I would consider myself to be a liberal in the classical sense, with a strong sense of freedom and liberty, maintained by a cohesive social order and visible community structures. Personal freedom is neither separable from social order nor tolerable without the regular exercise of restraint on the part of individuals and groups.
I find the conservative and reactionary positions to be wanting, with their excessive reliance on solving increasingly complex political and societal issues by abortive efforts to rejuvenate the virtues, and reenact the policies of the past. Furthermore, the progressive positions are similarly guilty of fallacious thinking and shortsightedness by succumbing to Utopian zealotry, at the expense of their own culture and civilization.
Generally speaking, this is the theoretical framework from which I operate under, the ideological skeleton of my other various and particular political beliefs. Feel free to outline yours, and critique mine and others.
Come on you fuckers, I wrote all of that out, let's have some meaningful discussion.
>>79594903
I'm an old fashioned Tory in all aspects however I am more free market than usual
>>79594903
>>79595815
I know the horrible feel of making a well thought thread which has taken much time to write
I'll contribute
I believe the only well functioning society is one that is entirely homogenous. All measures necessary to reach that goal must be taken, even if it requires implementing fascist or nationalist socialist methods.
Once a homogenous society has been created, I will hold libertarian values; all whites in the society may act freely both economically and socially with no government interference, as long as they do not violate the rights of others.
Government should only take care of certain core public tasks such as infrastructure (which the government should strive to delegate to private contractors), military and the enforcement of contracts between individuals.
Regardless of the above, the punishment for being a jew or a muslim should be either death or deportation to a muslim or jewish majority country, provided that said country wishes to take in the perpetrator.
Society is divided into the ruled and the rulers without this balance society falls apart with the ruled wanting to clutch at power they have no idea how to control
>>79599617
I do understand the appeal of traditionalism in certain regards. The preservation of certain cultural traditions is essential to the spiritual, and material well-being of a given society.
>>79599925
Very interesting stuff, and as an abstraction, quite appealing. I do have some questions however. What do you mean exactly by homogeneity? Ethnic, or religious, or sexual, homogeneity? Or perhaps all of the above? Your final sentence seems to imply an Ethnic or Religious solution, but I do wish to clarify.
Furthermore, once the homogeneity of your choosing is achieved, why do you revolt against your predilection towards authoritarian solutions if they have thus far served you well in accomplishing your political aims?Do you believe, as I suspect that the success of a more libertarian inclined society is contingent upon a homogeneous social fabric? If so, why?
>>79594903
i dont even know anymore natural libertarian but love trump to death an authoritarian
who....am i?
>>79600935
These are tumultuous times politically, and I am sure you are not the only one to be swept up by new ideological tides.
Yep yep, another WN pushing for a more homogenous society here. At this point, the amount of non-white immigration trumps up all other issues and pushes me as a single-issue voter (The Finns party). Economically pretty centrist, socially liberal.
Of course most of the posters here probably consider me a "zionist shill" because I don't share their anti-semitic conspiracy theories. And a "globalist shill" because I consider free trade between countries and cultural exchanges to be a positive thing.
Not in any way or sense a "traditionalist", I'm for progress in science and technology and cultural norms and society. And not a "conservative" either.
>>79600800
By homogeneity I first and foremost mean ethnic hemogeneity but also, to some extent, religious homogeneity. However, I don't care if you're a Christian (or what kind of Christian for that matter), Atheist, Buddhist or whatever, if you're a native to the country you live in. However, Judaism and Islam are to religions that only bring forth evil and therefore I believe they must be forbiden. I don't really care about the sexual preferences of my fellow countrymen if they share my ethnic ancestry. Besides, without the interference of the Jew, homosexuality and other unnatural sexual desires will automatically decrease in frequency among the population.
So, to summarize, mostly ethnic homogeneity but to a lesser extent also some religious and sexual homogeneity.
I am from a historically homogenous country with a population that is almost 100 % aryan/north germanic. Our society is founded on the trust between on another and that has been our most crucial asset throughout time; that we are alike, culturally and ethnically, and that we can trust each other.
If you have trust in your society, both among individuals but also trust to the state and government officials, virtually any kind of government can function. So why bother implementing a fascist regime to prevent degeneracy and racemixing if your homogeneous population aren't prone to fall victim to such sins in the first place?
The libertarian ideology is ideal for a homogeneous (white) state because it relies on a natural drive of the individual to strive towards something productive in life. And this is a virtue reserved only for the white race.
>>79594903
Traditionalist Neoreactionary, a monarch should function by the philosophy of Wu Wei and the state ministers should be elected through a process of Imperial Examination which elects them based on merit and values in power. For example, a general should take a very difficult test which examines them based on a process of situations and issues, and a slew of markers should decide whether he's worthy of the position. If he fails during their reign, they should be sacked, but if he achieves hugely, he should be rewarded.
A corruption watch dog should ensure ministers don't betray the values or the nation state, and if any minister were to challenge the monarch's will and the state, he should be publicly executed... This is necessary to ensure the spirit of the nation isn't subverted.
In regard to the economy and way of life for the people, they should be free to pursue what ever they wish. The less the monarch does, the better off the nation is. Social welfare can be applied, but only minimally, lest resources become too abundant, which leads to national decay.. A form of religion or spirituality should guide the populace, and the more homogeneous the beliefs of their people, the better off the people.
The state and monarch serves only one purpose, the preservation of the state from the external. When the external is defined, the internal is solidified and given meaning.
>>79601123
I agree that non-white immigration is certainly a threat to social cohesion, especially when these migrants very rarely share in, or appreciate the underlying precepts that have guided and produced Western Civilization. It is impossible to share a functioning society with people who do not share the same essential, fundamental ideas, but of course, this is rudimentary and unnecessary to repeat. This is my issue with the Progressive Left however, they are so emotionally charged and ideologically hellbent on achieving an impossible utopia they fail to recognize the essential nature of reality. In this misstep, they also undermine the very possibility of producing their supposed utopia by importing en masse, individuals who do not share the same idealistic, egalitarian vision.
>>79594903
I'm a pan-Anarcho Communist non-binary Robespierre Monarchist.
Just kidding. I'm a classical liberal like yourself just like our founding fathers were. Probably more like James Madison than anyone else. I admire Jefferson and Locke's writings as well.
I have come to the conclusion though that these policies which advocate individualism, liberty, etc. cannot exist if we stay on the same road, that being globalism, free movements or people, massive immigration, etc.
Even Hayek said he'd rather live in a liberal dictatorship rather than a tyrannical democracy. I'm not sure the days of classical liberalism can ever come back. American back in the late 18th and early 19th centuries must have been incredible in terms of freedom and liberty.
>>79601911
Bumping for an actual good thread on /pol/ for once.
>>79602779
Whoa, good thread but Im gonna have to sage if you keep posting hideous "females" like that.
>>79594903
i consider myself right, because i m often right while the opposition is wrong
i m always up for debates about any subject and i keep improving my own being for the purpose i have chosen for myself
I believe individuals, left to their own devices will naturally act in their own self interest and will tend to seek cooperation from others as a means to achieve mutually beneficial outcomes.
I believe that the role of any government is to do for the people collectively what they cannot do individually. I believe that in most cases collective needs will naturally be met through a market system based on the tendency towards cooperation outlined above. For other collective needs, a state can provide through funding gained by the collection of voluntarily paid taxes.
I believe this political position is known as minarchism.
>>79601911
>I'm not sure the days of classical liberalism can ever come back.
Don't make me cry anon.
Do your part. Spread the word. Join a think thank, write, podcast, organize meetings. If you're a student check out SFL network. Let's spread the word
>>79601123
http://youtu.be/rDGHZo0CgFQ
Fuck off fin
