a (philosophical?) question about fascism/authoritarianism

>>127324735
Ideally, I'd want to appoint a Roman dictator for the time it takes to fix things and retire after that.

The next best thing would be a peaceful ethnic-nationalistic takeover of our democracies, assuming they would chill out over time like right wing authoritarians tend to do.

I don't care much for ideologies per se or the means to get there, I want the pressing issue of immigration, demographics, and decadent leftist indoctrination through media and academia addressed because if we don't, our people will be irreversibly mudded up. Politics and even economics come far behind those concerns.

File: Lazy_Homer_Simpson.jpg (17KB, 308x313px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 308x313px

>>127325929
I'm really tired right now and I feel like my head is totally empty. Don't even have anything of substance to say, don't even know why I posted this thread. Maybe I am in the state the rulers want me to be in...

>>127327562
You're overthinking this.

Less white people with jobs and families = bad
More white people with jobs and families = good

>>127328167
I posted another related thread a few days ago that got only one reply I think. I asked if right wing ideology inevitably includes left wing ideology for a section of society and whether it is possible to apply right wing ideology to all of society. I guess a good illustration of this is in Brave New World where they are growing embryos in a lab and they put alcohol in some tubes to cause arrested development to create the working class, something like that.

>>127324735
You don't even really need "the right" people/person in power, desu authoritarianism just gets shit done. Very few people on /pol/ would consider Stalin one of "the right" people, but you'd be a dumbass to deny that he got shit done that without authoritarianism wouldn't have happened, he turned a serf-based peasant agrarian barely industrializing economy into a spacefaring industrial superpower in 40 years.

>>127329341
Brave new world is the end point of Liberalism. 1984 is the end point of Communism. Hitler was a leftist who was also a racist. If you want to see a right wing authoritarian look at Pinochet.

Ok, so here's an example I came up with.

Let's say you are against affirmative action because you think it makes everything go to shit when you take less qualified people instead of more qualified people.

We could call this destructive altruism. And the opposite would be constructive egoism.

But what if it was constructive egoism that created the policy in the first place? I.e. they knew exactly what they were doing and they used it as a tool of oppression. But my point is that their objective in doing this is perhaps exactly the same as the objective of the person who is against the practice. Then what does it all boil down to, nothing but pure self-interest? Then who can really say they want the greatest good for the greatest number?

>>127330447
Ehh. No, I disagree with that. Not that Stalin was "the right" guy for the job. But he was more right than many other authoritarian leaders in Communist countries. Look at his politics, Stalin was relatively right wing in comparison to Lenin and Trotsky. He made abortion illegal (although this was a failed policy and was targeted at increasing the population for the war), he encouraged the nuclear family, he encouraged nationalism, he encouraged the church (as a tool, but still it was dying and made a come back under him). Stalin was a power hungry nutcase but he did some things that were good in the long term for the cluntry.

>>127330642
How was Hitler a racist? 95% of the people he killed where White Europeans. He barely killed any Jews in comparison. Also, he respected other races and thought all races had a right to there genetics, which is why race mixing was the ultimate crime.

>>127331713
I don't think things happen the way you think they do. Any outcome is the result of a compromise between what seemed the most expedient to every actor involved, it is hardly ever intentional. Most people don't want whites to be displaced and marginalized, it's just more convenient for them to align with policies that lead to that when you ask them.

If you want to change things, you need to reconfigure the incentives at play, change the rules that got you there but there is too much resistance to get any change done without being authoritarian about it.

Every change has winner and losers, whether it's for the greater good or not is a matter of perspective and priorities. If you are aligned with kebabs, you'd be fine with our current immigration and welfare policies, if you are part of the native working class that has to compete and live with them not so much.

There is no objectivity in human affairs, just individual and group preferences.

>>127324735
>Pinochet
National Socialism, the best type of right wing fascism, is the only political system that as ever worked. Nazi Germany was a utopia.

(note: the military is separate from the political system and what the military did does not reflect on National Socialism)

>>127333271
Nah, I think this discussion is going nowhere at all.