==I’ve been critical of the American founding throughout my career,” Spencer replied. The whole concept of individual rights, he said, was “problematic."==
Later in the interview, D’Souza asked Spencer about the fundamental conservative principle of limited government.
“No individual has a right outside of a collective community. You have rights, not eternally or given by God or by nature,” Spencer said.
Spencer replied: “Ultimately the state gives those rights to you. The state is the source of rights. Not the individual.”
wnd.com/2018/08/see-top-white-nationalist-confess-hes-progressive/ wew a poo in the loo calling out a white man for not being really on the right….everyone knew spencer was a kike puppet but having dinesh call him out is a good turn for getting moar redpilled boomers
He also is against the second amendment because it would stop niggers from owning gun apparently.
Juan Lee
Absolutely degenerate.
He’s never read any political philosophy. The State isn’t the government.
Blake Bell
Why would Spencer even engage with D’Souza? What a fool.
Levi Hernandez
Now you know why he's buddies with the bush family. He is a far right progressive. He's using identity politics to demand the surrender of control to the collectve. i.e. the government. The concept is a completely jewish concept. Collectivism is Marxism. The only difference between marx and spencer is that spencer has a different antithesis to capitalism than marx had, both has the freemason goal of conflict between their utopian system and classic liberal capitalism that will destroy both and birth a global elite dictatorship.
I think Lauren Rose was working for Spencer when she was shooting her videos. I think the reason why they disappeared is because she had a falling out with him.
Xavier Price
That wasn't a photoshop?
Angel Rogers
Collectivism isn't Marxism, fucktard. It's the other way around. Don't ever say you're a NatSoc.
Jaxon Sanchez
Don't mouth off to your betters, boy. I don't give two shits about your natsoc jew larp.
Jacob Martinez
fuck off lolberg spencer is a faggot but you're an even bigger faggot
Ryan Martinez
and fuck the (((right wing))) third position you dumb nigger
Wrong. Rights exist when a significant portion of the politically willful unite in cause and demand they exist. These men ensure they exist by killing those who do not comply. The politically willful do not need to be the state. The united politically willful will frequently however become the state, in order to subjugate others who threaten their interests.
While I don’t disagree, Hitler did invade Russia, and he did have him men leave the Russian women unharmed for a reason.
Up the feed boys, I can see the artifacts apparently.
Bentley James
Sounds like Spencer is pretty much in line with Fascist and National Socialist thought. I'm a bit more towards the free market side of things, but I don't think that there's really anything wrong with what he said. I like most of what he says to be honest.
Easton Taylor
OH LOOK ANOTHER "X poltical celeb is not /ourguy/ post" even though most of these people are 80% or more /ourguy/. REALLY MAKES YOU THINK.
Spencer is absolutely right on "rights". You don't inherent any god given or natural rights by the sake of being born only a mindless fool would believe such nonsense. Individuals form the collective, the collective forms the state, the state forms the government. Individual rights are top down but a government should be built up from bottom up. In other words if you do it right the individual "feeling" of the person coming together with other individuals with the same feeling would form the collective then that collective would form a state to advocate and safeguard those feelings and ensure the government enforces the said feelings.
In a normal society the individual serves the state the state serves the government the government serves the state and the state back down to the individual. But we don't live in a normal society and the closest this was ever applied in recent history was the Third Reich. [Insert Hitler quote on Germans save yourselves for dramatic flair]
Omg don't Dicky Spency know that anyone who disagrees with Liberalism is aktually a lefty commie????????
Connor Mitchell
this is trying pretty hard, I don't believe in having "thought leaders" because they're inevitably literal shills but even if you do… Richard Spencer ? And the other alternative is Ben Shapiro ? AHAHAH
Jonathan Jones
boomer detected
Angel Butler
Totally organic and not a shill attempt.
Easton Kelly
not at all, full kike 1st marxist post but, we always knew about your (((controlled op))) so there is no surprise here. its nice to see your pets publicly outing themselves, you are wakening people to the JQ and doing alll the work for us, thanks
Alexander Jones
>(((this zionist))) is right
Liam Nguyen
It is. Spencer is a faggot. Clearly doesn't believe in natural law or rights and would likely back the "rights based" rubbish that has been destroying individual liberty in Europe and the US for the past twenty years or so. I'm a white lawfag btw so I know this stuff. The State loves being the source of "postiive" rights because it requires its citizens to submit to its authority to retain what should be our natural rights.
Christian Ramirez
...
Isaac Lopez
You faggot shills fool no one. No (you) for (((you)))
Brandon Sanders
And then I forgot not to give you that (you) I need to go to bed.
Matthew Morris
Which is exactly what he said with:
Nathan Bell
PSA: might makes right
Luke Anderson
Who is this fag again? Didnt he get punched in the face talking about his movements symbol, pepe the frog? How is this nigger relevant at all? Why does this deserve a thread? Don't answer that because I don't care. I'd rather discuss the LARP than waste another catalog spot talking about some faggot clutching to his 15 minutes for fucking hours now.
Eli Clark
"no individual has a right outside of a collective community" yes they do usually though the collective hates that someone isnt following their rules on rights and so destroys the individualist. you arent guranteed to abide by socially constructed law but do so because it often gives more benefits than going against it.
the reason why such a thing was separated as inalienable rights was so that each man could have justification to push his version of what rights should be available onto the collective despite the collective maybe deeming their version incorrect.
the way the US constitution and bill of rights was framed gives power to minorities. this power has been abused to destroy the white majority. but were to intended protect individuals from the collective
Brody Price
If rights were Natural or given by God, the state could not take rights away.
No, they don't. Rights don't exist without overwhelming force backing them up. If you're in the woods with trayvon, and you proclaim your god-given right to free speech, and you call him a nigger, what's stopping him from caving your fucking skull in with a rock? Nothing, because without deadly force, and the means to project that force on anyone who threatens your "rights" you have no rights.
Elijah Cook
...
James Morris
he's irrelevant at this point. The day he began categorizing, encapsulating his political beliefs as NatzBol; he alienated most of the people that "thought" he was genuine.
Aaron Myers
There are US citizens that think the USA is a democracy and have no idea what a Republic is, let alone what the difference is between the two. A big fuck you to MSM for blurring the line. Seriously, fuck you, you traitorous pieces of trash. diaf the lot of you
Jaxon Rodriguez
I would just like to remind you guys, the Southwest was never a part of Mexico.
Charles Gomez
(((White Nationalism))) not even once fucking kikes. these labels are ridiculous, especially when they are led by jews and are yet another controlled opposition operation
Andrew Mitchell
That should have long been abundantly clear, what do you think can come out of this label : (((white))). It doesn't even mean anything, a bit like (((judeo-christian))) but less obvious.
is it viable to create a > (((white))). it's just another subversive kike tactic, intended to rob the Caucasian of identity. the Jew has no other playbook. he uses the same tactics throughout history
Easton Hall
He was "outed" by having a Time Magazine article written about him before anyone here knew who he even was. No one legit is put forth by that completely controlled globalist rag. And D'Souza is merely around to muddy the waters by pooing in them and confuse people. Shit OP, Fox News-tier.
Noah Allen
It's impossible to be in your 30s today and a boomer, because the "booming age" was decades earlier. You cannot be in your 30s today and get a part time summer job that buys you a used corvette. You cannot be in your 30s today and walk into any high paying job straight from the street after high school graduation. You cannot be in your 30s today and easily buy land and a house and have a family with about three children, two cars, pets a pool, etc without doing something incredibly exceptional, unlike back then where pretty much anyone had the chance on that. You cannot be in your 30s today and routinely go on vacation without getting into precarious job situations. You cannot be in your 30s today and retire early unless you're doing something exceptional and nonstandard to regular people.
But you can be a language poisoning bastard who tries to muddy the linguistic waters of "boomers" and the devastating effects they had on the current generation, as demonstrated by you.
Jose Ortiz
Everyone gets this shit wrong, you don't have to be a lawyer to understand.
American "individualism" has to do with your god given rights under the LAW of the united states. It has nothing to do with "American founding."
American Individualism is not what people think of individualism as a person, only how the government treats you UNDER THE LAW. American founders were white nationalists who believed in Christianity. They did not want a state religion or religious test to hold office like in Europe, but at that time if you weren't a Christian we were probably at war with you anyway.
Everyone gets this messed up, both Spencer and D'Souza get it wrong which is why this country is so fucked. No one even knows what they are talking about.
Nathaniel Harris
>"I am a white zionist" - Richard "(((👃)))" Spencer
Completely true. You have no rights that you can't secure with force. This isn't controversial unless you're a moron.
Nathaniel Sanders
Fuck off, christcuck. Stop adding in your horseshit to history.
Ryder Butler
You're too dumb to understand what that means. He wants the United States to be a "homeland" for all whites in a similar way to how Zionists want Israel to be a homeland for all Jews. Richard is not supportive of Jewish and Israeli influence on America and he is not supportive of America securing Israels territory or helping them expand.
Carson Perry
Or perhaps he's making fun of all his good goy followers :^)
Leftist statist? More controlled opposition. White nationalism is a kike psyop we don't even neeeed to debate that shit anymore.
Robert Jones
Jealous eurofag detected
Jordan White
No it isn't you retard, the State is the sovereign authority that enforces laws and validates rights, the elites who identified rights were not the State, although the elites do run the State. They are not the same as the State will soon be non White and in direct competition with the rights written exclusively by dead White men. Kiked White state competed before that with rights
Elijah Gomez
Didn't think much of him until his rant about retaking Constantinople. He's ok in my books now, and he didn't say anything to worry about in your OP. Did you think this place was pro-democracy? Democracy is nice, when done by a single ethnicity.
Isaac Clark
This pathetic d&c
Eli Jones
The key word here being "sovereign." If that authority is usurped by a more powerful force, then that new force is de facto sovereign, therefore it is the de facto state. And by enforcing their will through violence, they are imposing law (law simply being the will of the sovereign backed by force or the threat of force).
No, the state grants rights. They do not exist prior to this.
Tyler Davis
Correct.
The State exists to protect rights that naturally are ours from the depredations of outsiders, others, or those within our society who seek to subvert them.
This is one of the problems faced by a lot of us - the final redpill if you will, is that the democracy we have grown up with the belief of being the best form of government to protect our rights only really works in an ethnically homogenous society built on trust. In low-trust brown societies it can't, and doesn't work. In our society, it is becoming less and less effective as our society's homogenity is undermined progressively. The same is true of all the Anglo-Saxon values and institutions that protect liberty such as the trial by jury. It just doesn't work when there are other ethnicities involved.
Most haven't yet faced up to this truth yet because it is extremely unpalatable to them and because it requires mass, fundamental change to our society and possibly extreme violence or world war. Since WWII the West has generally shied away from such action and people will do so until the truth and necessity of action becomes absolutely obvious. Of course, to prevent it being obvious the waters are muddied constantly.
Gavin Rodriguez
False. Rights do not exist naturally. This is a stupid judeo-christian assertion, invented by deranged retard Thomas Aquinas, that is provably false.
Mason Cox
Race superiority is a jewish concept just like multiculturalism.
This thread full of untermensch requires a can of raid
Owen Miller
That's a state, kiddo. Even you admit this.
While any ism is kind of bullshit ultimately, if we deign to talk about our beliefs using normie language, collectivism actually pretty much describes the fundamentals of White nationalism. Whites are a group that has rights as a group. Whites therefore must organize collectively to ensure our collective interests.
How's that working out for you? Do you judge every kike based on his individual contributions to society? Do you assume that every nigger has not been a savage, destructive animal lusting after rape and loot until you have proven otherwise? Mr. Individualist?
You know, the Founding Fathers weren't individualists either. They judged people collectively. That's why they knew that niggers shouldn't be allowed to vote in a White country. That's why they believed that the Indians needed to be removed from White society.
Look, if the word 'collectivism'' scares you, use a different word… or better yet, no words at all. Wordism is one of the most destructive things that our race has adopted. It muddies up the waters and compels otherwise pro-White people to vote and fight for meaningless and dangerous issues because you're sure that you're a "left winger" or a "right winger" It is why so called "right wingers" mindlessly fight for Israhell even though they have no reason to. They just were told that that's the right wing thing to do and that so called "leftists" hate Israel so you should be for it.
