What did he mean by this?
Peter Hitchens
Why didn't you listen, Jow Forums?
strap in for the gig economy lads
>" But godliness with contentment is great gain. For we brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out. And having food and raiment let us be therewith content. But they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition. For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows." 1 Timothy 6:6-10
What annoys me about Hitchens is that the solution to that very problem is national socialism but he refuses to acknowledge it.
He knows there is no democratic way out of this, but he refuses to advocate for an alternative.
He knows what the problem is, but he finds the solutions unpalatable and so he just says that we're fucked.
The lie is that there is no way out of it. The truth is there is a way. It is unpleasant for everyone, and especially those responsible for it, but that doesn't change the fact that an unpleasant time in England and particularly for English Jews is infinitely superior to the loss of England.
The problem is spiritual and the solution is a spiritual one, not an economic system.
What makes you think National Socialism is purely economic. Look at 1930's Germany. That wasn't a spiritual place? No - the reason it's successful is it fuses the necessary functions of society in a way in which it will work again.
Fuck him and his Christian apologism
It should have been him not Chris
>What annoys me about Hitchens is that the solution to that very problem is national socialism but he refuses to acknowledge it.
this, he's such a fucking faggot. He'll moan all day long about how this is the literal worst thing to ever happen but he would scoff at "racism". He truly is a kike.
Fuck le edgy fat Trotskyist man too
The Germany of the 1930s was a fundamentally different place to the Germany of now, and even more different to a US/UK of now.
Exactly. The issue with that though is that the only system actually putting itself forward is Islam. I remember a Catholic saying that the girls of Rotherham should accept some blame, along with their families, for the sinful lives they lived before the grooming, which is all well and good, but how many priests went to Rotherham or Telford?
Hitchens was a complainer. And as such all he did was to put into eloquent words what most people were thinking or knew was happening (all people from his audience I mean). I never heard him talk about solutions, only describing problems.
I'm not saying that bad per se, he would've been a great spokesperson for someone who actually had a plan.
>He truly is a kike.
Unrionically check out his mother's heritage.
To where, PEter? WHERE
Hitchens annoys me
he knows what's going on, but he keeps coating it in nice language
I'm not telling him to march in the street with a tiki torch, but at one point we need to stop sugar coating the solution to the problem
It doesn't matter, as long as the strong, intelligent, and rich, leave. Saying where could result in an ethnic enclave.
He spent his time as a Trot basically wanting to tear down everything Britain stood for, then after they did it, and he "changed sides" he wants anyone who could undo that destruction to branch off and split and leave the ruins he helped create.
Does the UK have a National Socialist party? Or at least a Nationalist party? I know that you Brits tend to have a wider array of party representation in Parliament than we do. We're too locked into the bipartisan fascade here.
I think National Socialism is basically a biblical model - we are supposed to honour our parents, take care of our own people first, have law and order, outlaw usury, require patriotism from industry, be lead from above instead of by the vote of the ignorant masses, three k's for women, etc. But artificially larping as Nazi is stupid and artificial. What we need is a return to traditional values, changing the hearts of the people to want to submit to a better society. This will come from a return to Biblical Christianity and a faithful Church willing to suffer to preach it.
The Church and the Christians that are part of it are as affected by modernity has everything else.
True, they're unfaithful. But God's standards haven't changed and he is still All-powerful.
Sure. National Socialism isn't the NSDAP. Obviously things will look different based on era, culture, etc. But the basics are what you listed.
As based as Peter is, he'll never be as legit as christopher
You're half right. Nationalism when paired with most things creates a strong society. Civic Nationalism is obviously a contradiction of terms.
Christianity is key to living in a civilized society. If you want to live like a barbarian, degenerate and evil then Varg is waiting with his pagan shit our ancestors abandoned for a reason. Likewise, our elites seem to revel in Luciferianism.
Or you can embrace atheism, and live like an insect in Asia.
No. None that is permitted or has a credible leader.
Milquetoast civnat is as extreme as we have and the media and establishment flips their shit about those because they are too "extreme".
Christians have become too based on retention, and not enough on expansion, almost like (going back to what I said about priests not going to Rotherham) they need this suffering to exist to reinforce the people already there, rather that going to these places and telling them that if you go out courting sin then it will come back against you even worse.