URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       True Left
  HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: True Left vs Right
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 28821--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Aryanism vs Boromir Syndrome
       By: rp Date: November 30, 2024, 12:04 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I recall you mentioning on one of the Aryanism.net pages that
       the battle lines will no longer be between Aryans, Jews, and
       Gentiles, but simply between Aryans and non Aryans. I see this
       becoming truer each day, as now it is not even worth the effort
       to distinguish between Jews and Gentiles.
       #Post#: 28847--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Aryanism vs Boromir Syndrome
       By: rp Date: December 3, 2024, 12:10 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Another BS "documentary" from BS Gentile Stew Peters:
  HTML https://twitter.com/realstewpeters/status/1861952893068427508
       #Post#: 28848--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Aryanism vs Boromir Syndrome
       By: rp Date: December 3, 2024, 2:36 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       The following tweet demonstrates the mentality of the
       documentary maker:
  HTML https://x.com/Onetimeoff1837/status/1861972915924689095?t=k81z-hHQuLj7omoUkw20GA&s=19
       [Quote]
       There is a difference between caring about your own very much
       and hating others. Hitler may have been racist against
       non-Germans. That doesn't mean he hated them. His hatred appears
       to be reserved for a very specific group and that group only.
       [/Quote]
       This is an annoying POV that is beginning to take hold in WN
       circles. That Hitler was "racist" but still cared about "non
       Whites". Now that information about Jesse Owens and Hitler's
       collaboration with the "third world" is coming out, they will
       attempt to reconcile their racism with "pro Hitler" sentiments
       by doing the old "self determination for all peoples" meme
       ("Hitler supported "non Whites" in their own countries!". Even
       David Duke was doing this). This what I believe VK Clark was
       promoting, and what JAM based his ideology on.
       I would prefer they abandon this and acknowledge (as many of the
       more literate identitarians are doing) that Hitler was an anti
       racist, and that it is in their interest to support Zionism/the
       Allied Powers. Of course this approach will also end up
       strengthening Identitarianism as it will give them a more
       coherent ideology, and I don't want that either. What are your
       thoughts on how to deal with this?
       #Post#: 28849--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Aryanism vs Boromir Syndrome
       By: 90sRetroFan Date: December 3, 2024, 5:08 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "doing the old "self determination for all peoples""
       This is just a sugarcoated way of saying "whites" get to
       categorize everyone and decide where each category gets to live.
       In other words, "whites" actually rule the whole world and run
       it like a zoo.
       ""Hitler supported "non Whites" in their own countries!""
       Which countries are their own countries?
       Firstly, it is known that Hitler supported Amerindians taking
       back America from "white" rule, so Hitler did not consider
       America to belong to "whites". This can logically be extended to
       all lands stolen by "whites" during the colonial era, contrary
       to the WN position that "whites" get to keep all their stolen
       lands.
       Secondly, it is known that Hitler opposed discrimination against
       "non-white" Germans in Germany. Thus he considered "non-white"
       Germans (ancestrally from former German colonies) in Germany to
       be in their own country. This can logically be extended to all
       origin countries of all the Western colonial powers, contrary to
       the WN position that these should be "white".
  HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/colonial-era/hitler-the-face-of-anti-tribalism/msg27892/#msg27892
       Thirdly, there exist "white" countries which did not have
       colonies, such as Poland (which is not to say that it did not
       try to get some:
  HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonization_attempts_by_Poland
       ).
       Hitler directly invaded Poland. Had the Third Reich won WWII,
       "non-white" Reich citizens would have been among those able to
       live in Poland afterwards if they wanted to, whereas they had
       been unable to do so before. Thus Hitler had no interest in
       keeping Poland "white", contrary to the WN position.
       Finally, if Hitler did not support "non-whites" being in
       "Europe", then why did he prefer Charles Martel to lose, and why
       did he praise Andalus and disparage the Reconquista?
       "what JAM based his ideology on"
       During OWNP and Monarchist Party times, JAM officially declared
       that America should be multiethnic, and in private discussions
       expressed that "non-whites" from former British colonies
       deserved to live in Britain. I do not know what he believes now.
       "I would prefer they abandon this and acknowledge (as many of
       the more literate identitarians are doing) that Hitler was an
       anti racist, and that it is in their interest to support
       Zionism/the Allied Powers. "
       I agree.
       "Of course this approach will also end up strengthening
       Identitarianism as it will give them a more coherent ideology,
       and I don't want that either."
       An incoherent ideology is more dangerous in that, even after
       defeating it, the narrative of what was actually being defeated
       can be distorted again. Last time, Himmler and other racists in
       the NSDAP was what allowed the Allies to portray Jews as victims
       of racism, leading to all the subsequent confusion that we have
       had to deal with ever since. Do we want to go through all this
       again?
       #Post#: 28851--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Aryanism vs Boromir Syndrome
       By: rp Date: December 3, 2024, 6:46 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "During OWNP and Monarchist Party times, JAM officially declared
       that America should be multiethnic, and in private discussions
       expressed that "non-whites" from former British colonies
       deserved to live in Britain. I do not know what he believes now"
       I suppose then that it was VK Clark's view, not necessarily
       JAM's.
       #Post#: 28852--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Aryanism vs Boromir Syndrome
       By: rp Date: December 3, 2024, 6:53 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "Which countries are their own countries?"
       They would probably do the "White separatist" meme in countries
       like the US, where Amerindians/"Black" descendants of the
       original slaves are allowed to stay (but still segregated")
       while other "non Whites" should be deported, whereas for Europe,
       they would say that all "non Whites" should be deported. Of
       course, these positions are thoroughly anti Hitlerist as you
       demonstrated above.
       #Post#: 28891--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Aryanism vs Boromir Syndrome
       By: rp Date: December 6, 2024, 9:40 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
  HTML https://x.com/jakeshieldsajj/status/1799317976942104992?t=f9jqmYOZaDkenkvBxCNSVw&s=19
       [quote]
       the difference America admitted our evils and gave natives
       monthly money
       Israel still lies and denies its crimes and is currently
       committing them
       [Quote]
       Don’t forget….
       [Img]
  HTML https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GPX7VWWaUAAyr_h?format=jpg&name=small[/img]
       [/Quote]
       [/Quote]
       Did it give them their land back? Shields is another
       ethnocentrist bigot who wants you to think that Jews are the
       only group capable of ethnotribalism, and that Gentile tribes
       are not as bad as Jews.
       #Post#: 29835--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Exposing people with the Western Darwinian Worldview
       By: antizion Date: April 6, 2025, 1:29 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=antihellenistic link=topic=348.msg23329#msg23329
       date=1698904163]
  HTML https://64.media.tumblr.com/22a12e78ab649c1be08bdb7878387f9a/3d1cac69c48f9586-ae/s1280x1920/cdf911da2386795794b871b42350405b6c27e660.jpg
  HTML https://64.media.tumblr.com/dc316943829548aea3fd2d29d3f1e305/df26cb2ccc575b18-86/s1280x1920/478b7f19f62cd5bf473160a323aac8716121d9e5.jpg
       [/quote]
       The replies on twitter are interesting. Expected, but
       interesting.
       The_Hellenist genuinely believes that IQ test scores is
       importantly, and hence also holds prejudice towards "whites"
       with low IQ test scores.
       Yet his followers replying to him, rather than agreeing with
       him, tries to defend "whites" with low IQ tests scores.
       If IQ test scores were so important, then it shouldn't matter
       where it comes from?
       This exposes that racists identitarians only talk about IQ test
       scores is because it makes their ethnicities look good (except
       when it makes Jews look good).
       Just like the topic of Ideology vs Pseudoideology in the main
       site:
  HTML https://aryanism.net/philosophy/ideology-vs-pseudoideology/
       > “Whatever quality in which I excel over others is a good
       quality. Whatever quality in which others excel over me is a bad
       quality.”
       #Post#: 30484--------------------------------------------------
       Re: False Leftists feeling the need for True Leftism
       By: Not At Home Date: June 23, 2025, 6:08 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Child: Mom! Let's go get some Anti-Zionism!
       Mother: But we have anti-zionism at home!
       anti-zionism at home:
       <iframe width="560" height="315"
       src="
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/embed/357OUblBYgQ?si=ULQdmA9tmFD5sJt4"<br
       />title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0"
       allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write;
       encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share"
       referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin"
       allowfullscreen></iframe>
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=357OUblBYgQ
       #Post#: 30485--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Aryanism vs Boromir Syndrome
       By: 90sRetroFan Date: June 23, 2025, 5:00 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       According to his narrative, Britain had good rulers until the
       1800s. In reality:
  HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Empire#Origins_(1497%E2%80%931583)
       [quote]In 1562, Elizabeth I encouraged the privateers John
       Hawkins and Francis Drake to engage in slave-raiding attacks
       against Spanish and Portuguese ships off the coast of West
       Africa[14] with the aim of establishing an Atlantic slave trade.
       This effort was rebuffed and later, as the Anglo-Spanish Wars
       intensified, Elizabeth I gave her blessing to further
       privateering raids against Spanish ports in the Americas and
       shipping that was returning across the Atlantic, laden with
       treasure from the New World.[15] At the same time, influential
       writers such as Richard Hakluyt and John Dee (who was the first
       to use the term "British Empire")[16] were beginning to press
       for the establishment of England's own empire.
       ...
       The British Empire began to take shape during the early 17th
       century, with the English settlement of North America and the
       smaller islands of the Caribbean, and the establishment of
       joint-stock companies, most notably the East India Company, to
       administer colonies and overseas trade.
       ...
       rising costs soon led English traders to embrace the use of
       imported African slaves.[35] The enormous wealth generated by
       slave-produced sugar made Barbados the most successful colony in
       the Americas,[36] and one of the most densely populated places
       in the world.[34] This boom led to the spread of sugar
       cultivation across the Caribbean, financed the development of
       non-plantation colonies in North America, and accelerated the
       growth of the Atlantic slave trade, particularly the triangular
       trade of slaves, sugar and provisions between Africa, the West
       Indies and Europe.[37]
       ...
       In 1655, England annexed the island of Jamaica from the Spanish,
       and in 1666 succeeded in colonising the Bahamas.[39] In 1670,
       Charles II incorporated by royal charter the Hudson's Bay
       Company (HBC), granting it a monopoly on the fur trade in the
       area known as Rupert's Land, which would later form a large
       proportion of the Dominion of Canada.
       ...
       Two years later, the Royal African Company was granted a
       monopoly on the supply of slaves to the British colonies in the
       Caribbean.[41] The company would transport more slaves across
       the Atlantic than any other, and significantly grew England's
       share of the trade, from 33 per cent in 1673 to 74 per cent in
       1683.[42] The removal of this monopoly between 1688 and 1712
       allowed independent British slave traders to thrive, leading to
       a rapid escalation in the number of slaves transported.[43]
       British ships carried a third of all slaves shipped across the
       Atlantic—approximately 3.5 million Africans[44]
       ...
       To facilitate the shipment of slaves, forts were established on
       the coast of West Africa, such as James Island, Accra and Bunce
       Island. In the British Caribbean, the percentage of the
       population of African descent rose from 25 per cent in 1650 to
       around 80 per cent in 1780, and in the Thirteen Colonies from 10
       per cent to 40 per cent over the same period (the majority in
       the southern colonies).[46] The transatlantic slave trade played
       a pervasive role in British economic life, and became a major
       economic mainstay for western port cities.[47] Ships registered
       in Bristol, Liverpool and London were responsible for the bulk
       of British slave trading.[48] For the transported, harsh and
       unhygienic conditions on the slaving ships and poor diets meant
       that the average mortality rate during the Middle Passage was
       one in seven.[49]
       ...
       In 1778, Joseph Banks, Cook's botanist on the voyage, presented
       evidence to the government on the suitability of Botany Bay for
       the establishment of a penal settlement, and in 1787 the first
       shipment of convicts set sail, arriving in 1788.[83] Unusually,
       Australia was claimed through proclamation. Indigenous
       Australians were considered too uncivilised to require
       treaties,[84] and colonisation brought disease and violence that
       together with the deliberate dispossession of land and culture
       were devastating to these peoples.[85]
       ...
       The East India Company fought a series of Anglo-Mysore wars in
       Southern India with the Sultanate of Mysore under Hyder Ali and
       then Tipu Sultan. Defeats in the First Anglo-Mysore war and
       stalemate in the Second were followed by victories in the Third
       and the Fourth.[92] Following Tipu Sultan's death in the fourth
       war in the Siege of Seringapatam (1799), the kingdom became a
       protectorate of the company.[92]
       The East India Company fought three Anglo-Maratha Wars with the
       Maratha Confederacy. The First Anglo-Maratha War ended in 1782
       with a restoration of the pre-war status quo.[93] The Second and
       Third Anglo-Maratha wars resulted in British victories.[94]
       After the surrender of Peshwa Bajirao II in 1818, the East India
       Company acquired control of a large majority of the Indian
       subcontinent.[95][/quote]
  HTML https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/81GyYavXL4L._AC_UF894,1000_QL80_.jpg
       *****************************************************
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page