Desnicarski topik

Dopuna: kud zaboravih Milicu Zavetnicu!

Look what they've done to my thread, Ma...




U svakom slučaju, da kandidujem jedno novo, mlado, desničarsko lice u usponu. Iz suncem okupanog Tenesija...

cuo sam da ima neka trans lepotica koja je nova desnicarska youtube uzdanica... anyone?

Hubert de Montmirail wrote:cuo sam da ima neka trans lepotica koja je nova desnicarska youtube uzdanica... anyone?

evo prilke da zablistam... *prociscuje grlo TA NAAAA

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDmCBKaKOtOrEqgsL4-3C8Q

uf

moracu da preslusam

Moj favorit kad smo kod mladih lepih alt rajt desnicarki
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCla6APLHX6W3FeNLc8PYuvg/videos


kacio sam onaj tresh paranoja conspiricy twit aleksa dzonsa, al mimo toga yt naprimer postaje sve ostriji prema nazi i alt rajt materijalu i skida ga redovno.... nema vise nekih meni omiljenih redneck racist pesmama o crncima 

E da, i ovo je jedan od retkih momenata koji sam zapazio da je izazvao odusevljenje medj altrajtovcima sirom sveta, pored pobede trampa. Ne znam kako se sad razvija situacija, al posle ovog klipa je bilo opste likovanje u stilu kako je konacno pravi muskarac izjebao dosadnu feministkinju i tako je kurcem izveo na pravi put i kako je to univerzalni recept. Da ne idem sad dalje u to kako je alt rajt isprepletan sa tim maskulinizam mra i slicnim pokretima, a i vecini je jasno 

Дисиденте, не спавај...

ЦАРОСТАВНИК је јединствен простор намењен културном и родољубивом дружењу и паметном провођењу времена.

Osmog marta u 19h predavanje Vladislava Dj. i Mihaila A. "Da li su žene diskriminisane u Srbiji?"

Info o njihovim planovima za danas, pa i onim koji nisu javni je već u ponedeljak prosleđen kome treba  
I posle kao disident nije feminstknja

fasovi se hvale kako su "odbranili" tribinu ove debilcine 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/smoke-bomb-protest-halts-altright-speaker-sargon-of-akkad-at-university-2qxghjpwh

Ne znam da li je neki njuznet ali ima sve... i majica za Mišu Watzića.
https://gizmodo.com/white-supremacist-adultery-scandal-ends-in-jilted-neo-n-1823788899/amp

Ladno Korleone!

Sta trazi ova divota na desnicarskom topiku i koja je to smrdusa narusava?

Vrlo lep kanal


https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCT8a7d6S6RJUivBgNRsiYg/videos?disable_polymer=1

Hehe

Uzeo sam da čitam Enocha Powella na temu zdravstva.

Interesantno je kako su svi povezani - jevrejski gang ovih talking head kvazi-analitičara i apologeta ' Intelektualci.
WASP sa istoka kao i kalifornijski libertarijanci i tehno-utopisti, venture kapitla -Biznis.

Lošija strana su američki "gubitnici tranzicije" koji glasaju za Trampa, koji kao ekstremno krilo imaju naciste - Plebs i Nacisti

Povezuje ih organizaciono i ideološki GOP.

Intelektualci - Biznis - GOP - Plebs - Nacisti.

Počneš od Samuila Harisa dođeš do Ričarda Spensera, a sve preko religiozne desnice.

There is a better way. The most effective and honorable way out of the dilemma we face is to embrace something like nationalism as an economic program. At the end of the eighteenth century, the French ­ancien régimepaid the ultimate price for failing to mend its ways. Had nineteenth-century Britain not adjusted the balance of power and interests between landed lords, commercial magnates, and the growing urban working class, a similar fate would have awaited it. America’s fundamental political choice now is between mild nationalism, resurgent socialism, or suicide by liberalism, whether of the libertarian or palliative sort. That being the case, how would the nationalist alternative work?

It would begin by rejecting propaganda about the end of the export economy. World population is still growing, and growing wealthier, which means there are more people around the world increasingly capable of buying goods made in America. We sacrificed some of our competitive advantage after World War II for the sake of Cold War strategy, and we were right to do so. But now the time has come to compete to the utmost, at once politically and economically, with our rivals, above all China. That means driving bargains to open markets for our goods while permitting access to our markets—still the most desirable in the world—on terms favorable to our citizens in full, in their capacity as producers, not just as consumers. The argument that the loss of manufacturing jobs to technology excuses the extinction of manufacturing employment is not an argument at all. What follows is that we ought to minimize the loss of employment due to every factor not technologically inevitable, such as ill-conceived trade deals. Tariffs are not an end in themselves, of course: They are a defensive measure and a source of leverage.

President Trump’s instincts are correct about immigration as well: It is in need of reform that puts citizens first, with emphasis on supporting higher wages for workers. Less low-skill immigration puts upward pressure on wages. And what if there just aren’t enough American workers to fill all the jobs? That’s good, too, because, other things being equal, it encourages larger family size. When parents see opportunities for their children in a world in which more labor is needed, they have confidence to have more children. This is why populations everywhere boom at the onset of an industrial revolution, and it’s a reason why frontier settler populations so often have such high rates of family formation. Get employment growing again for Americans who are not already on the top of the heap, and their families can grow again, too.

There’s an argument to be made for shifting policy preference from low-skill immigration to high-skill immigration, not only so that the country receives more economic value per immigrant but also to put competitive pressure on the professional elite. The more the elite feels the same pressures as the working class—from technology and immigration—the more its attitude toward patriotism may improve. Naturalization of high-skilled immigrants is preferable to the present H-1B visa program, which favors employers over native and immigrant workers alike by putting downward wage pressure on natives and making temporary immigrants effectively indentured to their employers.

The idea that economic nationalism is not compatible with free-market economics is absurd. The history of America from the founding to the New Deal belies the idea that nationalist economics is bad for business or growth. Its virtue is that it is good for labor and political stability as well. From growth, a contented middle class, and moderate political culture flow a strong country and stronger families and citizens. In the early decades of the twenty-first century, when nations and supranational institutions are in turmoil, those benefits are of existential significance.

The ideal of Jefferson’s agrarian America (as distinct from its too often plantation-based reality) was a nation of virtuous yeomanry—small, independent farmers capable of providing for their families themselves. Abraham Lincoln’s vision was of a country in which working men, not only farmers, could improve their standards of life. In the twentieth century, the American dream became a thing to which every salaryman could aspire: a good job; enough money to buy a house, start a family, and retire; and the chance to watch one’s children rise to a higher station. In the twenty-first century, that dream has given way to delirium—feverish uncertainty about whether in midlife one will have to become an Amazon deliveryman or a Walmart greeter, and anxiety about whether one’s children will be tech-company winners or endlessly indebted gig workers.

We need to accept the responsibilities of leadership. That means governing in the century in which we actually live rather than the one shaped by our political heroes. After the fall of the Soviet Union, the world began to change, and our country with it. Those changes have accelerated and are now threatening to tear us apart. The way forward requires ­refocusing on the American citizen as the basic unit of the economy. This is the essence of a nationalist political economy, which we very much need if our country’s tradition of personal independence and limited government is to endure, a tradition in which government’s primary economic role is not to provide welfare but to safeguard the conditions that make productive work possible. 

https://www.firstthings.com/article/2019/03/a-new-conservative-agenda?fbclid=IwAR3PX0ExTZJ1hoDft6NGTDMa5occYsh_I89KVhbx8n4qcn5Nq1Fxo2c-zA4


Isečak dosta opširnog manifesta trampizma/novog republikanizma.

U stvari kopiraju drzavni kapitalizam iz Kine, Japana, Koreje...samo sto oni nisu to.

Pa Zuperu, ako ti je zaključak iz teksta

This is the essence of a nationalist political economy, which we very much need if our country’s tradition of personal independence and limited government is to endure, a tradition in which government’s primary economic role is not to provide welfare but to safeguard the conditions that make productive work possible.

da je to kopiranje "državnog kapitalizma iz Kine, Japana, Koreje", treba da se malo udubiš. Upravo je suprotno.

Scott McNealy, nekadašnji CEO Sun Microsystems, zakleti republikanac, protivnik bilo kakvog uplitanja  države u život pojedinca, zakleti pobornik John McCain-a kada se kandidovao za predsednika US, izjavio je koju ulogu država sme da ima:

Odbrana
Spoljna politika
Red i mir

I ništa više. Sve ostalo, je stvar pojedinca. Socijalno, zdravstveno, penzijsko, stanovanje, porodiljsko, ništa da država nema sa time.

Zaključak članka je upravo to, ne znam odakle ti kopiranje Kine, Japana i Koreje.

Tarife, pomoc domacoj privredi kroz poreske olaksice, subvencije...
Uostalom, SAD su se razvile uz pomoc drzavnog kapitalizma nakon Gradjanskog rata.