This is a reply to the most sophisticated alt-right position that I can find, made by Hans-Herman Hoppe:
White is a term created by progressives to attack successful people.
It has no significance in reality, Arabs and Russians are white too.
The libertarian inclinations are a historical accident, there's no genetics involved.
Libertarian developments in Europe where a response to economic pressures, likely created by the plagues.
Gripping on to a group of people because this accident happened to them is doomed to fail.
It's already failing because those pressures disappeared.
Jews are successful because of their higher IQ.
For centuries they where banned from physical labor while Christians and Muslims where banned from banking or other forms of usery.
No wonder the Jews got good at jobs they where forced into and where given a monopoly in.
No wonder they're etno-centric when for many centuries rulers treated them differently based on their religion.
Instead we need to understand what these pressures are.
It has a lot to do with the historical rise and fall of empires.
Almost every empire in human history has collapsed to its own success as the west is doing now.
This process comes from progressivism, which comes from abundance of resources, which comes from capitalism.
So the causal relationship is 1. capitalism -> 2. abundance of resources -> 3. progressivism -> 4. societal collapse.
So we need to cut this chain somewhere to avoid 4. societal collapse.
I want 2. abundance of resources and think the values of progressivism necessarily lead to the final step.
So the only place I see where we can interrupt this is from step 2 to 3.
Since the level of progressivism/conservatism is greatly affected by how someone grows up:
Video:
Book: https://www.amazon.com/Evolutionary-Psychology-Behind-Politics-Conservatism/dp/0982947933/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1514984592&sr=1-1
I think we can do this by raising our children as if there's scarcity of resources.
Which is better for them anyway, because resources are actually scarce, so the progressive lifestyle doesn't work in reality. We can get a preview of how progressives would behave by creating their ideal environment for mice:
http://www.cabinetmagazine.org/issues/42/wiles.php
Trying to protect private property through the state is like trying to put a screw in a piece of wood with a hammer. Government is evil by definition, through such evil means only evil ends can be achieved:
So by definition, the state cannot be the solution to these problems. It's really a demon you won't be able to control. All you can do with it is make it stronger or weaker.
Why are your links messed up?
Sorry about that.
Youtube seems to hide comments with links.
So by default I copy a set of links that are broken up so they're not recognized as links.
Of course there's no reason to do this for Steemit.
I fixed them now.
You have a minor grammatical mistake in the following sentence:
It should be its own instead of it's own.Don't mind that, I'm a nazi on details too.
Congratulations @woutervos!
Your post was mentioned in the Steemit Hit Parade for newcomers in the following category:
I also upvoted your post to increase its reward
If you like my work to promote newcomers and give them more visibility on Steemit, consider to vote for my witness!
Well first world countries like USA know to fight back communism in military and economical, but now they face the hardest side on progresivism as part of the cultural marxism by antonio gramsci, they make the social structure struggle beyond workers and boss, going from black to white, gay against straight, even women against men... cutting the balance of development of a country, this is a existance race against extinction... against oblivion itself. @woutervos
@luisjoeyf
Communism is just one implementation of socialist principles.
I think the USA isn't really able to fight socialism because they're very socialist themselves:
Seems pretty socialist to me.
The current developments are just symptoms of western society becoming more and more progressive.
well USA always bid on several parties, USA vs URSS was very clear, but being a bit conspiranoic the 3 facts you mention could be in order; but USA doesnt work as singular country and have several parties working; republicans could be taken as collectivists in a way, but they are closest to nationalism and liberalism in political ideology; Democrats since the civil war tend to go to the left now having true socialist marxist among the ranks... Obama was accussed of being communist, and maybe he does in the gramcian side, but i cannot call trump communist since he is on the other side.
we cannot fall into ISM by declaring communist some people that make social policies in a country that tend to the other side.