I'm not from here. Hate it, dismiss it, ignore it, but here's a thought:

I'm not from here. Hate it, dismiss it, ignore it, but here's a thought:
Nationalism is the first step towards globalism.
Think of Italy, or Germany, or China. Similar things are true for most nations (except settled ones like America and Canada) but these are the clearest. Nationalism has created through state force
1. an idea of a single people where there really is, or used to be, several peoples with different cultures
2. a single standard language where there really is, or used to be, several dialects or languages - in the Chinese case often mutually unintelligible ones, and
3. a single country where there used to be several different countries (there being a country called, say, Italy is confusingly recent).
The nationalists unified these different peoples under one government, made them mix, suppressed their unique cultures and languages, and crafted for them a new identity - all of a sudden Sicilians and Lombardians are ever more meaningless distinctions in a new constructed people called 'Italians'. Within this new creation, people aren't aware of their origins, and whatever little they know, they are considered cute details. Within this new creation, Frisians don't know or care whether they are ruled over by Bavarians, they both are after all this thing called 'Germans'. All of this assimilation is of course done in the name of having a more powerful nation. Indeed, having a big strong 'China' instead of a nation of Hakkas, a nation of Yues, a nation of Mins etc. is greater.
It doesn't then take a genius to ponder whether the Portuguese, French and Romanians are of the same 'nation' (or the Scottish, Norwegians and Germans) - their languages are of the same origin after all. And once that is granted, certainly all speakers of Indo-European languages belong together. And all humans have a single origin ultimately.
It may not be the case for all 'nations' that they used to be several countries, but we all know of different 'tribes' our 'people' was crafted from even if we aren't Italian, German or Chinese. And in some sense, these things are even more true for the USA or Canada, where a nation was conjured out of nowhere for a mixture of peoples.
tl;dr:
Standard languages and nationalities have been forged by central authorities. It's no mystery where the idea of globalism comes from.

Attached: palm world.png (1000x1000, 214.08K)

Wrong on so many levels

Just like how peace is the first step to war.
Or like how Christianity is the first step to atheism.

So do you believe that Frenchmen of France were sufficiently different in language, culture, and heritage that there should have been an independent Centre and Bourgogene?
Are Italians not similar in language, culture, and heritage? Do Poles not share a common culture heritage, and language?

Mutually uninteligeable language groups tend not to produce nation-states. China is an Empire and the communists are waging ideological warfare against the people. That's not a nation, that's a state.

Nations are countries that reflect the People that live there. There is no better form of state.

Also, this idea of yours that the Italian people did not long dream of uniting is ridiculous. Study the unification of Italy and you will see how this was a People's movement to unite. Italians dreamed of uniting even back during the days of Machiavelli.

Sage not because I disagree with you but because you didn't bother to research your one example. Why, user? Why? History is the most interesting subject on earth.

...

Travelling east is travelling west. Nationalism is the only bulwark against globalism because the aim of globalism is to destroy the nations and create a globalised world. Globalism can't exist along with nations. It requires their destruction.

You are thinking of small scale pan nationalism. Just because it's labelled nationalism does not mean it is actually nationalism. What you are referring to cannot be actual nationalism by definition. A nation by definition is just a group of closely related people. For example, Cornwall, Vienna, etc.

Instead of relying on the ambiguity of terminology, nail down your definitions and present your case. You are right except for the fact that what you are calling nationalism is not actual nationalism by definition. If you're going to go that route, you may as well call male transexuals women because that's what others call them.

I'll add, pan nationalism is imperialism. The rest stands.

Now this is some truly BIG brain centrism.

Wisten lol, Earthwings, for the nationstate is the harbinger of one whirled government!

Lol are you implying president kushner is a nationalist?

Voice of reason

Stopped reading there, and opinion discarded. Not even meriting of discussion. Go on back to where ever you came from, you're not interesting.

Attached: opiniondiscardedlotgh.jpg (800x800, 159.99K)

Fuck off you stupid retarded kike

Reported for pump and dump faggotory

/thread

Globalism as in "global cooperation with healthy, peaceful and non-jewed nations" is possible but it is fundamentally different from current ZWG (Zionist World Government).

Fuck off with your blog, cunt. No one gives a fuck about your yeast infection.

You don't say…


Were you on the toilet? Miss your meds? Have an epic case of autism? Either way, don't come back faggot.

You are grossly committing a false dichotomy and should be gassed and then set on fire. Capitalism is not nationalism
Sage

The man presents a good point.

If you're forced to believe that everyone in America is an equal American, then you believe that all these disparate races are equal just because they happen to live in the same country. A white man in America being equal to a black man in America means the black man is always equal even if he's NOT in America.

Have you ever wondered what would happen if, by some happenstance, America just took over the entire world and formed a global Superstate called (I dunno) the United States of The World? They certainly wouldn't bother genociding everyone outside of America just to fill it with Americans. All that would change is that the entire world would end up united under one banner.

Which is globalism.

Now, I know that's not what anyone here wants, but it's what is GOING TO HAPPEN, whether you like it or not.

That’s like saying the perfect ideal vision of what America is supposed to be historically versus something akin to the USSR. Things surrounding this term globalism surly happen, but it’s the premices and the incentives that make stark contrasts. Polite sage because you tried.

good post. umbrians are not sardinians or sicilaians or venicians although monst are genetic indo-european early neolithic farmers. Nordics are paleo-european

Stop IP hopping.

We will kill all jews and all leftists. You won't escape us.

Duh. One is economic system one is cultural/social management system.

...

That's not a fed, user, your glownigger detector needs recalibration. Killing all Jews is literally the only way to ensure peace on earth.

Too long didnt read, faggot. Fuck off

Obvious slide thread
I am sensing a theme… Standing up for the White race is somehow controlled opposition according to these shills
Could we really be being raided by Tumblr?

it's a never ending cycle, and we are both the perpetrators and audience of the wild ride

You are the perpetrator. I am blameless. I politely saged this uninteresting thread to keep it off the front page.

Individualism>Tribalism>Nationalism>Globalism
Death>Life>Death
Nationalism is just extended tribalism. Most nations have similar DNA (there is no difference between ancient tribes in Central Europe and modern Scandinavians, Czech and Southern Poles for example) meaning they were isolated more based on culture than on race. I like tribalism because then all communities can self govern, but nationalism is more useful when you need to fight against invaders

You have a point, but a little bit of poison can be medicinal, but a lot can kill you.

Race globalism (blacks vs whites vs asians) is the next step after nationalism, because it's the next biggest tribe. We can't suddenly go from nationalism to full global globalism, because races are too different. Threats like overpopulation from africa, china rising, will force whites to join together.

Peace is the first step towards war.

Birth is the first step towards death.

Poverty is the first step towards wealth.

While I understand and sympathies with your concerns, OP, I think there is one very important factor that you are forgetting. Nationalism is still fundamentally tied to a biological and cultural element that cannot translated to a global identity/system. Although I would grant that many of the modern European national identities are somewhat artificial and constructed if you only compare them to the individual identities that existed before, however I would argue that these “new” identities are very much grounded in a biological and cultural factor that has loosely bound the combining groups together for hundreds to thousands of years. Why do I say this? Because the various states that eventually turned into Germany always conceptualized themselves as distinctly “German” long before the state itself was constructed. The full name of the Holy Roman Empire is actually the “Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation”. The same thing is true, albeit somewhat less so, with Italy, in which the various nations held a common conception of themselves as belonging to a larger community of Italian nations, sharing a connection with the Romans of old.

What I’m trying to get at here is that a nation and nationalism is neither purely a genetic construct nor is it purely a social, cultural construct. It is a merging of these two elements to create something that is shaped and moulded by both. While a “national” identity called British and American can be “constructed”, they cannot be arbitrary. They are always bound by the biological limits of their constituent parts (the groups being absorbed must be of the same or very similar racial stock). Furthermore, their identities need to be grown organically through the shared history of the constituent communities, or in the case of America, rely on the shared common history that all racial Europeans hold a claim to. In this way, one can make a strong case that the “white” American identity is just as legitimate as the “German” or “British” identity, as both are based on racial grounds and bound by a common myth rooted in a shared history.

It is for these reasons that “nationalism” cannot logically extend to all members of the world, as the very concept of nation has an outward limit of biology and shared history that cannot be transcended. It would be misguided to call nationalism globalist simply because it engages in assimilation, because it would be to ignore the fundamental and vital distinctions between the two methods/systems that I have laid out.

All these anti-intellectual niggers and/or shills shitting up a decent thread that would have garnered good discussion back before the second exodus or Zig Forums harbor.

Seriously, you worthless sacks of shit are the reason this board has gone down hill and turned into a cess pit of grugs banging their chests and grunting while they fling shit at each other. If you’re not going to discuss anything, then FUCK OFF BACK TO 4CHAN

Your message ain't wrong. People here forget that nationalism at first was essentially a left wing idea. It did wipe out lots of the genuine diversity that was present in feudal Europe, especially for instance in France, despite the latter being a unified state already.

But I think you fail to grasp that a people can share a degree of unity without this unity being brought about by a sort of homogeneization or horizontalization process. This is the fault of nationalism first and globalism now, and a typical modern inability to see unity as an organic and hierarchical idea, but doesn't mean it has to be like so.
Italians are some of the earliest people in Europe to be unified under a political entity called "Italia" by Augustus. Catullus even talks about "Italians" when talking about the work of Cornelius Nepos, a modern north Italian, thousands of years before any nation in Europe came about.
This certainly doesn't mean that a historical Lombard of the 19th century was the same as a contemporary Neapolitan, you are right about that, but one can see a thread of unity going all the way back to Rome and even before with the spread of Italics in the iron age, justifying the idea of a shared state, federal, imperial in a way, capable of allowing local diversity and power to exist without being overwhelmed by it.

Nowadays though, nationalism does represent a bulwark against something even worse, so we can support it.

Nationalism is as old as humans. Unless you're willing to argue that hunter gatherers favouring their own tribe over others is left wing, you are wrong.

Also, your jewish "left-right" paradigm is itself bullshit. Stop basing your ideological loyalties on empty wordism. Instead, base it on reality.
White people exist. Jews exist.
Leftism and rightism are abstract concepts that are 100% subjective to individual opinions.
They're not real.

I like how this place is now so stupid that the only response is 'didn't read kike'.

Interestingly, 'white nationalism' is a step up from the former 'German nationalism', 'French nationalism', etc. White nationalism as a concept is one step towards globalism from the old ethnic nationalism of the past.
This is frequently the case, where a group of once separate and unique people band together to fight an even larger enemy, ie. in our case multinational multi-ethnic globalism. There is a very good hypothesis that this is fundamentally how ethnic identities are even forged in the first place. ie. the modern Irish identity largely exists from fighting England, German identity exists from fighting France, Rome, etc.There is a tendency over time for groups to forge together into larger groups, however, this can only be accomplished when there is some outside 'other' to fight against.

At the end of the day, none of this matters. I've begun to embrace a concept of 'white globalism' rather than 'white nationalism', the fact that you have Americans taking interest in groups like NordFront, that you have Anglo Brits who support a guy like Salvini, that Italians are supporting Orban is evidence of this emerging phenomenon. The network of global solidarity is being built, based largely on racial identity, that transcends the old nation states and national boundaries.
The modern world, with its complex and multi-step supply chain systems largely precludes this fantasy of just cutting off from the rest of the world and doing our own things. The outcome of the second world war is evidence that this path is suicide, any nation that cuts off and tries to become a white ethnostate is going to be slammed by the rest of the world. The German nation of the 1930s had the best chance of anyone (some might even argue the German nation of the 1910s), and at the end of the day the weight of the whole world proved too much. We won't fare any better. Grouping up and isolating ourselves from the world is no longer a realistic possibility. Frankly it would be suicide, doing so would likely be the last thing whites ever did. We either regain our place as the dominant force int he world, or we perish.

As much as I admire the old cultures bound to the soil and produced by organic process over thousands of years… those are gone, they're all gone. And there is no time machine, you can't go back. We face the future based on the realities of the present

This time the world.

Attached: George_Lincoln_Rockwell_American_National_Socialism.jpg (489x276, 54.98K)

In the war to come, the forces of global capital and communism will ally against the nationalist. It will be nationalism vs. globalism, get fucked, chaim

Attached: 1448054168633.jpg (403x403, 34.9K)