might do this. I've honestly never entered the house of a nigger in my over twenty years of life so far, so I can only imagine that they live in squalor, given the fact that their neighborhoods when black-dominated are more often than not littered with garbage and filth. If they can't care for the outside of their home, I doubt they can the inside. In my own neighborhood the nigger houses are always easy to spot, and when a formerly White-owned house gets blacked it almost always ends up in shambles within a year. Same for most non-Whites in my area, I've noticed.
>>8584 >most non-Whites You're telling me that there's a few that actually try to not pollute the environment? Wow what a reality.
Open file (4.28 MB 4592x3056 1600487490648.jpg)
>>8584 >Let me know if you know some things that people should be doing. Like you mentioned, living frugally and consuming less is a great start, especially while we live in times of over-population. I can share a short list of practical and simple things I personally do to help the environment that most other people can try applying in their lives. 1. Collect a variety of fruit and tree seeds and toss them around non-forested areas, essentially doing the same work that birds and other animals do to spread seeds around. I find this is much easier than trying to grow and plant trees from seed. 2. If you go out hiking or exploring nature, take a trash bag and collect some litter along the way. I used to get frustrated at the idiots that littered innawoods, and angrily pass by the litter, but I feel much better when I actually clean it up knowing that it won't be there anymore. 3. One thing you can do at home (in secret, don't tell your boomer parents) is to collect urine in sealable jugs or containers, let it sit for a week to sterilize, mix it with an equal amount of water, and use it as a natural liquid fertilzer. Urine contains many beneficial elements for plants. 4. Composting toilets for solid human waste. Flush toilets use up gallons of water, whereas composting toilets use sawdust or woodchips to cover up solid waste. I don't have one but plan to use them in the future. 5. Instead of having a mowed grass lawn, let it grow semi-wild and introduce artificial habitats for all kinds of creatures, from microorganisms, to insects, to larger animals. Just try to mimic different types of ecosystems and biomes, creating microclimates, patches of land with wildflowers, grasses, big and little rocks, logs, wet areas, dry areas, shaded areas, sunny areas, etc. This is the funnest part IMO because you can get really creative with it and it's generally low maintenance. I have a small garden in the middle of my parent's mowed lawn and it's really amazing to see how many different species just a tiny area of land can support with assorted microclimates, compared to the rest of the lawn. Habitat destruction is a huge problem today, and although we can't effectively fix the habitats destroyed by intense urban development, many of us can improve the habitats in our yards. 6. Hunting, foraging, fishing, growing your own food and raising your own animals (as mentioned earlier ITT) or at least buying food from local farms. Don't buy food that needs to be transported from distant lands. >occasionally try to grow some stuff out back but it's really not as much as I'd like Same here, I grow veggies in my small garden but still need to get like 99% of my food from the grocery store.
>>8665 >let it sit for a week to sterilize a) sure about that duration? b) is it bad if I pee on pees directly? >Composting toilets for solid human waste Yeah but the smell and where to put that stuff afterwards if you're in a semiurban area? Are there services known to collect this? >Instead of having a mowed grass lawn Come on golf courses in the desert are fantastic! >raising your own animals Pic related >>8665
Open file (554.99 KB 1280x1024 girl flower smell.jpg)
>>8665 Thanks for the all of the tips, anon. A few of these, such as #2 is really something that I need to start doing, because I have felt the same way whenever I am out in the woods. There are all sorts of beer bottles, plastic cups and sorts of trash scattered about that always gets on my nerves, but like you I haven't really done anything about it. I will have to though. Some of the other stuff also look like good tips, but are obviously not as doable when one is (for now, at least) trapped in the suburbs where there are all sorts of restrictions and regulations on what you can do and what your yard has to look like, unfortunately. The composting toilet in particular seems like a great and really cheap way to deal with getting rid of and utilizing human-waste in an efficient way. I will really need to explore a lot of this stuff in a lot more depth, because I'd like to be living as cheaply as possible with as little attachment to the system as possible, as barebone as that would be.
Forgot a vid I wanted to post of some composting toilets that some anons may be interested in: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqbYohdTGzo

Report/Delete/Moderation Forms
Delete
Report

Captcha (required for reports and bans by board staff)

no cookies?