When did you realise it were the nationalists and Hitler that caused the degeneracy of the West?

>Very little to do with Jews per se
Reminder: an army of well funded, well organized jew shills patrol the internet in effort to shut down any counter-jew discussion and to promote the globalist anti-white jew agenda.

youtube.com/watch?v=7dGJDJoeAok

youtube.com/watch?v=8XnQN9Jjh2Q

act-il.com/

youtube.com/watch?v=tYleadaZ8vM
>ACT.IL shill recruitment video

thejidf.org

thejidf.org/2008/10/about-jidf.html

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Internet_Defense_Force

fortune.com/2016/09/12/facebook-google-israel-social-media/
archive.is/HpArO
>Why Facebook and Google Are Complying With Israel to Delete Certain Content

archive.is/sMsxH
>Israel’s Online Shadow Operations
>Numerous well funded, organized projects by and for Israel work to flood social media with pro-Israel propaganda, while blocking facts Israel dislikes. The projects utilize Israeli soldiers, students, American teens and others, and range from infiltrating Wikipedia, Reddit and Jow Forums to influencing YouTube. Some operate out of Jewish Community Centers in the U.S.

archive.is/bdyTW
>Israel launches secret squad to challenge negative image & boycott campaign

youtube.com/watch?v=Vqhi16iikxk
>"Israel's Internet Censorship War - If Americans Knew"

youtube.com/watch?v=ceCOhdgRBoc
>"The Lobby P1: Young Friends of Israel – Al Jazeera Investigations"

youtube.com/watch?v=TY7rNXmKjko
>"JIDF Editing on Wikipedia"

youtube.com/watch?v=2zbcEcSYcS8
>Israeli American Council shill recruitment video

youtube.com/watch?v=D2cNvncfCtk
>"Tony Martin IHR Conference Tactics of Organized Jewry in Suppressing Free Speech"

youtube.com/watch?v=XNWF9CeoZdE
>"Defamation" – Documentary about how acusations of anti-semitism are used as a JIDF tool to silence goyim who criticize anything related to jews.

Attached: image.jpg (3666x3284, 1.23M)

Bless your soul neocon. After your post WW2 world tour of Indochina, Latin America and Near East, leaving behind as big a pile of corpses as Stalin managed in Ukraine, whose blood your charcoaled little heart desires to shed next?

>I have no arguments.

>a brain gone wrong

You shoot those kids and you cause the generations long withering dead of the Western soul, still gradually progressing towards its grave. After the trigger was pulled there was no coming back. The will to stand up with pride and confidence to proclaim the superiority of Western Civilization died with those kids.

Attached: Einsatzgruppen executing jewish women and children, Mizocz Ghetto, 14 October 1942 2b.jpg (800x517, 162K)

It wasn't nationalists that started either war you ignorant mal-educated sop.

Having read Luigi Albertini's 2100 page long The Origins of the War of 1914, based on extensive interviews with contemporary people all around Europe who witnessed Europe's slide to madness, a monumental work that Albertini worked on for nearly 20 years from 1920's to early 1940's, I can say with confidence that nationalism was the main cause of WWI. What is your basis to assert otherwise? A meme picture?

>interventions and proxy conflicts are wars
You're probably going to starve and I can't wait to see the pictures.

>The Korean war, the Vietnam War, the Gulf war, the Iraq war... were not wars. I hope you starve to death for thinking they were. Cannot wait!

There is something wrong with you. Just a hunch.

Attached: pol.jpg (224x250, 7K)

Not even a hundred thousand of us dead in all of those conflicts combined. World War 2 was the last war.
Does it upset you to realize your lives are near completely worthless? Go back to crying about the dead babies.

WW1 & 2 were caused by Imperialism, not National Sovereignty.

Attached: pepe2.png (400x381, 120K)

Belligerent nationalism is nationalism. And nationalist sentiments of this type can feed into imperialism and worse all the way to genocide. It's the dark side of group psychology, that Europeans failed to control. The nations of Europe fell to the abyss of 1914 brimming with nationalist pathos, singing joyful songs, flags waving, masses of people sending the men to the front in deafening ecstasy. All sides thought the men would be back for Christmas victorious. Proust conveys this sentiment from the French side in his À la recherche du temps perdu. Ernst Jünger from the German side in his Storms of Steel. Even Hitler reflects how he fell on his knees thanking the Creator of the Universe that he was alive witnessing the moment the war was declared. And Hitler portrays how all the people around him were rapturous and drunk with national sentiment. There even exists a photo of that moment in which young Hitler is said to be pictured.

>When did you realise it were the nationalists and Hitler that caused the degeneracy of the West?
So the world is falling apart around you, the major civilizations are all essentially enslaved to the banking kike cabal, your country has been destroyed and enslaved to an even greater, more obvious extent. But if you fight back against the (((money masters))), you're responsible for the war that follows?
Just kneel and be a good goy, then everything will be okay! We definitely wouldn't be at the same stage of decline now!

The West wasn't demoralised by the Jew. The Jew had co-existed in the West for over 2000 years when in the beginning of 1914 the West stood triumphant, at the peak of its civilizational strength. The European Civilization, the white race if you wish, controlled most of the globe and formed close to 30% of world's population. The Belle Epoqué (the time between the Franco-Prussian war and the First World War) had been one of the most productive periods in European culture, science, art, economy and also a period of major advances in health and well-being. And Jews were major contributors to the richness of that era in all the fields mentioned. The Belle Epoqué the greatest era in European history was also the era of peak Jewish involvement in European civilization. The future looked Great for Europe. Then the catastrophe happened. The self-destruction, the slide to the bottomless pit, pushed over the edge by nationalism grown feverishly mad. The demoralisation of Europe is far above everything else a result of the two world wars and the holocaust. It was not the Jew, it was the white European with his flag that caused the fall from grace.

Attached: Ilmakuva Passchendaelen kylästä länsirintamalla ennen ja jälkeen taistelun, 1916.jpg (500x674, 250K)

(Picture caption: An aerial photo of the town of Passchendaelen on the Western front, before and after a battle, 1916)

(((Co-existed)))

Attached: 1533348665906.png (928x8840, 1.22M)

Same thing that's happening right now. The center held onto power for too long without actually trying to fix any problems, when things got too desperate they still clung to power and tried to "use" political extremists like the Nazis as their tools, only to have those tools turn on them.
You can see what happened in the lead-up to WW2 as a symptom--the Nazis were not the cause, they were merely a consequence of the disease that had already rotted out the country.

European madness in numbers.

Caption: During the battle of Messines the British army fired 3 561 530 shells into German positions, in a single week. on a section couple of kilometers in length.

Attached: Messinesin taistelun aikana britit ampuivat viikossa 3 561 530 kranaattia saksalaisten asemiin muuta (640x480, 70K)

Nationalism always needs an outlet. Natsocs would have bred better people who would fight to the death, but who were also noble, like a new knight race. They would be less inclined to senseless infighting, along with a strong personality at the helm setting their focus at new tasks. I like to think a new nationalism inspired by natsoc would turn it's eyes to the stars after it freed itself from international finance.

Ww1 was a total tragedy.

The two main reasons for historical pogroms were: 1. Blaming Jews for plagues (poisoning the well) 2. The Local nobility solving their mounting debts by killing or driving away the creditors.

I really doubt that will be commonplace even in 50 years. And in the mean time niggers outbreed everyone so in five decades we'll be buried in niggers who are known to make a society much less productive. So much for your utopian eugenics.

>it were
correct term in this case would be 'was'

oh boy you gottem
pack it up boys, OP is finished and has no argument

>jews dindu nuffin
wow you're a true specimen

What does my correction have to do with his argument?

Jews imported niggers into the rhineland during the weimar era.

Lol sure

Attached: 1513557209694.png (650x994, 600K)

>kike hissing with glee
Mai shhchemssshh are schhhekkend to none. Hhiiiisssssss

It starts today. Going out and putting one of your kind in the ground. If hes with his kike wife, she’ll barely survive the encounter. He definitely won’t.

Remember, this is on you. This is how it begins.

>Belligerent nationalism is nationalism.
No.
Democracy doesn't have to be exported to the middle-east by force, either.
WW1 was caused by Imperialism, and WW2 was mostly caused by WW1. No WW1, no WW2.

Nationalism has three main definitions:
>a synonym for Patirotism
>a movement to establish a sovereign nation state, or see an existing one upheld
>an extreme kind of national chauvinism - eg Nazi Germany

Like most normalfags, you've fallen for the myth that the 3rd definition is the only one, just as you've swallowed the big lie that the 2 world wars were a result of "Nationalism".

Nice VPN though.

Even Hitler mentions the 2. as the main reason for historical pogroms and discusses it in length in Mein Kampf. You are simply denying documented and well known history, not known by you though. And the numbers in your meme picture, which I by the way have studied and verified from primary sources years ago and corrected multiple times, are completely wrong. The source given in your meme picture is a book, in which a speech by an American congressman from 100 years ago is cited. Why this source and not the official membership records that are openly available? Because the American congressman exaggerated the numbers. This is how you construct the imaginary reality of falsehoods inside your mind. You have yourself never verified the content of that meme picture. You have just swallowed it whole meal, because it resonated apriori with your emotion-laden ideological identity structures.

leave it to a finngoloid to blame a man for what the rest of the world chose to do to him

a redeeming finnpost

>thinking OP is actually Finnish, or even in Finland

Attached: 1524864926776.jpg (500x500, 47K)

>Collective white European guilt

Such a thing didn't exist until the late 20th century because of propaganda - all those endless narratives about how bad we are. Our country was fucked because of WWI killing half the best men, and then the International Cabal infiltrating and subverting the Conservative party, feminism was born from that, then at the same time the Labour party were formed. We've been fucked ever since.

>No.
>an extreme kind of national chauvinism - eg Nazi Germany

You have no idea what you are talking about, so you manage to contradict yourself from one line to the next. And you completely ignored what I wrote, so I will repeat it:

Belligerent nationalism is nationalism. And nationalist sentiments of this type can feed into imperialism and worse all the way to genocide. It's the dark side of group psychology, that Europeans failed to control. The nations of Europe fell to the abyss of 1914 brimming with nationalist pathos, singing joyful songs, flags waving, masses of people sending the men to the front in deafening ecstasy. All sides thought the men would be back for Christmas victorious. Proust conveys this sentiment from the French side in his À la recherche du temps perdu. Ernst Jünger from the German side in his Storms of Steel. Even Hitler reflects how he fell on his knees thanking the Creator of the Universe that he was alive witnessing the moment the war was declared. And Hitler portrays how all the people around him were rapturous and drunk with national sentiment.

Anyone who has actually studied World War I in detail knows these.

This is the truth that emerges when you have read tens of thousands of pages on the cultural, political, ideological, social history of World War I from the mentioned Luigi Albertini's magnum opus based on interviews of contemporary Europeans to Thomas Mann's portrayal of the growing decadence of the pre-war European upper classes in the Magic Mountain, to Robert Musil's portrayal of the decay of the Austro-Hungarian empire in the The Man Without Qualities, to Dostoevsky's Writer's diaries on the socio-cultural fabric of late 19th century Russia... and have the needed education or reading (in psychology, history, epistemology) and intelligence to sort out the vast amounts of information.

I have given several sources. Have you read Albertini? Jünger? What have you read on the history of WWI?

>Such a thing didn't exist until the late 20th century because of propaganda

Not propaganda. The reality of 1914-1945, as argued in this comment:

Buddy, Hitler doesn't claim the nobility simplyndrove the jews out to relieve their debts, that's taking a very narrow view of his positions in mein kampf. What about Hitler's view of the mass population despising the Jew? He blames their positions in tax collecting and their cruel ways of extracting money from the poor, he blames their role in promoting vice, he blames their hand in leading the nobility into ruin and animosity against their own country and the masses in stirring up antisemitism. He basically blames jews for ruining the whole nation. Also, Hitler explicitly blames the jews for their leading role in Bolshevism, in the whole of mein kampf, the new is practically synonymous with Marxist.

>Very little to do with Jews per se. Very much to do with collective white European guilt from slavery, colonialism, two world wars, the holocaust.
Holocaust is a Myth dude. get woke.

Attached: 1536876958013.png (853x1432, 106K)

Nah man, he's read thousands of pages, he's now an expert, he's intellectually overcome antisemitism and nationalism to begin a brave new quest to promote liberal values to the western world. Such an intellectual powerhouse, and dare I say it, hero.

I have read the Mein Kampf and know exactly what I am talking about. Hitler discusses the specific history of the relationship between the nobility and the Jews. From your post I reckon you haven't read the book (perhaps just watched muh greatest story) or couldn't understand what you were reading or cannot put a coherent argument together. Bolshevism obviously has nothing to do with evictions of Jews in the middle-age.

I have read it retard. Get fucked.

5-6 million Jews were murdered by Hitler's national socialists and their collaborators. The evidence is crystal clear to anyone not mentally incapacitated by an ideological sickness. Start your recovery by reading Into That Darkness: An Examination of Conscience by Gitta Sereny, based on 70 hours of interviews with Franz Stangl the Commandant of Treblinka and Sobibór, and additional interviews with his family and friends.

Then you have either a poor memory or low reading comprehension.

>liberal values

If I start with the very claim that third world immigration into the West is a symptom of West's post WW2 degeneracy, then I am not promoting what is generally understood by "liberal values".

Although you could of course argue that opposing immigration from illiberal cultures and ethnic groups IS a liberal stance, and the reason it is not seen as such is because we have completely fucking lost our sense and moral compass in the West.

I am telling you the reason for that degeneracy. The narrative of what killed West's positive self-conception. And you are not liking the truth, because it shatters your cherished little ideology and threatens your self-image, an image based on falsehoods and muddled understanding of the past.

/thread
Go back to leftypol you nigger lovers

You said so much without saying anything at all.

>thinking OP is actually Finnish, or even in Finland

Kuvittelee, että langan aloittaja olisi suomalainen, tai edes Suomessa.

>I have no arguments.

I said this:

The gates to third world immigration were opened by post-colonialist, post world war II, post holocaust white Europeans. The psychological motivation was to atone for past sins, above everything else to dispel the haunting horrors of the holocaust from the collective European soul. Read Douglas Murray he documents this era of the dawn of multiculturalism in detail. Very little to do with Jews per se. Very much to do with collective white European guilt from slavery, colonialism, two world wars, the holocaust. It is the new secular narrative of our original sin. Not a forbidden fruit but mass slaughter and genocide from the trenches of Somme to the ashes of Auschwitz. The negative, identity destroying myth and narrative of our origins. That poisons our civilization with self-hatred. There is your spiritual abyss of multiculturalism. Of our own doing. Blame the nationalists who incited the first Great war. Blame the nationalists who incited the second war. They didn't care about their fellow whites. They murdered them on an industrial scale. A factory production line of human slaughter. And they murdered millions of innocent civilians, a sin for which we are still self- flagellating ourselves for as a civilization. The civilization of guilt. This is the truth. It was not the Jew, it was the white with his flag that caused this.

Attached: 3.jpg (602x600, 123K)

Who gives a fuck about whitedom.
A lot was at stake back then ofc it was fought over.

Attached: 20180915_115201.jpg (5312x2988, 3.81M)

When the worlds wealth and future is compressed on a continent you gonna fight about it. You make it look like it was completely irrational to do all of this.
European solidarity is only a thing since we have become weak and the world smaller, so that we now find ourselves face to face with the great economies of the far east and america.
The holocaust was our shot at killing christian morality and building our own on its corpse. Also a grand goal, you might not like it but our current state is more about how we deal with failure not about how the man with the flag tried not to fail.

>You have no idea what you are talking about, so you manage to contradict yourself from one line to the next.
Fuck off Herschel.
>so I will repeat: Belligerent nationalism is nationalism.
You can repeat it as many time as you like, it won't make it true. See pic related for the 3 common definitions of Nationalism:
>a synonym for Patriotism
>a movement for the establishment of an independent sovereign state, or desire to see one upheld
>an extreme, belligerent kind of national chauvinism - eg Nazi Germany

What you've done is assumed that the 3rd kind (National Chauvinism) is the only kind of Nationalism. That's ok, it's a common mistake. You're just wrong.

WW1 was a result of competition between the Imperial Powers of Europe. I'm not going to waste any more time on a such an obvious truth.

A Nationalist can certainly also BE Imperialist. No one would deny that. But that doesn't mean that Nationalism and Imperialism are one and the same. One can be Nationalist without being Imperialist.
Democracy doesn't have to be exported to the middle-east by force, yet Imperialists choose to do so. Liberal Democracy and Imperialism are not one and the same. One can be a democrat in favor of Liberalism without wishing to export it.
Socialists in the Soviet Union and China didn't have to export their politics around the world, but they chose to because they were Imperialists. Socialism and Imperialism are not one and the same.

Nationalists in Switzerland, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, the Netherlands and Sweden did not cause WW1 (and by extension 2). The Imperial Powers did. I'll repeat that so you can understand it:
The. Imperial. Powers. Did.

No one would claim that Patriotic sentiment was insignificant in the lead up to either world war. But there were plenty of Patriots in the NATIONS of Norway, Sweden, Denmark, etc... who didn't cause WW1. The Imperial Powers did.

Carry on masturbating with references to authors though, it's amusing.

Attached: Nationalism Definition.png (1288x668, 55K)

What you're doing is promoting cowardice and shifting the blame onto a blanket term of "nationalism". Your insights are nothing new or noteworthy, all they do is promote self doubt and keep us from working together, letting our enemies take further ground.

I have more if your memory still fails yous

Attached: 311.png (1000x1584, 2.56M)

Yes, the f) is what caused the pogroms as Hitler writes, if you understand what you are reading. Economic relations in the middle-ages between Jews and the masses who lived in a barter economy were of course non-existent. The main economic relations were between Jews and the nobility, who constantly had to borrow money to fund their endless wars, skirmishes and lavish lifestyles or to pay back older debts. And when they could not pay back and the interest payments kept accumulating, what better way to settle the debts in your favour than by getting rid of the creditor. And this is also what Hitler says.

Why the jews were then invited back some years later? The reason forced itself. Because even a medieval economy could not function without capital markets and Christians throughout Europe had barred themselves from this profession for religious reasons and made it the exclusive domain of the Jew (with notable exceptions like some of the Italian city states). To blame the Jew for a role without which a society cannot function, and into which the Jew has been forced, requires an incredible torture of common sense.

>What you've done is assumed that the 3rd kind (National Chauvinism) is the only kind of Nationalism.

No. I said that was the dark side of it. A side Europe failed to control. Never did I say it was the only kind of nationalism. I live in a country that has historically benefited a great deal from non-belligerent and constructive nationalism. But this was not the nationalism of 1914.

>WW1 was a result of competition between the Imperial Powers of Europe. I'm not going to waste any more time on a such an obvious truth.

You say it is an "obvious" "truth" because you haven't studied the era. You just assert it and link to wikipedia. An assertion without substance is not an argument. I asked you what books you have read. You haven't mentioned a single one. I mentioned several major works on which I base my claim and I described the content of these works in the short space an image board format allows.

+1, that's an important fact that many on Jow Forums don't accept.
Hitler was the worst that could happen to Nationalism.
Compare America, Canada, Europe before war, and what they are today.

The immigrant influx was an immediate step after creating the UN - which was caused by WWII.

When was the Federal Reserve Act passed?
Stop talking about my country.

>You can repeat it as many time as you like, it won't make it true. See pic related for the 3 common definitions of Nationalism:

It doesn't refute anything of what I has said. Anyone can google "belligerent nationalism" and "World War I" and see that a) I am using terminology common among scholars and historians and b) belligerent nationalism is seen as a major cause of World War I among scholars.

>yes, we're indespensible goy, how else is the monarchy going to afford that new palace during this famine

Attached: 1530897301056.jpg (984x550, 177K)

Wow, Jow Forums unironically btfo by rigorous historical research. I haven't seen an argumentative ass beating this bad in a long time. Stay mad lads.

Attached: 1536862614837.gif (500x260, 1016K)

Op post sounds like something a kike will say. Repeat of sins, with “not jew, not jew” mixed in.

>it was hitlers fault

No. It was the Jews who lied about the holocoaster and the gullible allies who wanted to maintain the image that the enemy they fought was evil for various reasons and interests including Banks run by Jews and Marxist sympathizers in western governments.

>Hitler that caused the degeneracy of the West
Was Hitler too soft on you people?

Based Finn post with true redpill

>era in European history was also the era of peak Jewish involvement in European civilization
>next stop: WW
I say it was jews fault.

Are you a socialist? An anti-capitalist?

>No. I said that was the dark side of it. A side Europe failed to control. Never did I say it was the only kind of nationalism. I live in a country that has historically benefited a great deal from non-belligerent and constructive nationalism.
Np, you quite consistently throughout this thread use the word "Nationalism" to simply mean that 3rd definition. You even flatly said it's the only kind here: >Belligerent nationalism is nationalism
You've have to be dragged kicking and screaming to admit it isn't the only kind. You NOW admit that there are other kinds, some of them benign, some even positive. That's ok, I don't mind winning arguments.

>You just assert it and link to wikipedia
I haven't linked to Wikipedia, Morty. I posted a screenshot of the 3 most common dictionary definitions of the word "Nationalism", and as a result, you've had to change your argument. See above.

Attached: Alan-Partridge-BBC.jpg (1368x1026, 137K)

Are you Jewish or just a cuck?

> I asked you what books you have read. You haven't mentioned a single one.
Pic related is quite good. Have you read it?

Ok, WW1 had nothing at all to do with rivalry and competition between the main expansionist, imperialist powers in Europe: Britain, France, Germany and the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Britain definitely didn't declare war on the Ottoman Empire because it (Britain) was a global Imperial power in competition with the Ottoman Empire (another expansionist power), and drag it's colonies into the fight. And Hitler definitely wasn't an Imperialist (as well as a Nationalist), who wanted to establish a 1000-year Reich over a large chunk of Europe modeled on the Roman EMPIRE, and WW2 was in no way a result of WW1.
It was all just the fault of horrid, one-dimensional "Nationalism" - even though nations like Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Switzerland, the Netherlands etc.. all wanted nothing to do with it, despite being nationalist constructs themselves, and despite having their own patriots (Nationalists), and even though country like Ireland had been dragged into WW1 by the British Empire, then chose to stay out of WW2 PRECISELY BECAUSE they'd become more Nationalist, it's all just Nationalism's fault. Definitely nothing more to it.

We should all just unquestioningly accept the EU's common argument that "Nationalism" is evil, the cause of both world wars, and not notice that the EU is itself an Imperialist project that has and will cause more violent conflict. All European Nations should hand over their Sovereignty at once. You've convinced me.

Attached: 27182891-5743219700_79e1c8c9d9_o.jpg (1319x2091, 197K)

There is a difference in meaning between:

a) Belligerent nationalism is nationalism (in answer to your claim to the contrary).

b) Belligerent nationalism is the only kind of nationalism.

a) means that BN belongs in category N. Nothing more. It doesn't exhaust the category.

You lost the argument completely and had no idea what you were talking about. Read a book or a dozen on the topic. Meme pictures are not your guide to understanding history.

One group of humans learning a lesson means they can teach it to the others more quickly than it took to derive it.

That's how fucking disocvery and the lump sum of human knowledge works.

>belligerent nationalism is seen as a major cause of World War I among scholars.
No one is claiming it wasn't part of the mix. I'm correcting your deliberate attempts to:
>claim that is the only definition/kind of Nationalism
>blame WW1 & 2 entirely or even mostly on it, while ignoring more significant factors - e.g Imperialism, competition between the expansionist, imperialist empires of Europe.

Nope. Kikes would have done this anyway. We would have been in the same spot even sooner. Hitler was trying to stop this.

You are still seeing everything through your ideological lense, even when corrected multiple times. Everyone can verify above that I said the "dark side of" not the only side of nationalism and used the epithet _belligerent_ nationalism. Yet you are fighting a ghost of some EU-type supranationalism. Even when I said that my country has benefited historically from a positive type of nationalism. I am not a friend of what EU has become, and I support the nationalist Finns party here. This doesn't change the fact that the dark side of nationalism, which is still nationalism, a virulent variety of it, was the major, never said only again you are just LYING, cause of Europe's slide to the madness of World War I.

Great, you've been forced to clarify that:
>You mean specifically one type of Nationalism
>Other kinds can be positive or benign
>Nationalists don't have to be Imperialists or Expansionists, any more than Liberal Democrats or Socialists do.
>There were other causes of WW1 besides belligerent national chauvinism.

So how about we agree that it would be better not to do what the EU and the modern Left does which is talk as though Belligerent National Chauvinism is the only definition of Nationalism, and any nation that doesn't want to surrender it's sovereignty of control of it's borders (e.g Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic) are Belligerent National Chauvinists who want to gas the Jews, and so must be punished?

How about actually saying "Belligerent National Chauvinism" when you mean is, rather than simply Nationalism?

As for your larger point about Hitler being largely responsible for ruining Europe, and his actions producing the suicidal guilt that handicaps Europe, I agree entirely. Hitler was a total cunt. He was also, people tend to forget, an Imperialist rather than just a Nationalist.

Probably Jewish.

>The Jew had co-existed in the West for over 2000 years
Come on now this is getting ridiculous. There are so many instances of the exact opposite, almost always the fault of their behavior

>Everyone can verify above that I said the "dark side of"
Only when challenged.
>and used the epithet _belligerent_ nationalism
Again, only when asked to distinguish between the two.
>Yet you are fighting a ghost of some EU-type supranationalism
*EU-type Imperialism, Internationalism, Globalism, and Anti-National Sovereignty
...only because I'm tired of seeing people like you unwittingly do their work for them by shitting on Nationalism without being more nuanced about it (until forced to). See here:

Näytä lippusi vai häpeätkö kotimaatasi?

You might want to look at the level of third world immigration to Europe prior to 1914. The flow was in the other direction from Europe to colonies. The first apprehensions in the literature start appearing after WWI, as in The Rising Tide of Color by Lothrop Stoddard. The peak of Europe came a moment before Europe's Nadir. Truly a moment of the harder you fall.

>You are simply denying documented and well known history, not known by you though
This is projection. You are cherry picking and omitting important historical facts about the actions of Jews in the west.

He's a disingenuous liar with a sharp tongue.

You wrongly identified me for something I was not and persisted with it when corrected and a result saw yourself involved in some sort of political fight, in which you were fighting "for your side" objectivity and facts be damned.

Even if you want to draw lines in the sand and effectively say
>NOT REAL NATIONALISM
>MUH IMPERIALISM
Like socialists and commies, the end result of nationalism would inevitably be war with any competing powers because fundamentally you are asserting that your nation is superior and more deserving of everything than other nations/people/groups.

It may not be immediately, and it might be OK in moderation up until the point of war hawkishness, but nationalism will inevitably tend towards war since competition for the benefit of one's own nation is the utmost priority by definition in nationalist thinking.

And since politics is a game of slippery slopes, it would very much be preferable to avoid modern or nuclear war at this stage, since it would eclipse any other conflict thus far in human history.

And outright lying and misquoting Hitler. He's a shill.

So I take it you are a socialist. Want me to explain to you why credit is indispensable for a functioning society? The 20th century didn't teach this to you?

Your own quotation proved I was right and as I explained it to you, how the masses lived in a barter economy and the main economic relations were with the nobility, who then often got rid of their creditors in pogroms. If you re-read your f) you will notice that Hitler asserts this. Though he speaks of blood and taps so it requires some effort.

The Jews as a whole had a head start on industrial and modern society because they are forced to learn and read Hebrew, giving them the advantage of higher literacy rates much in advance of other populations. This is why they could establish themselves in banking, academia, government, science, and other modern fields of study, because most other populations had high illiteracy rates because of how irrelevant it was to their pre-modern historical occupations.

The fact that they have much influence on the modern world was because they were given that first advantage by their religion. And when people try to blame them for some grand machination, despite other populations clearly being capable of the same duality of good and evil influence, it is literally scapegoating and ignoring the fact that powerful individuals can be evil regardless of religion.

> a socialist caused the degeneracy of the west
no shit sherlock . only embracing liberty and free enterprise can save the west .

Attached: 1516827139273.jpg (255x255, 10K)