Is identitarianism nazism 2.0?

Faggot nigger.

Any movement that does not name the Jew, or that is not attacked by Jewry, or is praised by Jewry, is useless.

Hopefully
They should be supported. It's a push in the right direction.
Slippery slope everyone, use the slippery slope.
They are a great way to get the youth on the right track of mind.

German Identitarians secretly deny access to those of Jewish decent.

Proof: I’m an actual right wing Jew who was denied access into it.

Attached: D6B6F1F9-6A0E-408D-8EEE-B8A6EB3442E5.jpg (1024x1024, 141K)

as far as i can tell the UK branch seems a little good goyish
but Martin Sellner on the other hand and the rest of the European groups are most likely just biding their time

Attached: 1528648544866.png (534x629, 100K)

BEGONE, GUN THOT! GO BE AN INSTAGRAM WHORE SOMEWHERE ELSE!

instagram.com/thedoctorbae

na biste mett

Attached: 1525092731292.png (1896x1009, 2.44M)

They are ethno nationalists but call it ethno pluralism.
The fact that not even 2 minutes after the thread was up some (((mutt))) posted a useless jpg shows that shills are out to put them in a bad light.
You need to understand that if you would adress the JQ or deny the holocaust in public then you go to prison.
Identitarians heavily focus on propaganda and marketing. They try to make the following opinions mainstream.
>Loving your homeland
>Anti-globalism
>Having traditional families
>Stopping US and Israeli wars
>Muh christian values
It is easier to shift the public opinion to things like the JQ when Nationalism is already mainstream than when you can not even wave a German flag in public.
Leading identitarian members also frequently interacted with actual natsocs and fascists on Twitter. Their background is mostly from nationalist youth groups.

>identitarians
they would have been laughed at by actual National Socialists, it's a pseudo-ideology

Attached: National Socialism and Nazism.jpg (2784x8500, 3.68M)

I sure hope so

It's a start user. Things are pushed so far there either has to be a cataclysm or baby steps.

If you push for racial identity, what you get is interethnic division. If you push for racial idealism, you get interethnic unity. It is not a "step in the right direction" to exacerbate a divide and conquer strategy.

“The Aryan Collective Unconscious unites, seeks to complete, to conceive the unus mundus, the totality of the human being, deifying him. … The Jewish Collective Unconscious is always exclusive, takes the part against the whole, fanatic, intolerant, proselytizing, dividing men, tending to produce chaos.” – Miguel Serrano

Attached: Why Race Matters and 'the races' don't.jpg (609x9175, 2.05M)

they likely assumed you were infiltrating
sucks that reality sucks sometimes

Attached: 20180611_120342.jpg (4032x3024, 3.2M)

The nazi idea of race was completely retarded

Europe is for whites
nogs and mudshits have to go back
I dont see the problem

ofcourse there is a conflict but we dont need them
we are in this situation because we are so obsessed with pandering to them that we let them genocide us

Jow Forums wasnt around to educate them

most of the shit they did was retarded
the intent was nice though

How so? Care to explain how dividing people into "white", "black", and "asian" is going to lead to the selection of a better humanity

Attached: Aryan Race.jpg (1854x5555, 2.02M)

Well actually the Classical anthropologists of the time basically believed what modern race realists believed and they constantly spoke out against the nazi conception of race. Aryanism never achieved popularity in academia.

National Transhumanism will lead to a synthesis of civic and ethnic nationalism. This will be the third position within 50 years.

Attached: 1494755696390.png (1000x1744, 957K)

Tailoring a message for normies is different than talking on here.
I strongly support a genocide and white ethnostatism. But when I'm red-pilling people I don't start with literal nazi level stuff.

We are essentially different species
Think of it as Horses and donkeys

Also take note that we have existed for thousands of years and traveled around but have you seen mixed blood people around
like in masses
not some recently mixed ones (first max 2nd gen)

mixing the races either doesnt end well (sterility) or gets washed away

They were right after all. Wew.

Attached: germany_non_white.jpg (953x836, 166K)

They should stop calling it some fucking mouthful like "Identitarianism" and just call it "Nationalism."

Or Nativism.

>>academia
cause it's kike run

There is more than enough proof that whites are different than nogs and chinks

Should be noted that whiles jews deny us that right they are very much obsessed with their own Race realism
To get a citizenship in Israel you need to have above a certain % of Ashkenazi DNA

I do
it's actually quite fun
most people are open minded and if they are your friends they'll just not take it as serious but will go along

Well i'm not going to go into why i don't believe in a magical mystical hyperborea. As for you question of how racial catagories are going to build a better humanity i never said it would. I don't care about a better "humanity". I just don't want shitskins in my country.

Attached: 1518276966214.jpg (621x1000, 367K)

You misunderstood what I said. The classical anthropologists didn't deny racial differenceces. They just didn't buy into the magical mystical hyperborea and aryan racial theory that the nazis adopted.

Labels are for faggots, we just wanna genocide the Jews.

Go read Marcus Willinger's book
Basically the Identitarian Manifesto
Its really fucking tame

Attached: GenID.png (597x805, 596K)

>We are essentially different species
There will always be differences between any two populations. The question is, are the distinctions critical, are they relevant?
>mixing the races either doesnt end well (sterility) or gets washed away
I agree, Aryans should marry Aryans, I have no problem with an Aryan from India marrying a European Aryan, I have a very large problem with an Aryan from Europe marrying a non-Aryan from Europe when both happen to be white.
>Tailoring a message for normies is different than talking on here.
I'm saying that your message is fundamentally wrong, not that you should tailor it in one way or another.
>I strongly support a genocide and white ethnostatism.
A genocide of who? And why? Why is white the relevant category for creating a state, instead of the quality of the individuals that will comprise it?
>But when I'm red-pilling people I don't start with literal nazi level stuff.
If you sincerely hold the beliefs you mentioned then you do not support literal "National Socialist" stuff.

Attached: Naturalism vs Idealism.jpg (2778x4890, 2.71M)

and kick out the shitskins

This is unironically the best and most permanent solution
The step towards this in the short run would be cultural nationalism

WTF
Aryan from India marrying European aryan?!!!
nigga WAT
NO, just NO

Attached: 1478535713191.png (900x516, 233K)

implying Portugal, Sweden or France are much better
vote far right already and wake up your people

Attached: 54-immigration_europe_nationalciti.png (898x916, 122K)

National transhumanism is the most retarded ideology lol. It relies on lots of false assumptions. Namely that white hatred is born out of jealousy and that people will genetically engineer themselves to be white. In reality genetic engineering will birth unspeakable horrors into this world.

meant for this lad

Lol there aren't any aryans in india. Even in the upper castes they only have about 20 percent indo european admixture

way too complicated

All I need is

Europe for whites, Africa for nogs and Middle east for nuclear testing site

Almost all Aryan bloodlines have been degraded to some extent. Because of this, Hitler would speak of "Two Japans and Two Germanies," some people who were closer to the ideal and some who were further from it.
The primary way to tell if someone is an Aryan is if one behaves as an Aryan; physical characteristics can but don't necessarily correlate i.e. someone can have an Aryanid appearance but behave otherwise.

“We do not conclude from a man’s physical type his ability, but rather from his achievements his race.” – Adolf Hitler

Attached: main-qimg-12c9ad9e66f4e81fac1ea8cb456c9484-c.jpg (602x339, 27K)

Is the left image Ganymede from Children of Dune? Damn she's hot.

jewess, half Turk manlet, crosseyed Amerimutt e-thot

Like i said the nazi idea of an aryan race was total and complete bullshit. The japanese have no proto indoeuropean dna. And no you don't determine someone's race by their achievements lmao. What an idiotic statement. My respect for hitler decreases every day.

>that white hatred is born out of jealousy
agreed, that is quite a baseless assumption
>people will genetically engineer themselves to be white
most asian cultures have obsessions with skin whitening products and plastic surgery to make themselves "westernised"
best example of this is South Korea
So some populations will
but yea, this wont be an entirely voluntary process

When i say white i don't just mean white skin.

SJWs if left uncheck will eventually turn into "Nazis" against their group that is at the bottom of their progessive stack, due to the unavoidable realities that they will eventually face.

Neither the Nazis themselves not the socialists will accept this, because it runs contrary to their narratives they are trying to push but Robert Mugabe and his regime was a national socialist one.

yea but its the first step
when CRISPR is in the market im sure there would be like packages to make white babies through gene editing

unfortunately no

Attached: ((identitarian)).png (1657x3163, 1.79M)

That's another assumption. That gene editing will be available to the public via a market.

>Like i said the nazi idea of an aryan race was total and complete bullshit.
You have yet to explain why this is or justify a superior classification.
>The japanese have no proto indoeuropean dna.
Hence the term "Honorary Aryan," their behavior was sufficient for them to have the title.
>And no you don't determine someone's race by their achievements lmao. What an idiotic statement.
Why can you not classify people into races based on characteristics other than physical ones? Why can you not speak of a Race also united spiritually, as Evola (and Hitler, though Evola didn't recognize it as such) spoke of?
>My respect for hitler decreases every day.
I care little for how much non-Aryans care about Hitler, but perhaps some lurkers will come to understand what National Socialism was a bit better.

Attached: img_9432.jpg?w=640.jpg (640x858, 165K)

>implying a political ideology is linked to national identity

I don't believe in mystical magical hyperboreans because there simply is no evidence for such a thing

>Why can you not classify people into races based on characteristics other than physical ones? Why can you not speak of a Race also united spiritually, as Evola (and Hitler, though Evola didn't recognize it as such) spoke of?

Because that's simply not what biological race is.

Attached: statue.png (1792x1198, 3.35M)

Attached: iewater.png (1666x1246, 3.55M)

>I don't believe in mystical magical hyperboreans because there simply is no evidence for such a thing
Strawman, I don't believe in "mystical magical hyperboreans," I believe that there are people who understand the nature of this reality and those who don't.
also
>I need physical evidence!!!
lmao what are you, an empiricist or something? pic related
>Because that's simply not what biological race is.
And I'm not talking about the way genes are distributed now, I'm talking about the way they should be, normative rather than descriptive, idealistic rather than naturalistic. Read these pics

Attached: 8053f92c-2873-4c87-98b5-fdf53b2adcab.png (607x4108, 1.33M)

Yeah lol I believe in empiricism and the scientific method. And race refers to how genes are distributed now. I don't see the point of you creating your own special definiton of race.

>the nazi idea of an aryan race was total and complete bullshit
It came from Nietzsche's discussion of the Arya in Genealogy. These "master" races--the Greeks, the Romans, the Persians, etc--all of the races that conquered and/or enslaved other races. He contrasted this with the "slave" races--Jews and Niggers. They are metaphysical concepts used to generalize the two types of human moralities: the master and the slave.

I applied to both Identity Evropa and Patriot Front.

It's been over a week and IE still hasn't contacted me, meanwhile I have an interview in an hour or so for PF.

IE seems like a much better organization and more active, PF has potential I think but isn't active enough and needs to change their game a bit as I don't think they'll win over many people.

What do, Jow Forums?

Attached: wojak.png (5000x5000, 363K)

pls anyone made a paint version yet?

let's fucking hope so

Attached: 1526000332920.png (618x354, 163K)

If anyone is interested:

inp.uw.edu.pl/mdsie/Political_Thought/GeneologyofMorals.pdf

Attached: Arya.png (930x1182, 186K)

>Yeah lol I believe in empiricism and the scientific method.
Do you understand why the scientific method can never give you absolute truth?
>And race refers to how genes are distributed now.
That is the way you use the term. It is not the only way to use it. The idea is the same; rather than discussing which races should be preserved, I'm interested in which races should be created.

We're talking on two different sides of a worldview chasm, and as such it's not really possible for genuine communication to occur. Pic related.

>they call themselves the truthful
accurate to my understanding, thanks for posting

Attached: plato aristotle.jpg (728x546, 60K)

>Do you understand why the scientific method can never give you absolute truth?

Yes of course. New evidence, better theories, better predictive models, etc can always come around and replace our older understanding.

>I'm interested in creating a new race
Yes that's called population engineering and eugenics. Wanting to do that doesn't change the definiton of race.

Attached: soros libtard.jpg (480x360, 40K)

>Yes of course. New evidence, better theories, better predictive models, etc can always come around and replace our older understanding.
And thus you understand that because we can never know if we have reached the end point of predictive models, we can never know if we have all the evidence, it is optimal to first base any ideology on aspects which are not subject to change i.e. rational knowledge as opposed to empirical?
>Yes that's called population engineering and eugenics.
Sure, if that helps you. Now do you understand how, when trying to create a new race, one can choose whatever qualities one wants, including evaluating individuals by their achievements? And thus, when Hitler says that he is wanting to create or regenerate a Race, that is what he is referring to?

Attached: deutschland erwache.jpg (1280x720, 85K)

Do we know he's Turkish?

c'mon Jow Forums what do you think?

>also hitler digits

Attached: bobby fischer.jpg (850x400, 76K)

Thanks BroAnon

>it is optimal to first base any ideology on aspects which are not subject to change i.e. rational knowledge as opposed to empirical?

Lol see that's the thing. I'm not interested in creating and ideology i'm interested in scientific truth.

>Now do you understand how, when trying to create a new race, one can choose whatever qualities one wants

This doesn't necissarily lead to the creation of a new race. It could just mean improving the average quality of a race.

>Hitler says that he is wanting to create or regenerate a Race

Hitler thought that germans were the purest "aryans" left. He hoped to elevate the racial quality of germany (and eastern lebensraum) through eugenic practises like lebensborn programs

One can only hope.
Pass the bikes. Race cars now.

Attached: camp.jpg (599x599, 70K)

>Lol see that's the thing. I'm not interested in creating and ideology i'm interested in scientific truth.
The point of this discussion is for you or a lurker to come to understand some ideas, or challenge my own, and ultimately we can have a greater understanding upon which to actualize some aspect of what we believe in.
My point was that there is no such thing as "scientific truth," only rational truths are necessarily eternal, whereas scientific truths are subject to change with additional observation and research. One can believe that one is approaching something akin to truth, but that does not mean one has knowledge.
This is the issue with current racial classification systems: people find differences between groups (as expected) and then use these differences to justify the separation into groups. This is how a scientist approaches the problem. A philosopher asks whether the grouping is relevant or justified in the first place.
>This doesn't necissarily lead to the creation of a new race. It could just mean improving the average quality of a race.
A race is defined by the qualities that it selects for i.e. if I only allow tall people to breed then I would form a "tall person" race, if I only allow lactose intolerant people to breed I will form a "lactose intolerant" race, if I only allow Aryans to breed, I will form an Aryan race, etc. It is the selection of the specific qualities that will define what the new race will be. I would agree with you that Aryanization is equivalent with improving the quality of a race, however.
>Hitler thought that germans were the purest "aryans" left.
But he nonetheless recognized non-Aryan elements within Germany, hence "two Germanies."
>He hoped to elevate the racial quality of germany (and eastern lebensraum) through eugenic practices
Through the regeneration of the Aryan Race, yes, which, as I mentioned, all noble individuals will recognize as improving racial quality.

Attached: MM 47.png (1061x610, 104K)

Anyone familiar with Identity Evropa and/or Patriot Front?

Attached: jewish expulsion.jpg (630x8612, 2.01M)

>My point was that there is no such thing as "scientific truth," only rational truths are necessarily eternal, whereas scientific truths are subject to change with additional observation and research. One can believe that one is approaching something akin to truth, but that does not mean one has knowledge.

This just seem like a bunch of assertions. Scientific truth can't exist because existing theories can always be expanded, improved upon, or discarded? The theory of gravity as it currently exists might be eternal or it might be expanded apon. This does not change the fact that at the moment it is the most operational theory we have. It allows us to send people to the moon and build cars and planes etc.

>This is the issue with current racial classification systems: people find differences between groups (as expected) and then use these differences to justify the separation into groups. This is how a scientist approaches the problem. A philosopher asks whether the grouping is relevant or justified in the first place.

This is absolutely false. I came to the conclusion that i didn't want to interact with or breed with shitskins completely independent of any understanding of darwinian evolution or human biodiversity. It's simply a preference. A pretty natural one at that.

>A race is defined by the qualities that it selects for i.e.

This is wrong. We already went over this. Racial groups aren't based off of height or eye color or skin color. They're based off if genetic clusters. If you have a special definiton of race or and idea of want you want races to be in the future that's fine. But when i say race I mean it in the modern biological sense.

>This just seem like a bunch of assertions.
Assertions that have been known since Plato.
>Scientific truth can't exist because existing theories can always be expanded, improved upon, or discarded?
Yes, empirical knowledge is not eternal, absolute knowledge as it is possible that it can change.
>The theory of gravity as it currently exists might be eternal or it might be expanded apon.
It might be the closest theory we'll ever get; however, I highly doubt that, considering there are conflicts between general relativity and quantum mechanics.
>This does not change the fact that at the moment it is the most operational theory we have.
It might be the closest, or it might be wrong in a very precise way. There is nonetheless no way to ever prove that it is "true"; what if something contradictory to your perfect theory occurs in the future? Because this can always potentially be the case, empirical "knowledge" is always subject to change, which is why, as I mentioned, only a fool would use it as the basis for an ideology.
>I came to the conclusion that i didn't want to interact with or breed with shitskins completely independent of any understanding of darwinian evolution or human biodiversity.
How did you recognize someone as a "shitskin" if you did not have an understanding of human biodiversity i.e. biological differences between beings?
>It's simply a preference.
Yes, one that reveals ignobility.
>A pretty natural one at that.
You would think that mankind would strive to be better than animals, but alas.

For your last answer I'll ask you again to read these pics and respond to them, as they elaborate more on the subject than I have space to.

Aaand it's beautiful.

Attached: GoldenDawn-Greece-ap-img.jpg (1440x907, 151K)

Attached: golden dawn.jpg (3000x1993, 654K)

First Greece, then Europe, then America.

Attached: imia2017drone_(1).jpg (1024x509, 322K)

Golden Dawn is the New Hope.

Attached: 5f5ca969c0727dab43f9b6a0f187cbee.jpg (640x462, 81K)

The jews pushed too hard.

Attached: 1528762550757.jpg (500x629, 629K)

And even fucking granpas got the banner.

Attached: 1526602627043.jpg (1600x1067, 969K)

And grandmas got the cross.

Attached: 1526636277120.jpg (610x408, 39K)

Everything is a nazi when you belong in a padded room.

Remember user, next one is you with torch cross and banner.

>Yes, empirical knowledge is not eternal, absolute knowledge as it is possible that it can change

Yeah so what. You keep repeating that over and over as if it's self-evident that it refutes scientific truth. That's exactly what scientific truth is. It's subject to change because we don't know everything. We haven't invented all the instruments we could invent. We haven't performed all the experiments we could perform. We haven't gathered all the data we could gather.

>It might be the closest theory we'll ever get; however, I highly doubt that, considering there are conflicts between general relativity and quantum mechanics.

Exactly. It's the best we have now and it is subject to change if new evidence comes along. That's how the scientific method works.

>It might be the closest, or it might be wrong in a very precise way. There is nonetheless no way to ever prove that it is "true"; what if something contradictory to your perfect theory occurs in the future? Because this can always potentially be the case, empirical "knowledge" is always subject to change,

Obviously there is no way to prove anything 100 percent true. Since we aren't omniscient beings every proposition we could ever make is subject to some amount of doubt. This literally applies to just about anything though.

And like I said I'm not interested in creating an ideology. I'm interested in verifiable, scientific, empirical truth.

>How did you recognize someone as a "shitskin" if you did not have an understanding of human biodiversity i.e. biological differences between beings?

Because they had shit colored skin and behaved differently from me? What did you think racism or preference for your own race only existed after the enlightenment/advent of scientific racism? Do you think that infants and school children don't show preference for people who are more genetically similar despite no knowledge of evolution or population genetics? C'mon.

>It's simply a preference.
>Yes, one that reveals ignobility.
>A pretty natural one at that.
>You would think that mankind would strive to be better than animals, but alas.

Nah. Believe it or not every biological being on the planet has a preference for people who are more genetically similar. .

Tf2>ow

I used to think these kinds of questions mattered but at the end of the day we'll all be in the trenches trying to defend whats left of our civilization while being thrown in the same prisons for dissent.

Attached: Hayek-Social-Justice-Interview.jpg (1920x1080, 66K)

This

Attached: anatolykarlintranshumanism.png (659x537, 107K)

>In reality genetic engineering will birth unspeakable horrors into this world.
Nice loss aversion, fag. Just because there's a chance of unspeakable horrors being created doesn't mean that you can ignore the chance of unspeakable awesomeness being created.

>in the sense that it is going to get passed on as "totally not nazis" and then go full blown holocaust?
Hopefully

Attached: GenID.jpg (768x510, 73K)

>Yeah so what.
So that means that there is no such thing as "scientific truth," only a scientific consensus which has been proven wrong many times throughout history. See Thomas Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions.
>This literally applies to just about anything though.
And the things it does not apply to forms a very special category, called Truth.
>Because they had shit colored skin and behaved differently from me?
So you observed differences and then used those differences to justify outgrouping them? Thanks for proving my argument.
Instead I think that you should judge people as individuals based on a standard.
>Do you think that infants and school children don't show preference for people who are more genetically similar despite no knowledge of evolution or population genetics?
I don't care if some individuals, even children, judge people in an ignoble way i.e. based on characteristics that the individual in question has no control over whatsoever, though I think you'll find that most people didn't care much about racial differences until around puberty, when individuals are viewed as either reproductive resources (if the opposite sex) or reproductive competitors (if the same sex).
>every biological being on the planet has a preference for people who are more genetically similar.
you're speaking to a counter-example; I would prefer someone who is ideologically similar to someone who is genetically similar. pic related as well

Attached: Folk and Nation.jpg (2122x4464, 2.34M)