Again, how do you propose to achieve such in the face of overwhelming acceptance of self-destructive, oft libertine, ideology on behalf of White people who have been completely stripped of a sense of Volkish duty as the direct consequence of the libertine ideals you promote?
You'll have to forgive me for impudence, but I find myself inclined to suggest that your responses, in each case, demonstrate a simple absence of acknowledgement of the counter-points already-levied in my previous posting against your position. I don't mean to say your position is trash or anything, merely that I don't feel as though you're actually acknowledging the argumentation being presented in terms of the hazards of your chosen position on the issue at hand.
Indeed. However, a Volk that cannot regain control over its destiny and renew itself with each generation being at least as good as the last does not deserve to survive (and will not). A quality Volk will have quality genetics. Genetics forms the foundation of behavior. Culture determines the rest. A quality Volk will have genetics that encourage honor and intelligence. It will have a culture that promotes it likewise. Once a certain threshold of "honorableness" plus "intelligence" is passed, then the Volk will trend towards stability in the maintenance of that honor and intelligence. As such, they will benefit from free speech in both the short and long term. However, such a Volk would need to reject foreign influence and maintain clarity of purpose in upholding their own Volk. The question is how to reach that level of quality. The first step is to reestablish White homelands and remove known hostile, dishonorable cults (such as judaism and marxism). Whites, or at least some White groups, already possess the necessary genetic predisposition towards honor and intelligence to make free speech a net benefit. They merely lack unity and a culture that both emphasizes these traits and cultivates a substantial suspicion of "what they are told" (IE, take what you hear with a grain of salt and think for yourself. This used to be considered "common sense"). Since all forms of abrahamism promote "listen and believe" type thinking, none of them are useful towards this end. Also, none of them are White anyway. A people with sufficient average quality will be able to, most of the time, correctly reject comforting lies and embrace truth, especially if they are part of a culture/ religion that encourages them to do so. So I believe. According to what I have read, they had fairly large problems with corruption. This is one of the central problems with, well, centralization. A quality Volk can reduce corruption, but likely never eliminate it.
Hence Volk Nationalism must be at the core of organization of the White countries of the future. Nationalism first, free speech among the Volk only. Which is genetic. Everything living is genetic. Culture matters, but as a veneer applied upon genetics. Individual choices matter, but are heavily affected by genetics and culture. Those who reject the words/ culture supporting degeneracy and White genocide will form the core of a new Volk. Their genetics of resistance will pass on to their children. If they come to value the survival of their own racial group and reject degeneracy, then they will also tend to have many more children than average, I surmise. Eugenics is always relevant, since genetics is always relevant (to anything involving life). Adversarial is a battle between truth, lies, and belief. Inquisition is simply who holds the gavel. Adversarial has more players and more struggle than the inquisition. With struggle comes possibilities, both good and bad. Better to have the possibility of "good actors" winning the struggle, than to have the near-certainty of nepotistic mafias controlling the gavel forever. Also, position of power attract crooked people with intent to corrupt them. Which is, again, genetic. Hence Volkism plus sensible eugenics. Indeed, but the righteous theoretically have as much voice as the "enemies." Which is better by far than the nepotistic mafias having more or less total control. Also, I disagree with your pessimistic evaluation of "human nature," at least among White people. Also, I will point out that much of the "voice" in modern society is not adhering to any sort of "adversarial system" since only one side has the chance to speak. That is to say, (((certain groups))) control 95+% of the media and use it to "control the narrative." How can people choose the truth if they are never allowed to see or hear it? In other words, we already live in something close to a form of "inquisition" since the media mafia gets to decide what is "true."
Aaron Fisher
I wonder. If the current system in the USA was total "inquisition" then no one could speak out against ZOG at all. It takes multiple things to be a free person. One of them is freedom of speech. There are others, such as right to bear arms and right to own land and property. (although "right to own property" does not necessarily mean "right to own unlimited property" which I oppose. Excess wealth must be taxed, otherwise oligarchic despotism) I don't agree. They are bombarded by propaganda their entire lives. Most are not stupid, just indoctrinated. Furthermore, your view sounds disturbingly close to talmudism. Regardless, I reject any system that seeks to reduce my people to serfs, or treat them as serfs. Principles and worldview are of critical importance, and starting from a position of "most people are serfs" is hardly conducive to the development of a prosperous, positive, and strong society. I believe, anyway. I never claimed to be. I am arguing for a very large degree of free speech, not total free speech. If a person's beliefs are so hostile to the Volk that they form a cult/ creed/ religion that is heavily opposed to the well being of the Volk (such as marxism or judaism) then that person has removed themselves from the Volk. Thus remove them from the homeland of the Volk, since they are no longer of the Volk. Deporting them would usually be sufficient, I imagine. A Volk is more than just genetics. Genetics is the foundation, but culture is a close second. Genetic AND cultural distinctiveness. Furthermore, education is not "free speech." Education is transferring knowledge, instilling civic virtue, and promoting the culture of one's own people (it should be anyway).
There are various theories. One possibility is via the creation of religion(s) that are specifically genetic race-centric in nature for White people. Become a movement, grow in number, acquire land, cultivate self-sufficiency as individuals and as a group, maintain high birth rates, peacefully expand, and eventually acquire sovereignty at some future time. Religion is what people believe. White people need religions that oppose White genocide, oppose foreign influence, and support cultivating greatness among their own people. Perhaps. In a balanced form. Yet I am also a Volkist who vehemently opposes White genocide.
