Morning bant

morning bant

Attached: chat_noir_.jpg (894x894, 94K)

what are you doing here? go to fight for your country, faggot

nah I want to stay in bed

no, fight for the revolution

don't let that your country keep been a shithole

Attached: 1543756633950.png (500x239, 263K)

only way to save my country would be to remove niggers and muslims desu

>morning
WHAT!?!?!?!

Attached: ce0dd6c7b8c61d929f48f48ae151e9bd.jpg (750x750, 35K)

based and redpilled

Attached: 1544335368119.jpg (194x259, 12K)

only frenchy latex catbois can defeat macron

Attached: 1537308501800.jpg (720x989, 144K)

that's the shit most homosexual and redpilled that I'd never heard before

Attached: 79f5c3bd6a4112693a39b4e232833924--frog-meme-gym-humor.jpg (236x222, 10K)

>the only way to save liberalism is to attack the symptoms of its own imperialist tendencies

Attached: FB_IMG_1543864702886.jpg (756x599, 81K)

>the symptoms of its own imperialist tendencies
do you really believe that shit

It's not exactly necessary, with a right populism, the world can work fine.

Attached: tenor.gif (220x291, 245K)

does france still receive taxes from former african colonies?

populism is too wibbly wobbly.
most americans can argue about what's REALLY all the livelong day.
you can't have cohesive national identity, it's impossible, and if you try, you get a sequel to dadaism from critics, and it will destabilize

>does france still receive taxes from former african colonies?
kind of

and, naturally, i'm assuming its firms rely on outsourced production in 3rd-world countries, including its former colonies? if yes, then it is definitely imperialist.
better to live in the master country than the slave country, am i right?

first we need to destroy our common enemy

Attached: national-fascism-socialism-authoritarian-nationalist-capitalism-populism-conservatism-libertarianism (500x490, 100K)

Except we don't really "tax" them. It's much more complicated than that. We hold a part of their money in our banks but we're not using it.

>i'm assuming its firms rely on outsourced production in 3rd-world countries, including its former colonies?
We don't support that system but we don't have our word to say. I don't want to let my country die because of what the richest, a very large minority do.

kinda funny, the juxtapositions we produce.

the 1st world hosts all the lands of opportunity until until the 3rd world tries to collect on it by "moving up the social ladder."

i thought that was supposed to be a good thing, you guys.
what happened?
not feeling so confident in your enlightenment heroes anymore?
then you should abandon the enlightenment

>the 1st world hosts all the lands of opportunity
Do you even know why that is?

getting a headstart in industrialization, and establishing a political stranglehold on developing countries to ensure their industrial processes belong to us through compliant proxie states, no matter how unstable?
of course the 3rd world would comply, since it's already taken loans up the ass from the IMF and World Bank?

make no mistake, the united states did this ALL OVER latin america.
latin america is no stranger to the CIA and WHINSEC, and United Fruit

And that's why we should allow millions of immigrants to come into our countries? The economical oligarchy never asked for our permission.

that's where you're gravely mistaken.
the "economical oligarchy" never needed your permission to hyperexploit people in other countries, and why do the exploited need permission to seek better lives when their conditions are economically desolate, courtesy of the oligarchs?
is sharing your life with theirs really that unthinkable?
and it sounds to me like you want actions without consequences, for the rich in particular.
they get to exploit, and you end up pushing back into the sweatshops for them, so they don't have to.
holy shit.
you're a class traitor

>and why do the exploited need permission to seek better lives
they don't I understand why they would want to come here

>is sharing your life with theirs really that unthinkable?
Yes

>and it sounds to me like you want actions without consequences
no, I want to be left alone

You will pay for your terrible deeds

take it from me, dude, latin americans leave us alone.

but either way, the result is the same.
there's honestly no point in burghers forcing 3rd-worlders in roundabout ways into being overworked and underpaid under horrifying material conditions if the workers can just leave.
whether it's for your own reasons or theirs, you are enforcing the will of the bougeoisie, whom you claim to despise so much

>being overworked and underpaid under horrifying material conditions if the workers can just leave
to recreate the same conditions in first world countries
that is the will of the bourgeoisie and I will suffer from it and I only care about my interests

it's funny.
now you're starting to sound like a strasserite.
but no, that's not good enough.
immigration is a symptom of an illness, burghers and their puppet politicians are the cause.
i fear that the only real solution here is your old friend, the guillotine

how do you kill an empire and undo all the problems it causes?
by cutting off its head

>i fear that the only real solution here is your old friend, the guillotine
It's too late anyway it won't stop the shitskin flooding Europe
the day will come when everyone will have to fight to protect his home and family

Because we can't live together in poverty.

so it's ethnic cleansing or bust.

the isolation of one people is no alternative to the liberation of all peoples.

getting rid of the long-distance heirarchies that make their countries so shitty to begin with, in favor of an economy in their own home country would make marginally more attractive to those aleady there, some may also decide to go home.

you are advocating a fool's errand.
your proposal only turns back the clock, it cannot give you a resolution

*in favor of an economy at the exclusive command of the workforce

>getting rid of the long-distance heirarchies that make their countries so shitty to begin with
niggers can't build something worth living in to being with

what did they have before the french and british empires?
the commons.
their "primitive" state is already far more preferable to what they have now, and you're saying they're incapable of ressurecting the commons onto the industrial infrastructure that is currently being used to exploit them?
that's a laugh

>their "primitive" state is already far more preferable to what they have now
the killing and raping between tribes is basically the same before and after we arrived

I'm about to shit myself.

i'm guessing the reason why they haven't stopped since their interactions with our influence is because of alienation.
cultures are usually prone to a lot of challenges and changes if left to their own devices, but because of alienation, they cling to older traditions, as those traditions are about the only thing they have and can't have alienated from them.
basically slave morality on steroids.
even brief synopsis on hegel can help give you some perspective

Before Caesar conquered the Gauls they were killing each other just like the niggers do, the Roman Empire civilised my ancestors and they gladly accepted the benefits of that conquest. just saying

do you have proof?
because based on the records and sites of their ancient civilizations, all the celtics peoples were a little advanced than you give them credit for, and the romans didn't oppress the celts the way we oppress the 3rd world, and the celts were also pretty eager to romanize, which suggests to me that they saw the romans as friends and a very powerful ally, and not just a conqueror, so your argument seems shaky

>all the celtics peoples were a little advanced than you give them credit for
True, they weren't as much savages as the niggers but they were organized in tribes and fighting against each other all the time.

>which suggests to me that they saw the romans as friends and a very powerful ally, and not just a conqueror
Some of the Gauls have been at war with the Romans for a very long time before Caesar put an end to it. Then the Romans brought their knowledge and skills to increase the quality of life of the natives, whiwh were happy to adopt the changes.

are you sure you aren't exaggerating the extent to which they fought each other?
because i'm trying to find sources to corroborate your claim, to no avail.

it seems the romans and greeks observed them fighting against foreign territories, including rome, greece, and germanic tribes.

and rome and greece similarly had their fair share of civil wars.

>op likes miraculous and is a shit right wing at the same time

Cognitive dissonance/20