>>511382594
>everyone would compete ruthlessly for land and resources
>Any disillusioned and alienated young man advocating for this is extremely naive because eventually he too will be thrown to the wolves or his country will be bombed as happened with my country.
are you implying this is unique to "Fascism", or that liberalism/marxism "solve" this?
>Fascism is a false promise.
you can't even define it
>Any system that promises you meaning is inherently false. That is what Dostoeovsky realised and much of his writing is about false utopias. It's hard to "debate" a person convinced that a mythical notion of nation, militarism and perpetual conflict will give him meaning and purpose. There are much deeper things at play here for a person to believe such a thing.
ah, youre a retarded libertarian philosemite (see? I can throw big words around too!)
Here is a good definition of my polity:
>I am White
>therefore White interests are my interests
pretty simple, no? rational too?
when I apply for a job, I dont get treated as an "individual", I get treated as a White man; because the Indian (not just an "individual") or nigger (not just an "individual") reviewing my application views himself and myself as such
