What’s everyone’s favorite thing about it?
Well, we can do whatever we want, within reason of course. But who does this benefit? If you ask most people, you’ll probably get, “well, everyone. Duh.” But think about how different people are for a minute. Now, imagine every single person in this system going down a path that could potentially interfere with the path of another person. Does it sound beneficial now?
Now factor in that with more resources comes a greater ability to pursue one’s goals. People that normally wouldn’t stand for certain schemes may feel inclined to abandon their values and do one’s bidding because the rewards for doing so are simply too large to resist. There is because of that an inherent divisiveness to this political system. That being the matter of the 1% vs. the 99%, robber barons vs. the working man, rich vs. poor, bourgeoise vs. proletariat, etc. Democracy, capitalism, and free markets, therefore, can all be thought of as synonyms.
The simple ugly truth about democratic societies is that “freedom”, it’s central tenant, necessarily leads to their inhabits falling prey to exploitation. In other words, people can’t be trusted to keep a democracy going. It will not sustain itself. Because someone or some group of dedicated individuals within the 1% will eventually use their resources to reduce the 99% to slavery.
Are monarchic/aristocratic societies any less vulnerable to foreign attacks, invasions, and civil disputes? Of course not. But there is consistency. You may not get what you “want”, but you at least know what you’re going to get most of the time. Monarchs, unlike deciders within the 1% in democracies, genuinely must in fact appeal to “the people”. Because if they don’t, they will be overthrown.
Central deciding figures within democracies, however (mostly financial and international), have no need and are in fact disincentivized from appealing to any honest, hard-working people here in the US. Because those people want what’s reasonable. For them to share. But there comes a point when one has so much money, that on top of getting greedy and changing themselves, everyone’s perception of them changes wildly and they suddenly find a bunch of friends they never knew they had. They get greedy themselves and when you don’t cover this month’s rent for them (cause it’s like “nothing” for you), you suddenly find a bunch of enemies you used to consider friends. You see what’s going on here? It’s an inherently divisive system.
and the Pursuit of “Happiness”
I can prove there’s no free will with pure semantics. Did you choose the last thought you had? If so, how did you do that? Did you think about what thought you wanted to think? If so, what compelled you to think that thought? Did you have to think about thinking about your thoughts to do that? And what compelled you to think that?! Did you think about thinking about thinking about your thoughts? You see how ridiculous this notion is that we “control” our thoughts, emotions, and subsequently—our behavior?! There’s no such thing as an uncaused cause. Everything happens for a reason. To suggest that our every thought and action is made purely out of thin air, based on our authoring is madness.
There is no free will, and by extension zero applicability in democracy and egalitarianism. When you give people the “freedom” to do what they want; they don’t. They take the path of least resistance, paths they end up regretting most of the time, which they wouldn’t have, had the state taken the reigns and made sure they were going down their optimal, objective path.
Another aspect to democracy people just can’t seem to let go of is freedom of speech. What many don’t realize however is that freedom of speech was made to protect unpopular speech. Speech that’s popular doesn’t need protection because everybody engages in it. It’s unpopular speech that could get someone jailed or killed in societies where free speech isn’t a priority. On that note, what’s the most unpopular speech you can think of? What’s the most taboo subject matter out there?
Holocaust revisionism. It’s more reviled than “misogyny, racism, transphobia,” and all this other stuff that upsets the establishment nowadays. Arguably, the single quickest way to become a social pariah nowadays, is by simply asking, “did the Holocaust really happen?” It’s the only genocide that’s illegal to question in certain areas, primarily Germany. But that’s probably just a coincidence, I’m sure. It’s not like anybody resides there that might know anything.
Now, I don’t think it takes a rocket scientist to figure out: things aren’t okay in our society, and the world over for that matter. It’s free speech that allows us to get through these tough times, talk out our differences, and come to conclusions that will benefit us all. But free speech has to be entirely free speech if this is to work, and for that—the unpopular speech (again, Holocaust revisionism, more than ever before) must be paid attention to. It must be acknowledged, fairly debated, and given the thorough, objective analysis it deserves.
The state’s job in fascism is to put everyone both where they want to be and where they are most efficient, without overstepping the boundaries of other people’s positions as I alluded to with democracies earlier. In democracies, we’re left to figure those positions out and get them filled on our own, which doesn’t work because quite frankly we’re not all on the same page.
Think of it as a combination of democracy and monarchy. There’s an election every ten years or so, the person has full dictatorial power, can be impeached, and obviously won’t be up for re-election unless they act in favor of the people that put them in power, right? Makes sense. Why don’t our (((politicians))) do that? Well, simple. We don’t “elect” them. The (((banks))) do, by funding them at the request of the Rothschilds. Even if one source wasn’t providing most of the funding, however, there are still other people that get to vote and do so, mostly to our peril. This is not “democracy”. It’s rape.
What’s Going on Here?
This system was never meant to work or keep us in a cooperative state of union with one another. It’s a system made by people who wanted the world for themselves and simply loosened laws and traditions around the world (since we were so cucked as to let them) to do so.
Demo means people, cracy means system. Democracy, therefore, means, a system by and for the people within the system. Does that strike you as familiar in any way, perhaps in terms of a sixth grade “social studies” lesson? You get true “democracy” from fascism. Why? Because the people of the land decide the fate of the state, not everyone and anyone, as is in the case in multicultural, feminist societies.
Given that different cultures are well—different and that said cultures, their composition, birthrates and all of that change over time in said “societies”, you can kind of think of your typical democratic state, if you imagine the state as a human body, as one that’s on the ground, shaking, trembling, and seizing out because it has absolutely no cohesion and structure, whatsoever. All the wheels of this internationally driven machine turn a different way, with different torques, resistance levels, speeds, and wheel sizes. This is the perfect system by the way for the Jews. Because in a society where race is taboo as subject matter, they are free to monopolize our financial system without us giving them the stink eye, thus compromising essentially all institutions within the nation and bending it towards the will of their people, and if you think they have your interests in mind, you’re dead wrong.
They don’t have interests, culture, food, distinct characteristics, or anything like that. They’re not exactly people, in the way we’ve come to understand them in their civilized, milk-toast form. They’ll tell ya that themselves. Just look at Jew-run Hollywood. Alien movies; non-stop. They consider themselves outsiders from mankind. I’m not saying that to be mean.
Fascism is about making that aforementioned, literal, state body one that’s awake, alert, coherent, and marching towards a goal with clarity, making whatever tweaks necessary in all institutions across the board—to achieve it, to make all those wheels go in the same direction. Very little is done in a “tyrannical” fashion. Think of it as controlled capitalism.
We allow certain things for certain people during certain periods of time and provide incentives through the state, because we know they’ll do what we want them to do. For example, suppose we allow and even provide abortion for black couples, but not white couples, and instead, we provide white couples with state funds to get married, housed, and start families. This creates an environment where blacks who can’t afford to have children and whites slacking on starting families, have a reason to follow the will of the state. It’s consensual.
Is America Really Capitalist?
Communism is often compared to fascism in a horse-shoe theory-esque fashion. While they are functionally similar, communism exhibits one key difference that cripples it. Desire is not a priority. What people want to do, their faith, culture, and their potential desire to leave the country is not a factor and won’t be taken into consideration. All you get for non-compliance is a bullet.
It’s communism that “anti-fascists” are against, yet advocate for at the same time. It’s a topsy-turvy world we live in, folks.