Books Defending Nationalism

[Anonymous No.21963815]

I dont want any /pol/ shit. No Evola or Hitler. Nothing about the Hyperborean spirit or skull measurements. I am looking for books that make actual intelligent arguments in favour of nations existing and maintaining their unique culture and heritage. Books critical of multiculturalism would also be welcome.

[Anonymous No.21963821]

>>21963815
nations only make sense for two reasons: 1) you think decentralization is good, 2) you think races exist. the former is obvious and boring. if you want the latter then you're getting into "/pol/ shit" but go read sailer.

[Anonymous No.21963836]

Burke

[Anonymous No.21963847]

>>21963821
>you think races exist
Ethnicities and distinct people groups certainly do exist. What I mean by /pol/ shit is crude racialism. I dont want books about how blacks are low IQ criminals and therefore should stay out of white countries. These are not really defences of nationalism, they are only justifying why a certain group of people should not be allowed in your country. If we go by this kind of thinking then your people being replaced by those with a higher IQ or level of social responsibility would be a good thing; I do not see this as a very nationalist position.

[Anonymous No.21963851]

>>21963836
Anything in particular you would recommend?

[Anonymous No.21963856]

>>21963847
>If we go by this kind of thinking then your people being replaced by those with a higher IQ or level of social responsibility would be a good thing
oh you're a utilitarian or something, go do acid

[Anonymous No.21963866]

>>21963856
>>If we go by this kind of thinking then your people being replaced by those with a higher IQ or level of social responsibility would be a good thing
I don't think this is a good thing, I am saying that by the logic of racialists it would be, learn how to read.

[Anonymous No.21963889]

>>21963815
Might get shit for this, but there's a chapter in Peter Hitchens' The Abolition of Britain that does a great job of making that argument, OP.

[Anonymous No.21963959]

>>21963815
I'm sure you could find something from the French revolution which fits your bill: They were a good example of a populace that wanted the right to self determination.

In all honesty though, Mein Kampf has a lot of historical context about Germany and why it was necessary for the creation of a single Germanic state. It talked specifically about the various German groups spread throughout the country, and how it was necessary for them to band together in order to be a force against other rivaling nations.

[Anonymous No.21963960]

>DESTROYS NATIONALISM
>DESTROYS COMMUNISM
>DESTROYS CRAPITALISM
>DABS ON ROTHSCHILDS
Psht nothing personal kid. Feudalism or bust.

[Anonymous No.21964024]

>>21963815
The downsides of global integration are becoming more obvious all the time, we reduce the diversity everyone supposedly values so highly and destroy the environment. Small tribes and local cultures are wiped out every day. My own language is endangered.
What the alternatives are is not as obvious, "nationalism" seems to be all old romantic nationalism which has some merit if you accept romantic narratives as useful but this almost inevitably leads you to Hyperborean stuff and doesn't really address the fundamental issue. We can be "nationalist" while outsourcing all manufacturing to Chinese slave labour. Most of the literature seems to be centred around this kind of thinking that doesn't seem to me to solve much.

For me the counter-narrative to globalism comes from biology not politics. Groups of organisms with common interests need borders, semi-arbitrary limits that allow varying degrees of safety vs exploration. Some form of preference for more similar organisms outcompetes having no preference in all simulations and history. The human body evolved because of the same principles that make some form of national body practical.
Basically the important relevant points are too simple, ape together strong, many sticks not break. People like Mussolini can see some of the simple truths but all these people add endless baggage because of politics.
Same goes for charity. The prevailing idea is you should ideally in fact give all money you get to poor Africans. Biology says no, you have to impose practical limits or you dilute everything to nothing. Giving the local homeless man meals is good, a +EV action that might evolve if the situation goes on long enough. An African sending money to a random poor Estonian is not good, it doesn't help anyone, the populations involved are more likely to die out as a result.

[Anonymous No.21964068]

>>21964024
>"nationalism" seems to be all old romantic nationalism which has some merit if you accept romantic narratives as useful but this almost inevitably leads you to Hyperborean stuff and doesn't really address the fundamental issue. We can be "nationalist" while outsourcing all manufacturing to Chinese slave labour. Most of the literature seems to be centred around this kind of thinking that doesn't seem to me to solve much.

Completely agree with this. Genuine nationalism needs to have some level of economic collectivism to actually work. Otherwise, you are just using it as a cheap political paint job to court the favour of those disenfranchised by globalism while selling them out to the same powers under the table. Unfortunately, most "nationalists" in this day and age seem to be this kind.

[Anonymous No.21964225]

>>21964068
A national economic collective would still want to rely on cheap foreign manufacturing. It's the path of least resistance so basically no matter how we frame the politics, if the system is adaptable it will adapt to the situation in roughly the same ways. Any idealism the actors have will end up bending to reality so the supposed commies, fascists and capitalists will become basically the same thing.
This implies a need for something beyond materialism, basically religion, and one that's held very highly, above material wealth. Even though I'm now thinking from a materialistic / biological perspective if you take just a slightly more long term view then people will need some kind of principle to work from in the immediate moment that's not just an appeal to some vague materially better future for people living after you're dead.

The only materialistic appeal for the future we can make is biological, an appeal to your desire to want good things for your family and for life to continue but that's hard to sell in the moment of temptation when you can withdraw a tiny bit of wealth at a great cost for future generations. Knowing everyone else around you would do it makes falling for temptation almost the automatic choice.
With global markets everyone on the planet tends to have the option to take each potentially disastrous deal and the further away from you the consequences are the less you have to worry about. If you attempt to cheat in a small local community you have to remain in you will always feel the consequences.

[Anonymous No.21964486]

>>21964225
Nationalism in a global economy is just fiefdom where you're not allowed to leave whatever plantation you're born into. Can't imagine a worse vision of hell than that.

If you look at most feudal societies they had extremely mixed cities and towns, with weird sub-ethnicities from dramatically different backgrounds coexisting side by side for thousands of years. The reason was that labour was divided by caste, clan, ethnos, or whatever you want to call it. One group of people made up the skilled tailors, another the warriors, another the woodsmen, and this allowed for a harmonious coexistence of racial types.

Now it seems the only racial types which will continue to exist in the next thousand years are merchentile ones: Jews, Armenians, and so on. All others will be absorbed into a faceless mass of undifferentiated labourers, who move where they need to move, work what jobs they can get, and breed with whoever's available if they are permitted the time and money to do so. Make no mistake, our future is a global plantation with no way out, and "nationalism" was just a temporary measure to expedite this process

[Anonymous No.21964541]

>>21963815
durr me need book to tell me Whites have right to exist durr

ISHYGDDT

[Anonymous No.21964565]

>>21964541
>wanting to read something that fleshes out a basic premise is le bad!!

[Anonymous No.21964570]

>>21964541
>thinking anyone deserves life

[Anonymous No.21964739]

>>21963815
Fichte's Addresses to the German Nation

[Femboy4Prez !!QtZ5ahYRiUC No.21964751]

>>21964225
This is just exactly what liberalism has become in the modern age. The politics you view as defunct are simply practicing this in one of two forms; ordiberalism or neoliberalism (austerity liberalism to be more precise).

If you need to hold on to infantile myths about nationalism literally because "other people need it" you're just the bottom of the barrel of these "other people". You conserve for no other reason but conservation itself and take a sugar pill knowing it's a placebo as if knowing its impotence makes you even more high IQ than those who don't.

But I suggest you read the ordoliberals or the neoclassicals.

The EU seems to be right up your alley though so I have no clue what you're bitching about.

[Anonymous No.21964761]

>>21964541
did you even read the post? OP literally said "I dont want any /pol/ shit. No Evola or Hitler. Nothing about the Hyperborean spirit or skull measurements."

[Anonymous No.21964949]

Nationalism is dead. Globalism was always inevitable with information technology. Just embrace it, there's no going back.

[Anonymous No.21965054]

>>21963815
Asking for books defending nationalism is like asking for books defending sin. The word itself is extremely ideologically loaded and therefore not something you should be defining yourself on the basis of, just like real non-christians don't define themselves as "pagans".

But since we live in a liberal age our vocabulary and ways of thinking are unavoidably going to be ideologically loaded in favor of the status quo and against the challengers of the status quo. Before anything else I'd advise you to think about how ideology can be innate to the frameworks in which we think and even the language that we express ourselves in.

[Anonymous No.21965150]

>actual intellectual arguments
give me an example buddy boy. "no evola" nice one bro.

[Anonymous No.21965324]

The concept of nation itself is evil. We should strive for global unity if we hope to ever solve global problems. We seem to tend to globalism, but in reality: we aren't, we tend to something much worse, classism of unprecedented level.

[Anonymous No.21965596]

>>21963815
>I dont want any /pol/ shit. No Evola or Hitler
Mein Kampf is THE book for you; otherwise nationashit cannot be defended and christcuck are just slaves to k**es and subjugated to k**es' toys-- nig**rs.

[Anonymous No.21966300]

>>21965596
H* s*id he d***t wa*t *t r***rd

k**l y**rs**f

[Anonymous No.21966343]

>>21963847
>blacks are low IQ criminals
it's a defense of ETHNIC nationalism, yes. We don't want poorly-behaved, dumb animals dragging our society down. We have no problem with them having their own nations for themselves, but them being thrust into ours is wrong.
>>21964949
Can't we instead destroy things along the way?

[Anonymous No.21966359]

Reflections on the Revolution in Europe: Immigration, Islam, and the West by Christopher Caldwell

[Anonymous No.21966367]

The problem with nationalism is that “national interest” isn’t always synonymous with the Good. If we take seriously the idea that the state should act in the national interest, we end up with the kind of jingoism, genocide, and war-mongering that has unfortunately bespeckled nationalism’s history. This is a necessary development, for it is always in the national interests of a strong nation to conquer, enslave, and kill off weaker nations for resources and lebensraum, thereby strengthening itself. Hitler saw this, so as the nationalist leader of a strong nation he did what his principles led him to.

Nationalism inevitably leads to tribalistic conflict, because it appeals to no higher principle by which nations can come together and negotiate. The “national interest” is different for every nation, and so what’s left is just a test of strength. If the world adopts nationalism, we can say goodbye to civilisation.

Nationalism’s vision of a large centralised state ruling over all of the nation hinders the development of culture and presents a real danger to the people. If you have a bunch of tiny princely states like Germany did in the Holy Roman Empire, you get more competition between the princes. If one of them becomes tyrannical, demands exorbitant taxes, or allows the country to degenerate people can simply drive a few hours to the protection of the neighbour prince. Plus each prince wants to develop the culture of his particular region, so you get good a high level of development throughout the nation; whereas in nationalism everything is centralised in the capital city and so the outer regions suffer as a result.

Under nationalism there is no escape. If the state becomes tyrannical, your only option is to flee to a foreign land, where people might not even want you. In short local government always leads to better results.

[Anonymous No.21966393]

Anti-nationalists frame nationalism as if it were the only or the main cause of war in human history and ignore the many other factors that contribute to war such as religious conflicts, ideology, economics, dispute over resources, geography, etc. They ignore that nationalism can in fact be a force for peace and cooperation, as it can foster mutual respect and understanding among nations that share common values and interests and allow for the most opportunity by encouraging nations to develop self sufficiency and invest in the benefit of their populations. If we had a system of diverse nationalist self sufficient nations that weren't forced to submit to the interests of imperialist globalist powers then there wouldn't be the need for mass migration to the West as the third world states would be able to develop with less interference.

[Anonymous No.21966402]

>>21963815
The origins of nationalism is in the Enlightenment, and in the increasing centralizing power of the state.
I would recommend both history books to understand the origins of the nation state like for example "Renaissance Diplomacy" by Garret Mattingly and "Empires to Nations" by Max Seville. The latter describes the transition on the Americas from empires to the revolutionary movements that spawned independent nations.
For the more theoretical grounding possibly thinkers of the enlightenment like Rousseau.
Another route you could take is to read more cosmopolitan or anti-nationalist thinkers. Liberal/neoliberal thinkers of the 20th century who argue for total unrestricted flow of goods. Reading the opposite view might make you better understand the virtues of the nation, as well as its flaws.

[Anonymous No.21966419]

>>21966393
The medieval wars of Europe were pretty much friendly games. Young lads would get dressed up in fancy uniforms, get admired by the girls, and trot off to a conflict on a pre-established battleground where no civilians were and have a good scrap. There was no conscription, it was purely voluntary, and often the kings would ride around begging disinterested villagers to join their cause. It was only after the French Revolution when the state became synonymous with the nation and conflicts became no longer the king’s personal business (disputes over succession or whatever) but contests over lofty ideas such as “the German Race” or “Liberty” that conscription and total war emerged. Imagine Hiroshima in 1400; it is impossible.

[Anonymous No.21966737]

>>21963847
>What I mean by /pol/ shit is crude racialism
You understand that the mass majority of /pol/ is reactionary, right? They're not racialists, merely racists. I guess that means you misunderstand /pol/. More importantly, that means the majority of what you're wanting to read conflicts with what you want to avoid.
>>21963815
>Hitler
He wrote two books, three if you consider the "unreleased" one. Of this, very little is "/pol/shit" because Hitler actually cared about the state of his country and not just "getting even".
>Evola
He has very little to do with nationalism itself. Nationalism is a means.
>Nothing about the Hyperborean spirit or skull measurements.
The "hyperborean spirit" isn't covered in almost any books, and the ones that do have nothing to do with nationalism. Skull measurements is eugenics, not nationalism.
>books that make actual intelligent arguments in favour of nations existing and maintaining their unique culture and heritage
This would be most of what you consider "/pol/ shit" because this is what they go for, when the "/pol/tard" learns to read. Something to consider is that nationalism is innate, because nationalism is tribalism scaled up. Tribalism is natural. When you realize that the rejection of nature is the foundations of Christianity, Liberalism, and even Marxism, things will become a little more clear to you.

Here's a nice extra suggestion for you: Learn what liberalism, marxism, and "the right" is... because you aren't ready for what you are asking. I wouldn't have inferred this if you hadn't shown your hand.

[Anonymous No.21966746]

>>21963815
Uncle Ho is a nationalist without the /pol/shit.

[Anonymous No.21966757]

How can a defence of Nationalism not get into mystical /pol/ stuff? You have to believe in some metaphysical connection for the 'nation' to exist
>>21966419
>Imagine Hiroshima in 1400; it is impossible.
>what is the Albigensian Crusade
Timur did a little bit of killing too

[Anonymous No.21967748]

>>21964486
>If you look at most feudal societies they had extremely mixed cities and towns
Left wingers talk about how the past was a racist, stiflingly White hellscape and in the next breath say its actually always been racially diverse. The UK was like 99% White before the end of ww2 for example.

[Anonymous No.21967754]

>>21966367
>In short local government always leads to better results.
In theory, but nationalism itself is on the backfoot nowadays, so going to an even smaller scale seems ludicrous.

[Anonymous No.21967844]

>>21966393
>They ignore that nationalism can in fact be a force for peace and cooperation
Spoken like someone who has never lived in a region brimming with nationalist fervor.

[Anonymous No.21967857]

>>21966737
>Hitler actually cared about the state of his country
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag1o3koTLWM

[Anonymous No.21967867]

>>21967857
you can apply this logic to napoleon too
the difference is hitler was under the influence of drugs which negatively affected his thinking

[Anonymous No.21967886]

>>21963815
Fukuyama defends state efforts to build a collective national identity so long as the identity doesn't exclude a subset of citizens. He provides some empirical support that this helps states achieve a high level of development and weather economic storms or conflicts.

G.W.F Hegel is probably the most famous advocate of nationalism in the non-"hurr right makes right," sense. People have badly mangled his philosophy or tried to coopt it for fascism or communism in the past and it is too do justice in brief. But the Philosophy of Right isn't long and one of his more accessible works. Honneth's Freedom's Right has a good description of it but doesn't do the argument for nationalism justice.

But for Hegel the state exists to promote human freedom and the welfare of ALL. He specifically denies the legitimacy of attacking minorities akin to the Holocaust or the Soviet persecution of formerly "wealthy," farmers. Hegel likes free markets a lot BTW, big early Adam Smith fan, he just acknowledges a role for regulation.

His philosophy suggests that international institutions like the EU or AU should exist but a flaw in his system is having the state be the absolute unit of legitimacy. He sees a state as a prerequisite for human freedom (can't be have a free market without laws, aren't free to do any job with no access to education), and people mistake this for totalitarianism by taking things out of context.

It's pretty easy to fit multinationalism into his philosophy, although he has an iffy relationship with Federalism because he wants the highest identity, that of citizen of the state, to trump that of being citizen of a given region in a state.

[Anonymous No.21967948]

>>21963815
your post is contradictory from one sentence to the next
>I am looking for books that make actual intelligent arguments in favour of nations existing and maintaining their unique culture and heritage.
this would imply you want arguments that there are inherent differences between groups which are largely biological and the importance of preserving these differences, when you previously said no /pol/ shit. You can't have it both ways, you are a libtard in denial

[Anonymous No.21967966]

>>21966367
>If you have a bunch of tiny princely states like Germany did in the Holy Roman Empire
Make Germany the Holy Roman Empire again

[Anonymous No.21968057]

i'm starting to feel like i'm the only person here who understands that there's a difference between racial/ethnic nationalism and cultural nationalism.

[Anonymous No.21968077]

Schmitt, Concept of the Political
TS Eliot, Notes Toward a Definition of Culture
James Philips, Heidegger's Volk
Charles Bambach, Heidegger's Roots
Fichte, Addresses to the German Nation (https://counter-currents.com/2023/03/forgotten-roots-of-the-left-part-iii/ try this)

>Books critical of multiculturalism would also be welcome.
Schmitt, The Crisis of Parliamentary Democracy

[Anonymous No.21968085]

A creative lecture of Rousseau could be useful, there are some parts where he explains why a legislator can't hail from another country or people.

[sage No.21968612]

>>21963815
But there is no rational defense of nationalism. Nationalism and patriotism are the lowest form of assigning value to something. If you have literally nothing else in life, you fall back on nationalism.
There’s a reason the overwhelming majority of nationalists look like they survived their own abortion.

[Anonymous No.21968620]

>>21968057
Then you didn't read much of the thread, lad. Either that or you couldn't understand it. Either way, good on you for understanding that there is a difference, but it's mostly leftists and liberals (The real definition, not the latest buzzword meme from american republicans) that don't.

[Anonymous No.21970149]

>>21968057
Culture is downstream from race/ethnicity.

[Anonymous No.21970615]

>>21967748
I'm not a leftist and I don't prescribe to modern racial identities like 'white'.

The point I'm making is that a city like Samarkand had Persian Druiz, Caucasian Jews, Chinese Muslims, and so on all living together for centuries, while maintaining clearly defined ethnic and cultural differences.
The UK is still famous for its class and ethnic distinctions, where the descendents of Roman legions, Norman conquerors, Norse Vikings, and Celtic Druids have all existed side by side for as long as the country has existed.

Nationalism is the blurring of these boundaries within a single state, by presuming a 'national' identity which people have to conform to.

Obviously diluting populations through mass immigration is one way to destroy tribal unities, but nationalism was just what was used prior to modern aviation and communication technology

[Anonymous No.21970642]

It would be rational for one to be nationalist for their own ethnic group as they would in turn benefit due to being part of the ethnic group that the nation state would cater to

[Anonymous No.21970683]

>>21963815
Huntingdon clash

[Anonymous No.21971107]

>>21963815
the expendables is some political science shit i read recently which talked about globalization and the middle class. within the author mentioned trump a lot and painted his nationalistic behaviour in a positive light

[Anonymous No.21971986]

Nationalism is not incompatible with liberalism, socialism, democracy, or human rights. On the contrary it is, in fact, the precondition and safeguard of these very things. Without a strong sense of national identity, there can be no social cohesion, no civic participation, and no common good. A lack of national pride and belonging will cause the society to inevitably descend into a chaotic fragmented state of war, tribalism, and conflict over resources among different groups. These aforementioned systems require a cohesive nation state, culture, structure, unified population and sense of belonging to the nation in the populace in order to be effective. Nationalism is a natural and healthy expression of human identity and a source of pride, solidarity, and strength. It isn't a dirty word, but a celebration of our achievements and traditions and the aspiration to uphold and improve upon them. It's the tradition that has preserved the distinct, diverse societies and civilizations around the world.

[Anonymous No.21971997]

>>21971986
Nationalism is a fake and flimsy construct. It’s not rooted in anything real. Just a tool of the ruling classes who use it to pit the workers against each other and rationalize their imperialism and wars to the masses. Grow the fuck up and take the Trotskyist pill.

[Anonymous No.21972003]

>>21970149
Not really.

[Anonymous No.21972007]

>>21971997
Lol Trotskyism? I can't believe that bunk still continues to attract some of the most deluded souls in our society. Trotskyism is a proven failure, a joke. You arrogant Marxists are a case study of intellectual arrogance, moral bankruptcy, and impotence.

[Anonymous No.21972018]

>>21971997
trotsky was a neurotic communist jew globalist who sympathized with jewish ethno nationalism while undermining european nationalism. one of most vile of all the bolsheviks, the epitome of the stereotypical "jewish bolshevik" subversive rat, deserved the ice pick.

denying the importance of national identity and interest is utopian and idealistic to say the least. revolution is not a simple or easy process, but a complex and risky one that inevitably leads to violence, which makes trotsky's permanent revolution all the more insidious. trotsky had no care in the world for the consequences of his actions, he just wanted to see the goy nations burn down for his ethnosadist fantasies.

[Anonymous No.21972028]

Imagine being a debate bro in 2023 and wasting your time on shit like nationalism vs globalism or reading dusty ass books by some dead German guy. Bro just smoke a doobie and chill the fuck out. Life is too short to be a gay fucking nerd

[Anonymous No.21972041]

>>21972007

Wow, you really know your stuff.

A century of thought, praxis, dialectic and revolutionary action utterly btfo.
Socialism is totally a failure. Unlike glorious capitalism
You know, the system that exploits and oppresses billions of people, that rapes the environment, that sold your future (and destroyed your precious little nation state and lilywhite picket fence Leave it to Beaver suburb), that causes endless wars and crises. Yeah, that’s the real deal. You fascist swine and right wing reactionaries are utter pawns, always being used and manipulated by the capitalists and continuing to be. They use you to get ahead, then discard you when you're no longer useful, and you keep falling for the pattern. Useful fucking idiots. Everything the right says about socialists is projection.

[Anonymous No.21972052]

>>21972028
Thanks for your contribution, dipshit. Bet you're the kind of jingoist cretin that will blindly cheerlead for any American imperialist adventure once you get the go ahead from FOX. Limp-wristed anti-intellectual cuck that will bend over for any foreign dictator the GOP tells you is saving le white race and will cut your taxes 0.2% while cutting Elon's by 80%

[Anonymous No.21972057]

>>21972041
>>21972052
bro you call yourself a "trotskyist" in 2023 . my brother in christ you need to get some gash

[Anonymous No.21972063]

>>21972057
Have you read Trotsky? You do know his work is readily accessible online correct? Identifying with a current of thought proposed by one of the most influential figures in world history and modernity should not be a shock to any educated, reasoned human being. Trotsky simply offered the most coherent worldview for addressing the problems that humanity had faced in his time and that we continue to face today. His critique of nationalism and capitalism remain pertinent and relevant to this discussion. Your iconoclastic, dismissive, non-committal attitude does not excuse your ignorance and anti-intellectualism.

[Anonymous No.21972068]

>>21972057
Note the right's reliance on petty insults and ad hominem rather than engaging with arguments against their dogma. Crass, sick, twisted individuals, as demonstrated not only by their thought, but by their actions.

[Anonymous No.21972070]

>>21972068
are you not doing that right now?

[Anonymous No.21972074]

>>21972070
No. You utter rube. Demonstrating my point. The neutral spectator observing this discussion can clearly see who the winner is.

[Anonymous No.21972126]

>>21967844
Give examples

[Anonymous No.21972130]

>>21972074
its not you

[Anonymous No.21972132]

>>21972074
Says the ad hominem attacker

[Anonymous No.21972150]

>>21972063
My dear friend, I am sorry to tell you, but your arguments have been hilariously naive and unbearably arrogant. You claim to be an enlightened intellectual, a critical thinker, a committed revolutionary representing the global working classes and downtrodden. But in reality you are only a dogmatic ideologue.

[Anonymous No.21972187]

>>21972130
>>21972132
Thank you for the input, reactionaries.

[Anonymous No.21972224]

>>21963815
What you mean by /pol/ shit are uncomfortable truths spouted by people forced into echochambers by "the problem" so their behaviour is more annoying. Read Evola and other shit like that anyway, if you don't like /pol/acks, just ignore them and go off people that publish their writing.

Nationalism is an obvious truth just by looking at world history, accepting the fact races and ethnicities with undeniable and unreconcilable biological, cultural and hisyorical differences exist and you're against the borg taking over everything.

[Anonymous No.21972285]

If you want a defense of white nationalism that is self-aware about the dangers of lapsing into vulgar "racism" in the meme sense, I recommend Greg Johnson's writings, including his White Nationalist Manifesto.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/bSobe0W6iZm5/

https://counter-currents.com/2017/03/white-nationalists-are-not-white-supremacists/

https://counter-currents.com/2016/10/interview-on-white-nationalism-and-the-alt-right/

[Anonymous No.21972289]

>>21963847
>These are not really defences of nationalism
Read Mein Kampf if you want an intelligent argument for nationalism. I can tell by your post that you haven't. If you had, you wouldn't have posted it.

[Anonymous No.21972302]

>>21972289
I would prefer a text or argument that does not invoke anti semitism

[Anonymous No.21972305]

>>21972302
Then just replace Hitler's use of the Jews with "rootless globalist elites and their useful idiots" and it still holds up.

[Anonymous No.21972310]

>>21963815
Ironically the best defense of nationalism was by a Jew, Yoram Hazony.

[Anonymous No.21972329]

do schmitt and heidegger have any writings relevant to this topic?

[Anonymous No.21972342]

>>21972285
White nationalism is inherently regressive. Why should white people be entitled to an exclusivist nation of their own that by design will oppress other racial groups? It makes it all the more immoral they seek to do this in countries that were colonies inhabited by a different racial group indigenously such as South Africa, USA, New Zealand, Australia, Canada, etc

Now one may make the case that white ethnonationalism is perhaps justifiable on a moral grounds when discussing Europe, but is this the case? No, this creates an elitist attitude and classism that perpetuates colonialism, imperialism, wealth inequality, and globalism. The European nations exploit the third world and make their countries uninhabitable, they invade these places and try to integrate them into their empire, and now they want to prevent the immigrants from taking advantage of opportunities to move there and take back some of the wealth extracted from them?

[Anonymous No.21972347]

>>21972342
From the links in the post you are replying to
>As for the idea of whites reigning over other people, I don’t want that. I am a nationalist. I believe in self-determination for all peoples.

[Anonymous No.21972764]

>>21972028
Weed junkies have nothing to say. At least hard drug junkies are hysterical.

[Anonymous No.21972768]

>>21972068
>Crass, sick, twisted individuals
Great materialist analysis.

[Anonymous No.21972864]

>>21972068
Twisted fucking psychopaths

[Anonymous No.21972921]

>>21966367
>The problem with nationalism is that “national interest” isn’t always synonymous with the Good. If we take seriously the idea that the state should act in the national interest, we end up with the kind of jingoism, genocide, and war-mongering that has unfortunately bespeckled nationalism’s history. This is a necessary development, for it is always in the national interests of a strong nation to conquer, enslave, and kill off weaker nations for resources and lebensraum, thereby strengthening itself. Hitler saw this, so as the nationalist leader of a strong nation he did what his principles led him to.
>Nationalism inevitably leads to tribalistic conflict, because it appeals to no higher principle by which nations can come together and negotiate. The “national interest” is different for every nation, and so what’s left is just a test of strength. If the world adopts nationalism, we can say goodbye to civilisation.

Very well put, anon

[Anonymous No.21973017]

>>21972864
nicest person you will ever meet

[Anonymous No.21973770]

>>21972068
Indeed

[Anonymous No.21973801]

Picrel is written by the former immigration minister of Israel. She doesn't think that nationalism is inherently good, but does recognize that it has many advantages

[Anonymous No.21973804]

>>21973801

[Anonymous No.21973942]

>>21966367
Is a world where each man can pick the nation most beneficial to him a good thing? All the corporations in tax havens, all the manufacturing with child slaves, the entire nation instantly becoming refugees in times of war, and so on. I know I don't want that kind of rootlessness for myself either.

[Anonymous No.21973955]

>>21963815
Nationalism is yet another false god of the enlightenment and modernity.
Seek Christ or burn in eternal Hellfire. Your choice. You must stop falling for these ideological phantasms and materialist worldly distractions. We have come to baptize the heathen savages into the Faith that has built our civilization. You will repent and beg for forgiveness for your sins. You will be cleansed and submit to the Holy Truth. There is no nation but the nation under God's leadership.

[Anonymous No.21973975]

>>21972342
What if my country does not and has not exploited the third world and our immigrants are opportunists from countries with no ties or relation to us?

[Anonymous No.21973984]

>>21966746
Using soft and hard power to unite a similarly oppressed people against a single foreign entity like Ho Chih Min did is on a different level compared to supremacist maniacs.

A lot of Chinese-Viets got targeted in his reforms post-war and is why a lot of them fled across the world but still.

[Anonymous No.21974008]

>>21971986
>belonging will cause the society to inevitably descend into a chaotic fragmented state of war, tribalism, and conflict over resources among different groups.

This doesn't apply for people who can have their groupishness desires met by other outlets such as friends, family, local community etc., which is the case for many people in developed countries. Yes they can have a 'national identity', but the degree to which they hold this up compared to other identities is very low.

Reminds me of a hilarious study that found during the African Cup when a country qualiified, its citizens all began heavily identifying with their national identity a whole lot more, but then when they didn't quality, their feelings towards it stayed the same (i.e ethnic group comes first).

[Anonymous No.21974091]

>>21973955
Yes, very good larp. Now please point to that nation on a map. Now, realize that no such nation can be created anymore because global ideology, policy and identity are for natural reasons being made more and more homogenous and static and your values are in stark contrast to our current ones. Understand that that is because of the very ideas you are peddling. Know that this is your fault - you have yourselves murdered any potential for a holy nation.

[Anonymous No.21974111]

>>21974008
>This doesn't apply for people who can have their groupishness desires met by other outlets such as friends, family, local community etc., which is the case for many people in developed countries.
Yes, and this lower level of identity and solidarity is what held formerly self-consciously national states together for a little while after WW2 when nationalism became verboten because the CIA was afraid it would create unruly "rogue states" seeking foreign policy autonomy and thus possible strategic alliances with the USSR.

We can see the empirical results of this in the steady downward trend in social cohesion, moral character, quality of life, etc., since this happened. It turns out that, between the two extremes of radically atomistic individuals and radically self-conscious national identity, the intermediate identities of region, community, friends, family, etc. are NOT ENOUGH to "hold" society in this intermediate zone once one end of the scale (the national or volkisch principle) is removed. Remove one end of the scale, and society slides or melts into the other extreme. We are witnessing the end result of this, but it was inevitable as soon as the national principle was removed. Lots of people not only saw this and wrote about it, they pointed out how very important "liberals" like the Founding Fathers of America also took it to be self-evident.

It may take a while for society to deliquesce into hedonistic individualistic goop dominated by financial forces and the manufacture of consent. And you may have a surprisingly pleasant period where everybody just kind of goes to work, goes home, has barbecues and watches TV. Hegel called these periods the "blank pages of history," and no doubt they exist. But they exist at the EXPENSE of the more energetic activity of the previous period.

All that boomer prosperity people are really unconsciously imagining when they think "why can't we go back to, say, the 1970s, when things just worked? I just want to go to work and come home again, but with a reasonable standard of living!!," they are are not showing their work. They should be saying: "I want to live in a world created by generations who took it for granted that this nation had to be continually served, maintained, and improved, through genuine personal sacrifice, but I don't want to make such sacrifices myself."

Nationalism doesn't need to annihilate individualism. That would just be removing one side of the scale again. Liberalism only worked, the European concept of the dignity and autonomy of the individual in his private life only originated in the first place, because BOTH ends of the spectrum were maintained: nation and person, state and citizen, polis and politeis. Starship Troopers gets it right:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSg6eOmgvW8
Only people willing to make the ultimate sacrifice for their fatherland in times of war deserve to enjoy its fruits in times of peace. "Individuals" are resident aliens, not citizens.

[Anonymous No.21974167]

>>21972342
>using colonization as an excuse for white genocide
Why do you leftists want to kill white people so badly? Seriously.

[Anonymous No.21974179]

>>21971997
>White nationalism is Le bad because wypipo bad!!
Go back to Twitter, you communist cocksucker.

[Anonymous No.21974203]

>>21974167
Ever read Camp of the Saints? You'd find it enlightening.

[Anonymous No.21974293]

>>21972028
ayy fax 1000$

[Anonymous No.21974379]

>>21972028
So fucking tired of twitter anarcho-libertarian contrarianism mentality and twitter obsession with using "folksy" expressions and sounding "silly," it's some kind of self-gelding thing to guarantee that the men taken in by it can't recover from the mincing faggots they had to become to take part in it

[Anonymous No.21974605]

>>21972342
who said anything about white nationalism outside of europe?

[Anonymous No.21974621]

>>21972342
Do you feel this way about nationalism for non white ethnic groups?

[Anonymous No.21974629]

>>21974605
The whites living in those countries who feel that they have a right to maintain imperialist hegemony.
>>21974621
Yes, I am anti nationalist and believe in a global unity and humanism. However, white nationalism is the most concerning as the white nations make up the imperial core and bourgeoise states.

[Anonymous No.21974658]

>>21963815
Try pic related.

[Anonymous No.21974688]

>>21963815
Some of Thomas Sowell’s works might do the job. Some briefer speeches/articles of his where he criticizes unthinking embrace of “multiculturalism” as an ideal (a critique of this hence indirectly supporting nationalism, by exclusion).

http://tsowell.com/spcultur.html

>Those who use the term "cultural diversity" to promote a multiplicity of segregated ethnic enclaves are doing an enormous harm to the people in those enclaves. However they live socially, the people in those enclaves are going to have to compete economically for a livelihood. Even if they were not disadvantaged before, they will be very disadvantaged if their competitors from the general population are free to tap the knowledge, skills, and analytical techniques which Western civilization has drawn from all the other civilizations of the world, while those in the enclaves are restricted to what exists in the subculture immediately around them.

http://tsowell.com/spmultic.html

> You want to see multiculturalism in action? Look at Yugoslavia, at Lebanon, at Sri Lanka, at Northern Ireland, at Azerbaijan, or wherever else group "identity" has been hyped. There is no point in the multiculturalists' saying that this is not what they have in mind. You might as well open the floodgates and then say that you don't mean for people to drown. Once you have opened the floodgates, you can't tell the water where to do.

[Anonymous No.21974734]

Support for at least some degree of coherent nationalism (i.e. against “open borders” or policies practically equivalent to them over years/decades) isn’t just from “racism.” As others in this thread being up, the onus should in fact be on those pushing for “multiculturalism and diversity” as to WHY this is good, and how they plan to bring about their quaint utopian idealism of abolishing all differences between ethnicities and cultures that lead to conflict between them when they’re crammed together (e.g.: Islamic fundamentalism being fundamentally incompatible with a Western liberal or progressive ethos, even).

As well as why we should depreciate the value of labor if not for the benefit of the same “1 percenter capitalists” progressives claim to hate.

Social trust is negatively affected by ethnic diversity, case study in Denmark from 1979 to the present.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2012.00289.x/abstract

Ethnic homogeneity and Protestant traditions positively impact individual and societal levels of social trust.

http://esr.oxfordjournals.org/content/21/4/311.short

In longitudinal perspective, [across European regions], an increase in immigration is related to a decrease in social trust.

http://sf.oxfordjournals.org/content/93/3/1211.abstract

Immigration undermines the moral imperative of those who most favor welfare benefits for the neediest.

http://cos.sagepub.com/content/53/2/120.abstract

The negative effect of community diversity on social cohesion is likely causal.

http://esr.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2015/08/20/esr.jcv081.abstract

In Switzerland, social peace between diverse factions isn’t maintained by integrated coexistence, but rather by strong topographic and political borders that separate groups and allow them autonomy.

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0095660

Our analysis supports the hypothesis that violence between groups can be inhibited by both physical and political boundaries.

http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4939-1705-1_12

Diversity hinders between-group cooperation at both the one-on-one and group levels.

http://spq.sagepub.com/content/78/4/324.short

The best chance for peace in Syria is better borders (intrastate or through the creation of new states) “suited to current geocultural regions”, and tribal autonomy.

http://www.necsi.edu/research/social/syria/syria.pdf

Using data from US states, study finds a negative relationship between ethnic polarization and trust.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1465-7287.2010.00215.x/abstract

Diversity is associated with more White support for nationalist parties, except at the local level where large immigrant populations cut into vote totals for nationalist parties.

http://sf.oxfordjournals.org/content/92/1/249

[Anonymous No.21974740]

>>21974734
In Australia, ethnic diversity lowers social cohesion and increases “hunkering”, providing support for Putnam’s thesis finding the same results in the US.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/juaf.12015/abstract

After controlling for a self-selection bias, study finds that ethnic diversity in English schools reduces trust in same-age people and does not make White British students more inclusive in their attitudes towards immigrants.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049089X14001392

In Germany, residential diversity reduces natives’ trust in neighbors, while it also reduces immigrants’ trust but through a different pathway.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049089X1400074X

Increasing social pluralism (diversity) is correlated with increased chance of collective violence.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/425106?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

[E]thnic heterogeneity [diversity] explains 55% of the variation in the scale of ethnic conflicts, and the results of regression analysis disclose that the same relationship more or less applies to all 187 countries. … [E]thnic nepotism is the common cross-cultural background factor which supports the persistence of ethnic conflicts in the world as long as there are ethnically divided societies.

http://www.scirp.org/reference/ReferencesPapers.aspx?ReferenceID=1251240

Genetic Similarity Theory (GST) could help explain why diverse groups in close proximity increases ethnic conflict and ethnic nepotism.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886912005569

[Anonymous No.21974741]

[Anonymous No.21974747]

>>21974740
>>21974734
Good posts.

>You can see why [in the 1920s] American felt our borders were out of control. [The immigration law passed at the time] stated a preference for Northern Europeans] ... [Restrictions on] Southern Catholics and Jews—this went on to 1964, so all through [World War II] there were incredible restrictions. 1965 comes, we’re reluctant leaders of the world, we have an economic boom, we didn’t have much immigration, and we have a ton of guilt. First, about the Holocaust. [Rep.] Manny Celler was voted in in 1923…he was Jewish, from Manhattan. He was warning about the Holocaust, and everybody was ignoring him. In 1947, he was head of the Judiciary Committee, and he was able to get jurisdiction [over immigration] changed from the Labor Committee. He had control over immigration reform. There was a huge attitude change. Exodus had been published. Israel was popular. The other thing was the civil rights movement. Black soldiers were coming back, and there were Jim Crow laws. Those movements drove the 1965 law. Philip Hart, called the conscience of the Senate, was passionate about civil rights. ... They decided to do away with preferences for work skills, and have preferences for family reunification. That’s pretty unique to immigration law—they gave green cards to extended family members.

>“Manny Celler managed to get immigration into the Judiciary committee,” Orchowski told TAC in an interview. “That changed the whole focus on immigration from a labor thing to a justice [thing].”
>Following the conclusion of the war, Celler worked to liberalize American immigration laws. He helped pass a bill that allowed 339,000 Displaced Persons to come to the United States, including many Jews.
>Over the next few decades, he continued to work to liberalize American immigration laws, pushed by Jews and others who were discriminated against by the current system. That culminated with him writing and passing the INA, which is also known the Hart-Celler Immigration Act of 1965.
http://deborahkalbbooks.blogspot.com/2015/11/q-with-margaret-sands-orchowski.html

See also
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2018/04/05/the-special-jewish-role-in-passage-of-the-1965-immigration-law-a-reply-to-abraham-miller/

[Anonymous No.21974781]

>>21963821
The social identity theory makes a good case for nationalism since smiliar people cooperate more effectively. Different peoples sharing the same system will compete with one another for power at the cost of the whole. Any unity will be very difficult to achieve on grassroots level which benefits the elite class.

[Anonymous No.21974788]

>>21963815
>no Evola or Hitler
read Gentile

[Anonymous No.21974790]

>>21971986
Nationalism is incomparable with liberalism. Nationalism is all about putting the group above all else; liberalism is about putting the individual above all else. This is the main political dichotomy.

[Anonymous No.21974795]

Support for at least some degree of coherent nationalism (i.e. against “open borders” or policies practically equivalent to them over years/decades) isn’t just from “racism.” As others in this thread being up, the onus should in fact be on those pushing for “multiculturalism and diversity” as to WHY this is good, and how they plan to bring about their quaint utopian idealism of abolishing all differences between ethnicities and cultures that lead to conflict between them when they’re crammed together (e.g.: Islamic fundamentalism being fundamentally incompatible with a Western liberal or progressive ethos, even).

As well as why we should depreciate the value of labor if not for the benefit of the same “1 percenter capitalists” progressives claim to hate.

Social trust is negatively affected by ethnic diversity, case study in Denmark from 1979 to the present.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2012.00289.x/abstract

Ethnic homogeneity and Protestant traditions positively impact individual and societal levels of social trust.

http://esr.oxfordjournals.org/content/21/4/311.short

In longitudinal perspective, [across European regions], an increase in immigration is related to a decrease in social trust.

http://sf.oxfordjournals.org/content/93/3/1211.abstract

Immigration undermines the moral imperative of those who most favor welfare benefits for the neediest.

http://cos.sagepub.com/content/53/2/120.abstract

The negative effect of community diversity on social cohesion is likely causal.

http://esr.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2015/08/20/esr.jcv081.abstract

In Switzerland, social peace between diverse factions isn’t maintained by integrated coexistence, but rather by strong topographic and political borders that separate groups and allow them autonomy.

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0095660

Our analysis supports the hypothesis that violence between groups can be inhibited by both physical and political boundaries.

http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4939-1705-1_12

Diversity hinders between-group cooperation at both the one-on-one and group levels.

http://spq.sagepub.com/content/78/4/324.short

The best chance for peace in Syria is better borders (intrastate or through the creation of new states) “suited to current geocultural regions”, and tribal autonomy.

http://www.necsi.edu/research/social/syria/syria.pdf

Using data from US states, study finds a negative relationship between ethnic polarization and trust.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1465-7287.2010.00215.x/abstract

Diversity is associated with more White support for nationalist parties, except at the local level where large immigrant populations cut into vote totals for nationalist parties.

http://sf.oxfordjournals.org/content/92/1/249

[Anonymous No.21974799]

>>21974790
All "classical liberals" from Locke to Rousseau to the founding fathers to the biggest bleeding heart pussies like Mill were nationalists who would never have dreamed of dissolving nation states

Even Marx didn't think nations would just disappear and understood they'd be around for a long long time as natural forms of organization, even after the revolution. Because he understood that people group themselves into ethnic and cultural identities automatically, and these already exist and have a lot of weight in people's lives. Even after a total worldwide communist revolution he didn't actually think this would change except over the long term maybe. Lenin was the same.

"Nationalism" is so primordial that not even Marx and Lenin thought it was disputable.

[Anonymous No.21974814]

>>21974799
>All "classical liberals" from Locke to Rousseau to the founding fathers to the biggest bleeding heart pussies like Mill were nationalists who would never have dreamed of dissolving nation states
No liberal would ever support the group over the individual, otherwise they would not be liberals.

[Anonymous No.21974830]

>>21974814
It's a false dichotomy, they all knew that groups always exist and will always exist. Locke would never dream in a thousand years of not letting the natural formation of the English (not even the British, but the English) continue to exist, or to sacrifice it on the altar of "radical individualism."

Liberals simply believe that within naturally existing ethno-cultural formations, liberalism is the best way to live and govern. You are mistaking some kind of Kojevian Fukuyama dystopian proselytizing "one-world-democracy" with actual liberalism. The German liberal party was called the National Liberal party. Liberals have always been basically "patriotic," until 1945 when neoliberalism started wearing the skin of this authentic classical liberalism and pushing shit like "constitutional nationalism."

[Anonymous No.21974831]

"Finally, perpetually preoccupied with his personality (it is a question of the Aryan warrior) and what relates to it in a direct way, he is not materially patriotic, and does not experience the passion of heaven, from the soil, from the place where he was born, he attaches himself to the beings he has always known, and does so with love and fidelity, but not to things, and he changes province and climate without difficulty. This is one of the keys to the chivalrous character in the Middle Ages and the reason for the indifference with which the Anglo-Saxon of America, while loving his country, easily leaves his native country, and, likewise, sells or exchanges the land he received from his father. Indifferent for the genius of the place, the Arian Germain is also for the nationalities, and only bears them love or hatred according to the relations that these circles inevitable maintain with his person."

[Anonymous No.21974969]

>>21963815
bump

[Anonymous No.21974974]

>>21974781
>smiliar people cooperate more effectively
i would categorize this as "races exist". that other anon seemed to think i was only talking about IQ differences, but social constructs are real things too and the older the more powerful.

[Anonymous No.21975037]

>>21974799
>All "classical liberals" from Locke to Rousseau to the founding fathers to the biggest bleeding heart pussies like Mill were nationalists who would never have dreamed of dissolving nation states
>"Nationalism" is so primordial that not even Marx and Lenin thought it was disputable.
That's completely anachronistic. The nation state, as a concept, only came out about as a result of the French revolution to distinguish the new republic and federate disparate cultures into a single warring faction. Nationalism itself is further refined by revanchism and Barrès in the late 19th C, but before then, English liberals supported the American revolution, generals served in whichever army they could with little regard to 'nation', Louis XVI would have Austrian soldiers massacre the French if it meant keeping his throne and Rousseau praised the Swiss state, not the nation, just as much as the potential Corsican one.

[Anonymous No.21975184]

>>21972003
Its not a coincidence that, say, the Germans developed German culture and the Han developed Chinese culture (although in that case foreign conquerors contributed). Your hollow "rebuttal" means nothing.

[Anonymous No.21975198]

>>21970615
>The point I'm making is that a city like Samarkand
I assumed you were talking about Europe. My mistake.

[Anonymous No.21975209]

>>21975037
This kind of "the nation is a historically contingent concept!!" pilpul is old and stale. Machiavelli despised Spaniards and Frenchmen and wanted an Italian to unify the (famously disunited, lmao Italians are all regionalists and hate eachother lol so much for the nation state!) Italian people in a single state. Englishmen in the 16th and definitely the 17th centuries were fiercely self-conscious of the glorious tradition of Englishness, and defended the "ancient constitution" as their unique heritage, and subordinated the monarchical principle to the popular/republican principle of the English nation. There are limits to the stupid liberal academic game of saying that group-feeling is a completely modern invention and everybody prior to 1789 or whatever made up date was a racemixing enthusiast who didn't care if he was conquered by this or that king. This is true to a point and especially true in some extreme cases, but for the most part it is normal for ethnic groups to be self-conscious of their ethnicity, which is a vague category encompassing both physical phenotype and "culture" in the sense of "how we do things around here." The use of the word nation to designate this is fine, in the same way that the anachronistic use of the word state to designate what was clearly a state-like formation in some past epoch is fine as long as one doesn't reify it in egregiously silly ways.

[Anonymous No.21975225]

>>21975209
Some useful introductions to this line of thought:
https://odysee.com/@RechtesArchiv:9/GregJohnsonANewBeginningHeideggerEthnicNationalism:0

https://counter-currents.com/2023/03/forgotten-roots-of-the-left-part-iii/

[Anonymous No.21975229]

>>21975225
Text version of the video lecture if preferable
https://counter-currents.com/2017/06/heidegger-and-ethnic-nationalism-part-1/
https://counter-currents.com/2017/07/heidegger-and-ethnic-nationalism-part-2/

[Anonymous No.21975265]

>>21971997
>Grow the fuck up
>take the Trotskyist pill
lmao

[Anonymous No.21975736]

>>21974629

[Anonymous No.21975837]

>>21974974
Preference and discrimination based on distinct group traits are genetically hardwired but not limited to genetic traits. They can be anything from religion and how you dress to racial traits like skin colour.

Though of course a people that has a different race and culture will be easier to integrate than a people that has just a different culture.

[Anonymous No.21975842]

That is more difficult to integrate, not easier.

[Anonymous No.21976107]

>>21972063
riddle me this
if internationalism and trotskyism are so superior, why did stalinism end up winning out and the national communism/socialism in one country policy became the model each socialist nation followed in practice

[Anonymous No.21976494]

[Anonymous No.21976497]

>>21976107
Stalinism eventually failed because it failed to achieve a global revolution. Trotsky foresaw the inevitable failure of the socialism in one country idea as he correctly predicted in a global climate surrounded by hostile capitalist nations they would organize boycotts, embargos, coups, wars etc to prevent the develop of socialism

[Anonymous No.21976501]

>>21976107
>stalinism end up winning out
Factually incorrect. Trotskyism became the predominant ideological force within geopolitics for several decades and was a direct cause of the Soviet Union's collapse. I don't know what schizophrenic history book you've been reading, but reducing the conflict to some outdated Russian power struggle is either dishonest or flatly deluded.

[Anonymous No.21977072]

>>21974734
For your collection:
Immigrants Reduce Unionization in the United States
https://www.cato.org/blog/immigrants-reduce-unionization-united-states

[Anonymous No.21977440]

>>21963815
>I am looking for books that make actual intelligent arguments in favour of nations existing and maintaining their unique culture and heritage.
It's funny because most books written in history TAKE THIS FOR GRANTED so there was rarely a need to ever write an explicit defense of it. It's like asking for books on defending the moral viability of respiration through the inhalation of oxygen.

[Anonymous No.21977450]

>>21963847
>I dont want books about how blacks are low IQ criminals and therefore should stay out of white countries. These are not really defences of nationalism
I see, so you want to believe in a fairy tale world where you get all of the good, but don't have to deal with the painful truth of all of the bad.

Might I suggest the fiction department?

[Anonymous No.21977462]

>>21972302
>I'm willfully ignorant and have intentionally NOT read things because of my presuppositions that I know what they're about despite not having ever read them. I am very smart.

There's no helping people like you. You are insane- I mean that literally. I don't mean that as a generic buzzword shitpost/insult. I mean you are actually displaying a detachment from the basic laws of reality and logic. You're adding 2 plus 2 and getting -113. There is a specific psychological term for this: insanity.

[Anonymous No.21977466]

>>21974629
All communists deserve death.