/fascist/ - Surf The Kali Yuga

Eco fascism is not the same as being a luddite.

There's a specific issue with machines that compete with humans for living space, rather than being tools for people these machines actually replace people. 
There's an imperative to struggle against these technologies just as one would struggle against a wolf, and wipe wolves out. 
Typically these technologies set out specifically to impersonate a human, most are either some sort of vending machine or a machine which carries out a bodily function. 

There's also an issue at a social level with technology which undermines the biological evolution of mankind, typically reproductive technology which deprives peoples ability to procreate.

Then there are technologies which are more pervasive and remove man from that moral environment, creating a delusion of moral cause and effect. 
Typically these are technologies which give a false perception of nature- and that could be something like cartoons of animals. 
This is significant when the viewer doesn't actually have any primary perception of the thing which is being distorted, and this damages the relationship between man and natural law. 

Then there's regressive conflict over resources, where the weakest people try to compete in the short term by exploiting finite resources or damaging the environment. 
This is a wicked problem because it's hard to stop regressive conflict without ending conflict entirely. 
How do we kill the Bangladeshi who burns plastic for a living without burning plastic ourselves?
This only became an issue when mass migration allowed bugpeople to flee, historically regressive conflict killed the whole society as in Easter island. 

So it's more complicated than being a luddite

Would killing off the non white races resolve the issue?

Techno-optimism would be nice if tech didn't so often merely compensate for human weakness, producing a less fit race over the long term. If the highest standards of physical and mental fitness  are maintained, and relying on gratuitous technology is shamed instead of encouraged, it could work very well.

>>361
bro wtf imagine being this boomer  SHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESH

>>363
No, It wouldn't, the only way to address the issue is to work it out over generations, killing all the non-whites would help or slow it down but not solve it.

To me it's more like techno-realism. Like you said we need it to compete, so might as well use it wisely.

I'm glad my long post upset the name fag. 
This brings me joy, i drink tears

shut_up_jew.jpg
[Hide] (670KB, 2040x2560) Reverse

>>200 (OP) 
Perhaps some technology should be considered ethnocentric. such that that tech is considered the domain of our enemies and only studied to develop countermeasures. I give the example of the psyop so relevant to the current age. The psyop is the domain of the jew, and the jew has been at the forefront of this since the pyramids were built. Population psychology manipulation should be understood so it can be countermanded but never trusted because the technology of lies is rooted in the talmud.

>>361
I really take issue with the wolf analogy. Wolves and apex predators in general are a sign of a functioning ecosystem. Any ecofascist philosophy should incorporate an understanding of the purpose of all animals within the ecosystem not pin any given one as a threat. 
Allowing wolves to proliferate does reduce domestic livestock production marginally, but it also balances the population of other animals such as deer, rabbits, etc. Once those population of prey animals are balanced other animals and flora that were absent from the previously damaged ecosystem start to return as their required food sources are no longer overgrazed. This in turn eventually causes pollinator populations to rise which causes our own agricultural production to rise overall. 
Which is all to say, viewing wolves, or any animal as an enemy to be struggled against both fails to realize our penultimate position as apex predators on this planet, and fails to encourage any understanding of ecology that would help us be good stewards. 
Does that mean that animals can't become overpopulated and cause problems? No, of course not, deer are a good example of that. You know what the solution is? Not years of bad management through human hunting, rather, the introduction of apex predators like wolves that hunt the deer. 
I'm honestly amazed you would dare to use the term "eco" and not understand the basics of a food chain.

xmr_1.jpg
[Hide] (136.6KB, 864x1200) Reverse

xmr_2.png
[Hide] (554.9KB, 640x828) Reverse

xmr_3.png
[Hide] (342.2KB, 1920x1080) Reverse

Use Monero

https://getmonero.org


Useful Links

https://www.monero.how
https://revuo-xmr.com
https://teddit.privacytools.io/r/monerosupport

>>371
We don't climb trees all day, so we have to lift heavy stuff to get strong. Artificially induced struggle and all that. Maybe you could incorporate monkey bars on the way to work? Idk

>>200 (OP) 
The reasonable middle ground is ensuring that technology is always subservient to man (much how the economy should always serve the people) but unfortunately the only way to guarantee this is by using technology against the races that cannot be trusted with it. Certain technologies are especially insidious and attempt to overturn natural law (which often skews in our favor) and undermine natural human incentive structures, examples are gene-editing and AI-generated "art". New technologies become particularly bad when liberal society refuses to violate the sacred idol of personal choice. It must use expensive invasive surgeries to deal with obesity instead of encouraging health, and it must open the Pandora's Box of gene-editing to stop autosomal dominant genetic defects, instead of just prohibiting certain people from reproducing. 

Heidegger wrote A Question Concerning Technology in 1954, which warned that technology inevitably reduces humans to another material resource ("standing reserve") and it undermines intuition and mysticism as pathways to learning about the world. He recommended art and a celebration of humanity as a solution but sadly that is being directly targeted via AI as well. 

tl,dr; Lothrop Stoddard and Terry Davis were right, nigger tech should never have left the exclusive domain of White people

Yuval-Harari.jpg
[Hide] (91.7KB, 900x943) Reverse

>>361
>Eco fascism is not the same as being a luddite.

Came to post this.
Unabomber is NOT an ecofascist, for example.
Fascism has fully embraced the betterment of one's own people by using technological advancement, but without falling as slaves for it like ((( transhumanists ))) preach.
Fascism is not anti-tech in so far as it doesn't go full circle ending up destroying our people (which is the ultimate goal of ((( transhumanists ))), pic very related).

>>1167
>my politics is I want all the good things without any of the bad things

>>1168
Yes.

>>1169
And you think communists are out of touch with reality.

jew_feel.jpg
[Hide] (11.9KB, 234x216) Reverse

>>1168
That's literally what politics should be about, smoothbrain.
Probably being born and raised inside ZOG has made you retarded and you actually believe a correct and balanced management of your own tribe doesn't exist.or is not possible to achieve.
You have been jewed, that is all.

>>1171
>That's literally what politics should be about
Pretending you can achieve anything and ignoring natural laws?

>>1172
>the guys circlejerking on a dead end imageboard are throwing shade about not achieving anything

>>1172
>Pretending you can achieve anything
What? politics is intended to achieve something, yes. Are you just being argumentative for the sake of it or do were you actually going somewhere with this?
>ignoring natural laws
I fail to see how limiting the use of technology while still making use of it for the benefit of the volk is ignoring natural law. Again I am forced to wonder if you're arguing in good faith or just being belligerent. Unlike under ((( capitalism ))) fascism actually considers whether the manufacture of some given consumable is responsible or not, and unlike ((( communism ))) it's not just used to make the oligarchs more powerful while allowing millions of citizens to starve.

>>363
But Fascism/NatSoc is not about killing all others. Instead they both are pro-life ideologies. Hitler wouldn't have had an issue with other ethnic groups or non-whites living peacefully in their own countries.

>>1177
Quit conflating fascism and National Socialism, and second the foundational principle of National Socialism is the survival of ones own race, not the survival of anyone else's, "peaceful" or not, at some point you will conflict with another who is not of your race so long as the others exist, one solution for the end of this threat to our race is Exterminationism and I can tell you that Hitler would gladly kill all the other races since doing so means the survival of our race essentially forever, barring outside of the planet interference of any sort.

>>1175
>Are you just being argumentative for the sake of it or do were you actually going somewhere with this?
If you've forgotten what we're talking about maybe you should retrace your steps.
<my politics is I want all the good things without any of the bad things
>Yes.
Ignoring the limitations of reality doesn't make those limitations go away.

at_cpu.jpg
[Hide] (67.5KB, 538x754) Reverse

>>1178
>let me tell you what Hitler would have done, trust me goy

Come on now.

>>1173
If this is a dead useless instrument, why are you here spreading demoralization?
If what you said were true, you wouldn't be bothered with coming here and spam blackpills.
The mere existence of our "useless circlejerking" community must scare you for some reason.

>>1172
So then how does what he suggests violate natural laws? He was responding in agreement to >>361 which specifically mentioned natural forces that must be respected.

>>1185
>So then how does what he suggests violate natural laws?
Because actions have consequences and resources aren't infinite.
<I want all the good things without any of the bad things
Thinking this makes you as out of touch with reality as any communist.

>>1184
>If this is a dead useless instrument, why are you here spreading demoralization?
Because you fired first?

>>1184
>>1184
Hitler told us all that himself, his plan for Lebensraum for the German Volk would have invariably included extermination of the racial inferiors who live in the Slavic regions while preserving the Nordic/Germanic blood that still remains there. 
Insinuate that Hitler is a jew again, by ridiculing his plan and those who wish to continue his plans and you won't be speaking here for much longer.

>>1178
>kill all the other races since doing so means the survival of our race essentially forever, barring outside of the planet interference of any sort.
You sound a lot like a Zionist. They want to have ethnoglobe and they seek to either enslave or kill all others. There is no reason why you couldn't deport all non-whites to their own countries. Why would some other race (even if it's whites) have the right to land that has been historically inhabited by other races?

>>1194
>>1194
>You sound a lot like a Zionist. 
<muh you're a jew
>They want to have ethnoglobe and they seek to either enslave or kill all others.
No they don't, they want to enslave everyone and turn them into an amalgamation of races just like them, but inferior to them, I want to exterminate all the others so that my races purity and natural superiority is never tarnished again, quite clearly a difference there is no hatred at the core motivation of my goal, there is only love for my people and for Nature, I so love those two things that I hate those who harm them directly or indirectly and wish to permanently solve the problem they represent first to Nature and second to my Race for from Nature comes my love for my Race.
>There is no reason why you couldn't deport all non-whites to their own countries.
Yes there is, first, is the extremely huge waste of resources that would when they would be better utilized as fertilizer for a newly planted forest or feed for pigs on a farm.
>Why would some other race (even if it's whites) have the right to land that has been historically inhabited by other races?
And here you reveal your ultimately leftist framework, nobody has any right to any land, not a single living person, nor any race or group of people, if they can not, or will not, defend it from invaders or conquerors, not even our race, your revealed framework leaves nobody with claim to anything that they haven't lived on as long as this group or that group lived on it longer. We have the right to take whatever we want from anyone for any reason.

As a final note take off the Hitler flag, you besmirch and insult him by even pretending you have any sort of mindset similar to him.

>>1192
>would have invariably included extermination of the racial inferiors who live in the Slavic regions
There is no evidence whatsoever of Hitler calling for this yet you ridicule anyone who has a problem with your exterminationist projection onto him. Continuing the German march east which was going on since the Teutonic Order isn't the same as exterminating the rest of the planet, that's only something jews want to do. Generalplan Ost and the Holohoax were fake, maybe it makes Hitler a cuck in your view but you don't have claim over him.

>>1199
You're non-White. Look, I get that you don't want to die since you respect the White race. The least I can do is advise you: just stay in your own country and hope for the best. Besides, I don't think the Whites will invade your country by the time you die. Also, get off our board. The BO is pro-Ethnoglobe. He would not appreciate your presence here.

>>1199
Where do you get that jews want extermination, they very clearly do not want that, they each want a minimum of 1000 slaves per jew as per the Talmud, which according to the jews themselves(whether accurate or not) is 15.2 million multiply that by 1000, which would be about 15.2 trillion people, they want the extermination of those who are naturally better than they are the ones whom they steal genes from on the regular, the Aryan Race.
The Germans were obsessed, and rightfully so, with purity for the Nordic race and you think they weren't ethnically cleansing the Slavic lands of the racial inferiors within that region? Hitler was going to exterminate Mongol and asiatic sullied Slavs, We see their existence today in Russia, Ukraine, and everywhere else in the Slavic regions. Thats not even mentioning Turkish sullying and more thanks to their subjugation by the Ottomans.

>>1203
Make that 15.2 billion people*

>>1195
Hitler wanted to unite Germans and take back the land that belonged to them. But he didn't want to conquer the world or genocide all other races. Please point the relevant pages from Mein Kampf. If I'm wrong, I am willing to admit that.

>>1205
You are wrong, Mein Kampf isn't very good for getting Hitler's ideas alone or in any pure form, as it was edited by others for consumption by the German public, one reason why David Irving disregrarded it,  Exterminationism was the position of many National Socialists, In Hitler's time as well as after, William Luther Pierce, was a particular champion of such lines of thinking as was David Lane, as such is the natural consequence of the 14 words he purified out of Mein Kampf. 
I warned you about using Hitler as a flag while trying to twist National socialism against itself.

>>1206
>I warned you about using Hitler as a flag while trying to twist National socialism against itself.
You didn't wear a capcode and the rules don't prohibit using flags. I wasn't breaking any rules. You are just banning people for using flags, you faggot. If the moderation on this board is this retarded, this will probably be the last time I will use it.

>Mein Kampf isn't very good for getting Hitler's ideas alone or in any pure form, 
I find it a bit strange that you are referring to post WW2 national socialist groups when we are talking about the historical Third Reich. I'm not saying that these groups aren't national socialist but I think the situation is similar to how christianity has different denominations. They all share the same foundation but the groups also have political differences and other differences that are specific to the group. Much like national socialism and fascism both belong under the third position umbrella, despite being different ideologies. I think there should be a dedicated thread for discussing different third position groups and the differences between them.

>>1207
He just reported you, I banned you, as trying to twist NS against itself is, in my opinion, against Rule Six, No Degeneracy doing so with Hitler's flag is just insulting.

>>1207
>I find it a bit strange that you are referring to post WW2 national socialist groups when we are talking about the historical Third Reich.
Find it strange all you wish, Hitler was shown to have ethnoglobe in mind ultimately through the various table talks, and as a sort of undercurrent even in Mein Kampf because it is the natural logical conclusion of putting Nature's Law at the fore front of the mind, I reference two men probably smarter than either of us but certainly who worshipped Hitler as a man and sought what we now call Ethnoglobe.
>They all share the same foundation but the groups also have political differences and other differences that are specific to the group.
That is not how Natural Law works, It demands of every group the same things, Those who choose to ignore any part of what it demands, are on the wrong path.
 >I think there should be a dedicated thread for discussing different third position groups and the differences between them.
Make one, or look through the catalog to see if an existing thread fits your topic.

>>1209
From Table Talks Hitler gives the impression of wanting White global dominance in the long run, which was well in line with the Madison Grant/Lothropp Stoddard vein of racial thinking that heavily influenced him. That probably looks like British Empire (minus the White savior complex) instead of some fantasy that unga bunga tribespeople in Fiji will need to die to secure European safety. If you have any quotes from Hitler that actually prove he desired the latter, post them.  

>>1203
Messianic rabbinical judiasm is the only ideology I'm familiar with that calls for the entire rest of the world to be enslaved or exterminated. It was not present in Hitler's mindset or even the Aryan one since the violent expansion into central and western Europe 2,000-3,000 years ago.
>The Germans were obsessed, and rightfully so, with purity for the Nordic race and you think they weren't ethnically cleansing the Slavic lands of the racial inferiors within that region?
I readily believe that they were doing it, even if it wasn't some kike propaganda version with gas chambers and so on. Nature is a struggle between races regardless of whether guns or wombs are the weapon. There were SS men who saw themselves as having to take on the task of wiping out kikes for the sake of Hitler's reputation (according to Irving at least). My problem with that anon is that he believes Hitler wanted to ethnically cleanse the entire planet, despite there being a quote of Hitler (I can't find it now) where he says that the Eastern expansion alone would keep them busy for the next few centuries. He declined Mussolini's offer of a German port on the Adriatic for this reason. I couldn't care less what someone's view of ethnoglobe is but I don't like Hitler's intentions being re-written.

I'll just add that the German-Slav conflict was unique in that it went back as far as either group existed, in table talks Hitler is asked about how much the slavs should be educated to which he half-jokingly responds "enough to read road signs to they don't get hit by our cars". He had a contempt for them both as a German and on a personal level. It's a stretch to extend that to the entire planet, especially when Hitler for both pragmatic and ideological reasons gave up Germany's foreign colonies when negotiating with the British and French in the late 1930's. A common theme to Hitler's public and personal statements is that he wanted to quietly build his German Reich once he dealt with the slavs, and there were even important figures like Alfred Rosenberg who was head of cultural policy that advocated for softer treatment of them.

Bump for Futurist interest

Tech can be made to work, it's consumerism and cheap Chinese shit that causes problems.

>>2115
For example, use Linux instead of Windows. However, most of the Linux distros out there are dogshit. I will admit that I am compromising security bc I want to consoom vidya on Linux, but I will stop embarrassing myself now.

Ted_Dead.png
[Hide] (441.9KB, 800x717) Reverse

Ted just died.

>>2225
What do you think about this guy? He himself was an enemy of the fascist worldview: https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/ted-kaczynski-ecofascism-an-aberrant-branch-of-leftism

>>2230
Just one of the cases where you can agree with a guy you ideologically disagree with.

>>805
It is ultimately rooted in the Torah.

1690142930151933.jpg
[Hide] (852.6KB, 3718x2092) Reverse

>>200 (OP) 
I see a problem with modern technology: whenever you like it or not, it will one day disappear.
All modern technology is based on oil, and other fossil fuels. When they run out, we can say goodbye to our modern technology.
Careful planning and consideration could have made it possible for it to last very long, but the present techno-capitalist system is sucking out everything extremely fast to move fat nigger's cars, so much that we can expect a collapse in our lifetimes.
That's technically good news, but when we rebuild afterwards, we won't have much left.

Think about what a lack of oil means: no cars, no plastics, almost no electricity, no heaters, nothing.
We will be set back to the 18th century. Obviously we will still have the knowledge of how to make modern tech, but it will be very difficult practically.

I see only one solution: first, we must achieve ethnoglobe at any costs (Turner Diaries style). Our racial enemies will see no problem in sucking everything dry and dumping the chemical trash in the sea afterwards.
Then, our society will need to change drastically: the globe will be organized in a network of autonomous city-states, and transportation will be handled by trains and other public transportation. Planes and cars will be reserved for military use. 
The citizen will be taught how dangerous technology can be, and how finite and precious the earth's resources are. We will prohibit littering, everything that can be recycled will have to be recycled, and wasting will be a major criminal offense. It will also be necessary for every citizen to know how to survive and thrive in the wilderness, to keep a real contact with Nature.
Plastics and other polluting materials be prohibited, and the technological level of the cities will be very low.
But we will still need the best technology possible. This means that the state will possess, use and manage most of the precious resources: technological advancement will still happen, probably even faster than today, but it won't be mass produced and democratized like it is today. There will be a few "tech cities" that hold most of the big industry and laboratories in which everything will take place. Technology will not be used to make the population softer and more degenerate like it is today. The Spartan lifestyle will be the norm.

Even if we do all that, we will only push back a few centuries (even millennia if we do it right) the inevitable. After that I see only two solutions: going back to a tribal lifestyle, or space exploration (which seems unlikely)

>>3526
You're seeing natural resources as something finite, like a bag full of things that with the time is being emptied, is true that earth has a limited amount of resources, but they are unlimited.

>>3527
>>3526
The anon who responded to you is right. Reliance on fossil fuels is largely a consequence of technological stagnancy caused by the repression of white engineers and inventors under hostile regimes. I don't doubt that, given free rein and a real reason to develop new technology, whites could develop a much more sustainable source of energy. 

Space colonization is also sort of a copout. While I can see while people might be interested in it, we have a perfectly salvageable ecosystem on Earth perfectly capable of supporting us for an unknowable number of years to come, if only we change our approach to utilizing it.

>>3527
>but they are unlimited.
How so? Explain your claim

>>3529
>Reliance on fossil fuels is largely a consequence of technological stagnancy
No, I don't think it is. Every single modern technology today comes directly from the fact that we were able to use fossil fuels to our advantage. The second principle of thermodynamics states that "free energy" is impossible.
If you have concrete examples, I'd love to hear about it, but I'm well-versed in the subject and I fear it won't be possible. Even if we found a way to create free energy, basic building materials like rare earth will be exhausted in no time, and some chemical transformations to produce, for example, stainless steel cannot be reversed to give back the cobalt.

>we have a perfectly salvageable ecosystem on Earth perfectly capable of supporting us for an unknowable number of years to come
That is very true, and I highlight it in my post, but we must use the resources very carefully; they are limited.

>Space colonization is also sort of a copout
For now and for long into the future that's very true, but remember that earth will progressively get colder as its inner currents slow down and will become inhabitable.

>>3539
Fusion is not exactly free energy, but hydrogen is a most common element in the Universe. As for transferrite elements, space mining would be indeed the only option to scale production without exhausting Earth's supply (and massively fucking up environment in the process, Chink-style). 

But, of course, the economic jew makes sure that fusion research progress at a pace that makes snail look a sprinter (ITER's been overdue by - how many - 12 years now?), because it will interfere with both oil profits and "green" energy scam. Which bring us back to the point how without Fascism, our race will not survive.

>>3840
>without Fascism, our race will not survive
It's actually much worse: without "fascism" (I believe that NS is better. Fascism never cared too much about biology and the Laws of Nature, it was merely a political movement, maybe better than the others, but still time-bound), Life itself will not survive.
The jews and the subhuman races will deplete this earth of all life to "save as many lives as possible" and to "live comfortably"

>space mining
>Fusion
These things are interesting, but I don't think we should bet everything on that. 
What we SHOULDN'T DO is think about technology as a way to make life comfortable: if we do that, our race will progressively devolve into a lifeless and incapable subhuman blob, worse even that the Negro. Life should be hard and competitive, not soft and comfortable. That is how the Aryan was created and how he lived prior to modern insanity.
Civilization is something very fragile; it gives tremendous power, but at the same time it softens its creators, resulting in collapse. Only in National Socialism I see the ultimate anwser to this very important problem.