>>24526319
See, you're making it about yourself again. This is a common mistake. Maybe read some more Kant, Hume, etc
>My family is working class, but I make a lot more than them because I was the first in my family to go to uni and get a good job. Should I have been excluded just because of who my father was?
Where do I even begin to address this... You're assuming our society, economy, and so on would look the exact same but with no social mobility. This is not how it works.

You know how one "working class" man with one job and an unemployed wife could support a household of 10, buy land, and basically have everything? Yeah, but that's not even beginning to address my argument though. Moreover, those don't mean anything without social cohesion, which is the biggest crisis in the West for the foreseeable 50-100 years. Your "uni" won't matter for shit when there's a predictable death of what this country is and has meant since conception. An unsustainable system is not a good one. But I'm rambling.

>>24494273
>>In the end, the /lit/ antisemites like Ezra Pound were vindicated by history, and proven totally correct.
Total Ezra Pound victory.

>>24493067
>the plebs were given total social freedom and they degenerated into shameless, greedy pieces of shit.
Degenerated? They were always like this. That's quite the Jewish vision of people, thinking you're somehow better. I think that's promoted by the elite to increase dissidence and distrust between the working class. Of course, people are selfish and seek pleasure, since forever.

It's my personal opinion that if you fix the atomized family (by stopping the state from being women's daddies, and not giving taxpayer money to immigrants) along with fixing birth rates and promiscuity by banning birth control, things will naturally sort itself out.

Socialism is anti-natural.

We agree though even if we differ in method.