Italorestorationism

Self-Insert

"People can really believe anything these days!" - Ismism
This page is meant to represent Alexi-da-Gamer's political views. Please do not make any major edits without their permission.

File:Burgsys-image.png

This page is being rewritten

"This page has been nuked to give lebensraum for a better page to grow." - Burgundian System
Alexi-da-Gamer is currently working on this page. Please do not interfere with their work. Instead, contact them to propose additional edits.
Reason:
(None specified)

File:NewNihilism.png

Work In Progress

"This page isn't even complete yet, who cares?" - Nihilism
Alexi-da-Gamer is currently working on this page. Please do not interfere with their work. Instead, contact them to propose additional edits.

File:LibertarianNazball.png

Totally Unironic

"I swear it's not LARP." - Libertarian National Bolshevism
This page is based on actual ideas that actual, somewhat well-known people, real or imaginary, have had at some point in history. Do not break the jerk.

"If we do not return to the old maxims, if education is not restored into the hands of priests, and if science is not every where placed in the second rank, the evils which await us are incalculable: we shall become brutalized by science, and this is the lowest degree of brutality."

Joseph de Maistre

Literacy

Levels of Influence:

1. ♡ = influence
   
2. ♤ = quasi-influence
   
3. □ = neutral
   
4. ◇ = non-influence
   
5. ▿ = anti-influence
   

Finished Reading

• George Orwell
  • Nineteen Eighty-Four ♤
  • Animal Farm ♤
  • Homage to Catalonia □
• P. Djèlí Clark
  • Ring Shout ◇
• Dante Alighieri
  • Divine Comedy ♡
• Nick Land
  • Meltdown ▿
• Curtis Yarvin
  • Divine-right monarchy for the modern secular intellectual ♤
• Father Félix Sardá y Salvany
  • Liberalism Is A Sin ♡
• Pius IX
  • Syllabus of Errors ♡
• Julius Evola
  • Revolt Against The Modern World ♤

Reading

• Joseph Marie de Maistre
  • Considerations on France

Going to Read, one day File:Armchair NeoCountEn.png

• Béla Menczer
  • File:TradCathMon.png Catholic Political Thought
• Fritz Kern
  • Kingship and Law in the Middle Ages
• Joseph Marie de Maistre
  • Essay on the Generative Principle of Political Constitutions
  • On the Pope
  • St. Petersburg Dialogues
• Edmund Burke
  • File:ReflectionsOnTheRevolutionInFrance(EdmundBurke).png Reflections on the Revolution in France
• Rudolf Kjellén
  • The State as a Living Organism
  • The Great Powers
• Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira
  • Revolution and Counter-Revolution
  • File:AntiCathModern.png In Defense of Catholic Action
  • Nobility and Analogous Traditional Elites in the Allocutions of Pius XII
• Nicolás Gómez-Dávila
  • Scholia to an Implicit Text
• File:LouBon.png Louis de Bonald
  • On Divorce
  • The True and Only Wealth of Nations: Essays on Family, Economy and Society
• F.-René de Chateaubriand
  • Memoirs from Beyond the Grave
  • The Genius of Christianity
• Julius Evola
  • Negrified America
  • Ride The Tiger
  • Men Among The Ruins
• Niccolò Machiavelli
  • The Prince
  • The Art of War
• Thomas Hobbes
  • Leviathan
  • On the Citizen
• Carl Schmitt
  • File:ConceptofthePolitical(CarlSchmitt).png The Concept of the Political
  • File:PoliticalTheologyBook.png Political Theology
  • File:Antidem.png The Crisis of Parliamentary Democracy
  • File:TheoryofthePartisan(CarlSchmitt).png Theory of the Partisan
  • File:RomanCatholicismandPoliticalForm(CarlSchmitt).png Roman Catholicism and Political Form
• Adam Smith
  • The Wealth of Nations
  • The Theory of Moral Sentiments
• Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels
  • The Communist Manifesto
  • The German Ideology
• Karl Marx
  • Das Kapital (Volume I)
  • Theses on Feuerbach
  • On the Jewish Question
• Friedrich Engels
  • The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State
  • On Authority
• Charles Baudelaire
  • Les Fleurs du mal
• Yevgeny Zamyatin
  • We
• Aldous Huxley
  • Brave New World
• Plato
  • The Republic
• Aristotle
  • Nicomachean Ethics
  • Metaphysics
  • Politics
  • Poetics
• Catechismus Catholicæ Ecclesiæ
• St. Thomas Aquinas
  • Summa contra Gentiles
  • Summa Theologica

Suggestions

File:Deitap.png-

• • The Restoration of the Guild System by Arthur Penty
    
  • Guild Socialism Re-stated by G.D.H. Cole
    
  • The Great Heresies by Hilaire Belloc
    
  • The Servaile State by Hilaire Belloc
    
  • Easy Eassys by Peter Maurin
  • National Guilds An Inquiry Into the Wage System And The Way Out by Samuel George Hobson
  • The World of Labor by G.D.H Cole
    
  • Labor In The Commonwealth by G.D.H Cole
    
  • Old Worlds For New by Arthur J. Penty
    
  • File:Georges Sorel.png- The Socialist Future of the Syndicates by Georges Sorel
    
  • File:Georges Sorel.png Reflections on Violence by Georges Sorel
    
  • File:Georges Sorel.png- The Illusions of Progress by Georges Sorel
    
  • File:Georges Sorel.png- The Decomposition of Marxism by Georges Sorel
    
  • File:Georges Sorel.png The Dreyfusian Revolution (1908) by Georges Sorel
    
  • Anarchism and Syndicalism by Édouard Berth
    
    • Note I recommend a lot for variety and I was picking things that I think you might find interesting as well.
      • - thanks i actually wanted to understand more about sorelian syndicalism and distributism, also The Restoration of the Guild System sounds interesting, but ill probably only read the one who are translated in my language.
        • File:Deitap.png- Nice! In regards to Sorel there might be able to more stuff that isn’t available in English because I’ve only read what I could find in English so far.

— You asked for book recs, and book recs I will give:

• • The "must-reads," because they align with my camp:
    • The Populist Delusion (by Neema Parvini; great layman's guide to elite theory)
    • Scholia to an Implicit Text (by Nicolás Gómez-Dávila; srsly I love this book so much)
    • Reflections on the Revolution in France (by Edmund Burke; baby's first right-wing politics)
    • File:TradCathMon.png Catholic Political Thought (ed. by Béla Menczer; neat anthology with J. de Maistre, K. von Metternich, et al.; despite the title, it's not all religion-focused)
    • Kingship and Law in the Middle Ages (by Fritz Kern; traditional theory of law)
  • The "should-reads," for general knowledge:
    • File:ChurchF.png Address to Young Men on the Right Use of Greek Literature (by Basil of Caesarea; not political, but since you're Christian, I'm pointing you to it)
    • File:Plato.png The Republic (by Plato; warning for being long)
    • Politics (by Aristotle; vide supra)
    • Life of Constantine (by Eusebius of Caesarea; modern historians consider it overly positive so keep that in mind)
    • The Federalist Papers (by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay; even if you aren't a Yank or a Lib this is still has historical value; also, I only just started them myself)
    • "Calvinism and Politics" (by Abraham Kuyper; btw, you're free to disagree with some of his conclusions, as even I do)
    • Dominion (by Tom Holland; history book on Christendom)

• File:Marxist.png Socialism and the Workers by Friedrich Sorge

File:Hardtrad.png User:HardTrad -Disintegration of the System by Franco Freda

• - yo is le funny ordine nuovo tfr guy, i remember when i used to larp as a nazi-maoist
  • I'm suggesting it to you because he was a(n Evolian) reactionary with accelerationist views, I don't really like Nazis or communism or Maoism. There's also no visible neo-Nazi sentiment in that work.

Beliefes

The State

File:Reactsyndimage.png

Section Under Construction

"The Union representative says we'll continue working when we get a wage increase, free beer at work, and an end to the modernist factory owners!" - Reactionary Syndicalism
This section of the article is currently under construction. If you would like to help, you can propose additional changes and discuss them on the talk page

The Monarchy

WIP

The Economy

File:Reactsyndimage.png

Section Under Construction

"The Union representative says we'll continue working when we get a wage increase, free beer at work, and an end to the modernist factory owners!" - Reactionary Syndicalism
This section of the article is currently under construction. If you would like to help, you can propose additional changes and discuss them on the talk page

WIP

Diplomacy

File:Reactsyndimage.png

Section Under Construction

"The Union representative says we'll continue working when we get a wage increase, free beer at work, and an end to the modernist factory owners!" - Reactionary Syndicalism
This section of the article is currently under construction. If you would like to help, you can propose additional changes and discuss them on the talk page

Theory

Faith and Church

File:Reactsyndimage.png

Section Under Construction

"The Union representative says we'll continue working when we get a wage increase, free beer at work, and an end to the modernist factory owners!" - Reactionary Syndicalism
This section of the article is currently under construction. If you would like to help, you can propose additional changes and discuss them on the talk page

Ancient World

File:Reactsyndimage.png

Section Under Construction

"The Union representative says we'll continue working when we get a wage increase, free beer at work, and an end to the modernist factory owners!" - Reactionary Syndicalism
This section of the article is currently under construction. If you would like to help, you can propose additional changes and discuss them on the talk page

L'Ancien Régime

"Whoever did not live in the eighteenth century before the Revolution does not know the sweetness of life and cannot imagine what happiness there can be in life."

Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord

The only alternative to Democracy

The parliaments of the West are tired. Anyone who watches them can see that. They're meant to be — or at least they were intended to be — this institution of transparency and honesty, but it's just become a theater. You've got staged opposition, and this kind of fake outrage on either side, and these decisions that should be made but are forever put off. The thing is representatives, as they're called, they don't really represent; They perform representation. And behind that performance is where the real power is, operating through channels that never appear. Whether that's the civil service, whether that's; the banks, financial institutions, international bodies and groups like NGOs or foreign interest groups. This is all the sort of machinery that the Liberal institutions refer to as global governance, But it's not really fair, is it? Because it just undermines the people. The problem with liberal democracy it's not that it fails to deliver some results, or a good standard of living, but the problem is that it hides where the power really sits because we are told in a democracy that the people are in charge. That everybody is in charge. But if everybody's in charge, then nobody is. And they pick from options that are handed to them, they're shaped by forces that they can't see and by people that they didn't choose, and I think a civilization in this state has just lost touch with political reality. It's managed decline, as many people say. The post-national politician, which is what every Western government has now, is inherently cut off from the land and the people they serve and therefore they become interchangeable. He's just a paper-pusher that could work for any country really, because it doesn't work for one in particular, and against this gray middle-management style of rule, the older style of rule stands as a challenge to it. So, let's take a look into it.
First, we got to think about the bad king stereotype. The tyrant. Because in the popular mind, their idea of a king is the bad king, it's the cruel, the unpredictable, the boot on the neck of the common man type of guy. But who's that a memory of when and what? I mean, I think of images like Henry VIII, killing his wives and all that, or that sniveling lion and the Robin Hood cartoon, I think that one was based on King John. Greedy and petty. These are bad kings that we're told to fear, and fear is not made up of course, but where did that originate? Well, the answer is 1066. The Norman Conquest was elite replacement as many people say — not a full blown ethnic replacement, but it was actually a complete break in our civilization. A lot of things that exist today, whether it's the class system or some cultural norms, are a consequence of that. They were a foreign military aristocracy and they forced themselves onto the English. And so what came next naturally was theft and centralized control and terror. The harrying of the North and the castle, and look, I like castles, but this was a symbol of oppression. This was to show people they're being ruled over. They're being occupied. And the English became strangers in their own country; their customs were pushed aside and their lords were replaced by foreign knights who just saw them as subjects. So the original bad king is the Norman and the line that followed him because — sure Henry VIII and people like that — I mean, they were ethnically British, specifically Welsh, but they inherited the Norman institutional logic. You know, he ruled through a centralized state and the entire Tudor state was built on Norman thinking. It was centralized and extractive. So, the tyrant king that the English remember well is real but he's a foreign king. It's a foreign dynamic. It's the king who rules over his people, not through them. And that system of oppression that started in 1066 has just been hardened over the centuries and we've forgot that anything existed prior to that. The pre-Norman world had ways of checking bad kings that the conquest completely wiped out.
So let's get into that. what was lost.
Anglo-Saxon kingship was just a completely different thing. The king was chosen. Wasn't elected in the same way we'd understand it now, but he was raised up by the Witan, which had the people's concerns in mind. They were the council of the Wise Men. And the king was bound by oath and by the rights of his people. So, his authority came up from below just as much as it did from above. He wasn't above the law, he was subject to it but he was its guardian and its servant. I mean take King Alfred, for example, he fought the Danes when his kingdom was being reduced to a swamp. Built schools and translated Latin texts into English and set down laws. I mean he was a lawgiver, and a scholar, and a warrior, but more than anything he was of his people. His kingship was service and embodiment, It wasn't domination. And the folk really saw themselves in him, and he carried their spirit into battle, and into council, and this is the monarch as a vessel for the collective spirit of a people. The king's body is the political body of the nation made flesh. His interests and his people's interests are aligned, not by contracts but because they're the same. They're the same identity. He is them in political form. When he wins, they win and when he falls, they fall. And this is a theory that's a theory of authority that's rooted in mutual obligation and shared fate and continuity, and if you set that against the Liberal theory of rule, which is in procedure and contract, and endless renegotiation of terms between strangers, I mean it really holds up. What it is, is an authority at the level of the cosmos, because pre-modern kingship operated on a completely different level of reality. Authority was understood as a feature of the natural order itself. It wasn't like paperbased legitimacy or administrative power or even ideological. Rule was built into the sacred view of the world. And that was a world in which the land, and the people and the law, and the ancestry and the fate, all formed one continuous structure. And in a world like that, political authority was something that was carried within people, rather than wielded over them.
The real difference is the skin in the game. Who holds risk. And that's really the sharpest difference between the king and the politician because the king rode at the front of his army. I mean, it's not a metaphor, they quite literally did. I mean, think about Anglo-Saxon or medieval kings fighting in the front rank. Whether that's King Harold taking an arrow at Hastings as he led against the Norman invasion or King Alfred risking his death on the marshes. And the sort of political decision of going to war, the risk was held by the king. If it was a stupid war, then the king would pay for that with his own blood. So, his fate was tied to his decisions. I’d think about King Théoden at Helms Deep in Lord of the Rings; His fortress was getting breached and the line was broken, and it was pretty hopeless at that point but Théoden doesn’t hide in the keep. He calls for his horse and he rides out and he charges into seemingly hopelessness, in front of his own men, into what looks like almost certain death. And that image is really strong, even in fiction, because it’s actually something real. See, this is honor. It's honor in the old sense. It’s honor as the willingness to share the fate between you and your people and the refusal to send other men to die for a cause that you believe in, but won't bleed for yourself. Now consider the politician: Think about Tony Blair or George Bush in Iraq. Can you imagine Tony Blair doing this with Iraq? Just picture him at the front of the column, rolling into Basra, rifle in hand, sharing the same fate as the infantry and the other men. It's just absurd, isn't it? And I think the absurdity is the whole point. Set aside for a moment whether the war was legal or illegal, wise or foolish. Ask a simpler question, who was it even fought for? Because it wasn’t fought for Britain. I mean British interests weren’t served by the destruction of Iraq, the chaos that swept the Middle East and the rise of ISIS and all the refugees that followed. The war was fought for global capital, It was fought for interests with no flag. Contrast that with Théoden and its dishonour in its purest form because a war that is not in the interests of his own people is sold to them in their name. The politicians don't hold the risk, they don't ride at the front because there's no honor in the cause. You can't lead the charge for a war, you can't justify with your own people, and the absent body of a leader on the battlefield tells you everything about the absent honor behind the decision. And yet for that war, Britain still gets the blame. They — as what a lot of migrants say, and liberals — They invaded, it’s their crimes. And the nation carries the moral weight while the people who actually made the decisions carry nothing, in fact they just retire into wealth and comfort. Think about Tony Blair, his son’s a billionaire, I'm sure some of those investments for that firm was from somewhere inconspicuous. Also he was knighted as well, Tony Blair that is. He's invited into panels and treated with respect and polite circles and he faces absolutely no consequences because the system is built to spread and disperse responsibility around until it just disappears.
But the king cannot hide beyond his people. He stands in front of them. Visible. Named and accountable in his own person.
See, Democracy — for all its talk about accountability just builds a structure in which nobody's really accountable for anything.
And I think this matters now because I believe the democracies of the West are in trouble. Trust in institutions is just falling apart, and the populist movements are rising across the political spectrum. I think they’re driven by the same gut feeling that the system’s rigged and the elites answer to no one, and people don’t have a real voice, and I think that gut feeling is right. But people don't have the words, the vocabulary to really say what's gone wrong here, because the words have been taken from them. The only criticism of democracy that you can give nowadays is — or that's allowed, rather — just the call for more democracy. Have you noticed that? “You have to democracy harder. Do it better.” But I think bringing back the older idea of rule; the older idea of kingship — and it doesn’t have to be an actual restoration of monarchs, but it’s an invitation to take seriously what we’ve lost: The hunger for a strong leader. It points to something that democracy just can’t give us: The desire to see yourself in your ruler, and to see your ruler truly answer for the nation’s decisions in victory and defeat alike.
I think democracy’s victory wasn’t inevitable and it’s been contested and I think it’ll be contested again. I think the figure of a noble king, it sticks in our imagination because it speaks to something that is natural. If you think about it, it’s a system that was naturally developed everywhere.
There’s something in our political nature that wants this.
I think we long for a figurehead. I think we long for a king at the head of his army. Riding towards the same fate as the lowest of his men. Bounds to his people. Not by contract or vote but by blood, by soil and by shared destiny.

Modern World

File:Reactsyndimage.png

Section Under Construction

"The Union representative says we'll continue working when we get a wage increase, free beer at work, and an end to the modernist factory owners!" - Reactionary Syndicalism
This section of the article is currently under construction. If you would like to help, you can propose additional changes and discuss them on the talk page

Countering Enlightenment

As a Reactionary, I oppose Enlightenment, I oppose its beliefs and its consequences and what World it has left to us.
Enlightenment was an ideology born out of a deep contempt for the “Old” Aristocratic and Clerical order, seeking a “New” order based on human “Reason”, seen as the ultimate source of all genuine knowledge. This is called “Rationalism”, the ideological and philosophical principle which Enlightenment is based on.
What is “Reason”? The Cambridge Dictionary gives this definition: “The ability of a healthy mind to think and make judgments, especially based on practical facts.”
Reason is the logical cogitation that dictates what material and abstract concepts are. It doesn’t make us "Comprehend”, we try to. The Individual Human mind, as intelligent it might seem, is inherently flawed, and in constant conflict with one another. And yet Rationalism, the ideology that promotes reason as the highest source of knowledge, criticizes us for basing our beliefs on faith, and even sometimes accuses us of basing it on “instinct, which is a statement entirely false and accusatorial.”
But the ultimate problem with Rationalism is not whether its source is flawed, because Reason got many things right, let's take for example its contribution in modern mathematics, like the development of Calculus, but no, imperfection it’s not the problem, which it’s a very weak critic if i may add.
The problem with individual human reasoning is that it’s fundamentally subjective. Enlightenment claims that it wants to build a “New” order to substitute the “Old” one. But, because of its extreme subjectivism, most branches fail to even agree on basic principles. Even really subjectivist systems like Democracy agree on a basic network of how things should work.
Enlightenment is like Anarchism, they know what to hate on but they have no idea on what to agree on.
WIP.

Death to the American Monster

"WE FIGHT FIGHT FOR BIBISI ZOG"

Unknown American Soldier

Miscellaneous

On Race and Immigration

Disclaimer: In this essay I use the words “Race” and "Ethnicity" interchangeably or as the same, and not “Race” as “Whites, Blacks, Arabs, Asians” but as distinct ethnic peoples.

Everyone has at least once asked themselves this question: Is race real?
A leftist, who puts all his faith in science, would argue with a plain “No”
“There is no such thing as human races, we’re all one human race.” “We all come from Africa, you know? You ancestors had dark skin.” “We humans share 99.9% of our DNA, skin color does not biologically differ, [etc.]” He would argue, in order to push his egalitarian ideal that we’re all one and the same. And how could we ever argue with that? He’s backed up by science! Well, our dear racial egalitarianist fails to understand why people are racist. He does not understand the fact that few are ones who still believe in the pseudoscientific doctrine of biological race that was first popularized by Arthur de Gobineau and later by the National Socialist movement.
“So that means race is not real!” Yes, but it still doesn’t answer the question.“Race” has more than only this definition, and therefore it has more answers. There are two fallacies with this argument:
1. This definition of “race” is strictly scientific, tied to how we understand race as “subspecies”, the genetic difference between an animal’s species, ignoring the historical and socio-cultural meaning of the term.
2. It avoids explaining the actual reason why people are racist, assuming it is entirely based on physical appearance and scientific illiteracy.

With this cleared out the question still remains: So, is race real?
Long story short: Yes, but not in the way you think.
Race is not biologically real, but rather socially real. Real as in a concept that transcends into the person. Let’s take for example binary genders. In biological essentialism, binary genders are viewed as interchangeable with sex. In a similar way, race can be viewed to be interchangeable with someone’s ancestry or place of origin. However, unlike biological essentialism, race is not a metaphysical concept. Before the modern age, “Race” was a term for the people of a “Nation”, and both terms were closely intertwined. This terminology affirms that people are what makes a Nation and rejects the concept of the nation as constructed by the Enlightenment, that is just a bureaucratic political state. This is also seen in the Bible, where the “Goyim” or “Gentiles”, which is used for non-jews, literally means “Nations”. People who differed from the Jews were called “Nations”, implying that a people were seen as a Nation. Or also in its original terminology “Goy” was a neutral term used to refer to any Nation-People, including the Israelites themselves. In the Torah, God refers to the Jewish people as a “goy kadosh” (a holy nation). The People are the Nation.
So to be proud of your nation, to be patriotic, means to be proud of your people and your race. Making Civic Nationalism self-refuting and pointless and just a false construct of Enlightenment.
Now, Civic Nationalists will argue that people with shared ancestral traits do not always share the same Values. Well, Civic Nationalists often describe Europe of all places with always the same keyword: “Values”, not people, not a substance, not a land, just “Values”. And when you push them enough, you’ll find that these “Values” are things like Tolerance and Equality. Categories invented literally 5 minutes ago in their modern meaning and they have nothing to do with the heritage that made Europe what it is. And here’s the trick, the word “Value” comes from the market, it indicates the price of something. “Values” are something that you hold onto, something you can take, abandon, buy, exchange and negotiate. Let’s compare the word “Value” with “Virtue”, for example, much closer to the European sensibility. Indeed, the word "virtue" comes from the Latin “virtus”—originating on the battlefield-and signifies strength, virility, and excellence. Virtues are intrinsic, defining characteristics; they describe the essence of who a person is in a permanent way. Consider the difference between saying "I care about the truth" and "I am truthful." Caring about the truth costs nothing; being truthful can cost you your career. These bureaucrats—and anyone pushing their vision of Europe—prefer values ​​to virtues; this is because values ​​can be used to extend the boundaries of imaginary moral communities, encompassing anyone who claims to share them, regardless of whether they actually do. Well, that is not Europe. Now listen to how Jean-Yves de Gallou, philosopher and founder of the Iliade Institute, answered the question "Who is Europe?" at the 2025 Remigration Summit: “Europe is the continent of Europeans. The settlement of Europe dates back 40,000 years with the expansion of hunter-gatherer peoples. We, contemporary Europeans, carry the same genes as the parietal artists of the Lascaux caves in France, Altamira in Spain, Hohle Fels in Germany, or Fumane in Italy. This initial settlement was partially modified, particularly in southern Europe, by the arrival of Anatolian farmers 8,000 years ago. It was then complemented by the expansion of the Yamnaya, a hunter-gatherer people from the Pontic steppes, 5,000 years ago. This migration brought the Indo-European languages we still speak today through their Greek, Roman, Celtic, Germanic, or Slavic branches, as well as a cosmogony and social structure, the tripartition, which has continually shaped European civilization, even after Christianization (oratores, bellatores, laboratores).”
This is Europe. The Europe of which we are the rightful heirs. The Europe that is united through true diversity—regional diversity. The only Europe for which we young Europeans are willing to fight.

Now, can a modern, multi-ethnic society maintain social cohesion on shared civic principles alone, or does a stable nation inevitably require a single, unified cultural/ethnic identity? Well, the effect that Multiculturalism and Civic Nationalism had on the West answers the question. The British MP Rupert Lowe put in writing “Your mother is being raped in fron of you, Your daughter is being raped in front of you, and you’re watching TV and eating chips” in the Gang Rape Inquiry Report, an indipendent inquiry of over 200 pages funded by 23’000 British citizens who self-finaced. It reveals an organized network of systematic rape and drug trafficking that is estimated to affacted up to 250’000 underage British girls and which spanned dozens of cities where 97% of the perpetrators were Asian and 80% specifically Pakistani. Both Legal Immigrants and “British” citizens. Among the victims’ testimonies is that of Kate, who was kidnapped near the university locked inside a roulotte and held there for 9 days during which she was raped, physically tortoured and even raped by a dog while the men bet on whethever the pentration would be vaginal or anal. The whole thing is filmed and Kate is forced to watch the video. Kate’s case accurately describes the operational pattern of these networks. Girls as young as 11 were lured from school and foster homes with gifts, alcohol and drugs and loaded into taxis, and then passed among dozens of men into private homes, apartments, restaurants, and hotels. They were trafficked from one county to another, impregnated, then forced to abort, and filmed for blackmail. They were called “White Trash” by their own tormentors, or “Kuffar”, meaning infidel in Islam. Well, if this impressed you, you won’t believe what comes next. Take Fiona's case, whose mother called the police to report her daughter missing and mentioning a history of abuse by Asian men. The call handler said: “You can’t describe them as Asian men because that’s racist. You should just be glad that your child is being taught a different culture.”
On one occasion, a police officer returned Fiona to the house where the abuse was occurring and told the men to: “Have fun with her.”
In Rotherham, where if you were to be an 11 to 15 year old girl, you had 20% chance of being raped by an Asian man. Multiple Labour councilors interfered in police investigations, tipped off perpetrators, or dismissed the victims as “making lifestyle choices” to protect “community relations” and voters.
While Kier Starmer was the Director of Public Prosecutions, it has been reported that 13’000 suspected rape gang members and pedophiles were left off with warning letters.
Sadiq Khan, the mayor of London, has repeatedly denied the existence of grooming gangs in the capital for years. Khan had direct access to HM Inspectorate of Constabulary documents that described exactly the same schemes he was denying. So not only did the government and municipalities know what was happening, but they actively covered it up at all levels, along with the extended families of the perpetrators, as in the case of Nahid Ejaz, the former mayor of Bracknell, who helped his son hide the evidence of a 15-year-old girl’s sexual assault. Actually, this is a warning. In Pakistan 17% of the students report having experienced sexual abuses during childhood. In India, 53%.
Keep these numbers in mind the next time someone tries to convince you that what happened is an isolated case that shouldn’t be exploited, or asks you what it means that “certain cultures aren’t compatible with ours.”, or tries to talk to you about regularization to resolve the problem. Because all of this could reach us too. In Switzerland, authorities in Geneva discovered a similar network operating under the cover of a barber.
In Austria and Germany, similar cases have been emerging month after month.
In Italy, in just one year the Pakistani community grew up by 13.2%, the Bangladeshi community by 16.9%. The government continues to have relations with India to replace our doctors, and as I was doing research for this essay I came across a News story where a Bangladeshi man was sentenced to just 5 years in prison after impregnating a 10-year-old girl at the local migrant reception center.
So the Answer to the question is a big fat No.
Assimilation has been proven not to work. We have the duty to stop all of this. And the only peaceful tool remaining to us is Remigration.
But against Regimigration leftist will argue that “Therefore to repatriate the 339,000 irregulars in, let's say, 5 years with a cost of 5.5 billion euros which added to the 2.5 billion of before, makes a total of 8 billion euros, a huge amount”
When even leftists no longer debate whether it is desirable or right, but whether it is possible, you know you’re winning culture. Let’s keep it up folks. Jokes aside, what leftists usually talk about in this case is the first phase or Remigration which, in addition to a high rate of all types of non-European immigration, uses reparation as a means. This phase in all remigrationist literature is estimated to last around 5 years, exactly as hypothesized in the argument. So that would be about 1.6 billion for just 5 years. You know how much we Italians have spent on reception from 2015 to today? In initial reception alone, 1.7 billion a year. 18 billion in total. If we add CAS, healthcare and schools we arrive at 4.7 billion in 2018 alone. So from 30 to 40 billion in the last 11 years. In short an exaggerated 10 billion, a one-off payment over 5 years, doesn’t seem so huge anymore. This, in addition to being a recurring expense, is supported by undocumented migrants, the group we now have as a reference. Even if we were to take into account the economic contribution of everyone, even the one of legals, we would see that GDP per capita which measures the wealth of us mere mortals, is stagnant, and the €1.2 billion positive fiscal balance attributable to foreigners most likely stems in large part from the contingent of European foreigners who, due to their ethnocultural familiarity, integrate or even assimilate at much higher rates. Unfortunately our government is "so Fascist” that it doesn’t transparently display the numbers for each immigrant and their origin, but we can deduce it because where it is permitted, serious studies already exist. The University of Amsterdam has estimated that each non-Western migrant costs the Dutch Kingdom € 275'000 net over their lifetime, and each asylum seeker € 800’000. In Finland, a Somali costs the state an average of € 951’000 for life. It takes 142 native Finnish taxpayers to support him. In March 2026, The LIBE committee gave the green light to Return Hubs in third countries as part of the Returns Regulation. And Italy already has bilateral readmission agreements with practically all the main countries of origin, including Morocco, the 2nd largest non-European community on our territory.
“But wouldn’t it be easier to integrate these people, teach them Italian, give them valid documents, let them work and contribute?”
Yeah, like Spain did, where in this June there have been 44 stabbings and 12 gun-related incidents, and violence is increasing dramatically. All this was done despite 90% of young people opposing regulations in defiance of Democracy, as in Sweden where 2/3 of rapists were immigrants or 2nd gen immigrants, or the United Kingdom where tens of thousands of undrage English girls have been raped by British citizens of foreign origin. How many years of sacrifices would we have to make within our nations to try to make this failed experiment work? And understand that anthropological identities and differences exist? They are structures, and not constructs. As such, should they inform our political actions? Leftists, let’s face it, Remigration is not an answer to an economic problem. There is only one goal, and that is the one you cannot say: To preserve the ethnocultural continuity of the European people in the lands of their forefathers. A single European victim of immigration is worth more than any billion that our state can spend, especially when the task of our state is to protect those who belong to it, our security, our rights, our working class, our new generations. Don’t act as Caritas for the entire globe or, in the worst cases, as an economic zone, served by large interests that leftists profess to fight. What is missing is not money, it is not infrastructure, it is just political will. And, driven once again by political will, we—the children of Europe—will implement Remigration.
But we have to remember that we’re patriots, not racists.
As shown before I demonstrated that vast majority of people within this systematic rape and drug trafficking network and of grooming gans members were of asians descent. Now, why does that matter? It is true that it isn’t morally righteous to treat a group of people based on how 80% of them act, but you can’t ignore it just to be empathetic towards those remaining singular individuals who did nothing wrong. Now, we could argue that native Europeans do it too and we’re just focusing on cases of migrants out of xenophobia, that at least if you have no understanding of what per capita is, which its understanding is more than elementary.
A comprehensive study by Lund University researchers found that 63% of individuals convicted of rape or attempted rape in Sweden have an immigrant background. The research, analyzing over 4,000 convictions, indicates that foreign-born individuals and those with two foreign-born parents are significantly overrepresented in these statistics.
The odds of conviction remained higher among immigrants even after controlling for socioeconomic factors, substance abuse, and psychiatric disorders.
Bear in mind that migrants make up 21% of the population in Sweden, 1/3 of the Sexual Assault cases committed by migrants. But, as said before, not every single individual of that group commits sexual assault. Meaning even a smaller fraction of that 21% is doing 63% of the rape cases. Whether you like it or not there’s a pattern and we can’t ignore it.
Now the question is: what makes different ethnicities act like this?
First of all we have to understand their background, as their evil doings aren’t simply caused by someone's ancestry just because is different, but it is intrinsically related, as someone ancestry is shaped by history, and history shapes ancestry.
You’ll see that Africa lacks institutions, economic and political stability and reeks of corruption, while Asian culture is rooted in misogyny and religious bigotry, but why?
“It’s because of colonialism!” Leftists will shout. While exploitation by colonial powers did make its part in this, is it really just the fault of White settlers? If you do more research you’ll find out that colonialism had a minimal effect compared to other causes, but it has to carry the guilt, the white guilt, so that the left-wing will be able to push their ideals with this excuse, that the white man is single handedly responsible for modern day Africa and the violent behavior of Asian migrants.
The issue with the colonialism explanation is three-fold. First, it fails to explain why nearly all of subsaharan Africa was so weak that they could even be colonized in the first place. Second, it fails to explain why African nations that were not colonized, such as Ethiopia, are in a similar or worse situation than formerly colonized nations. And lastly, it fails to explain why after colonialism, these nations’ standard of living and infrastructure have gotten worse, not better, while relying on western foreign aid.
To understand how did we get here we have to go back to Pre-Colonial Africa. The picture of Africa that emerges out of the last five or so hundred years since the Atlantic slave trade and colonial era distorts understanding of African history by presenting what's essentially a snapshot as if it's the whole film. The narrative that emerges by focusing narrowly on a four or 500 year timeline can be summed up in the words of the 19th century German philosopher, Georg Hegel in his reflections on the continent of Africa:
“It is manifest that want of self-control distinguishes the character of the Negroes. This condition is capable of no development or culture, and as we have seen them at this day, such have they always been. At this point we leave Africa, not to mention it again. For it is no historical part of the world; it has no movement or development to exhibit."
Hegel's comments taken from lectures that he gave around 1830, reflect a very selective use of timelines, highlighting a moment when Europe is in a state of expansion, while simultaneously Africa was in a state of decline. But backing up the timeline to, say the 4th and 5th century, presents an entirely different narrative. At that time, Rome was declining, and Europe descended into the early medieval period of violence, disease, warlordism and various kingdoms vying for what was left of the crumbling Roman Empire. But while Europe was in tatters, Africa at that moment was thriving. We see vast empires connected to global trade networks that enjoyed wealth and prosperity. If we subjectively decided to start the timeline here, what the would be the narrative of Africa as it relates to Europe? Where you start the timeline matters.
Nevertheless, the question this video is addressing is, how do we go from Africa before colonialism with its wealthy and prosperous kingdoms to the Africa that exists at the time of Georg Hegel's disparaging description? The answer involves a complex chain of events that begins with the development of a global economic system that centered in Egypt. Egypt sits on an important nexus that linked the Mediterranean to Asia through the Red Sea and later connected large empires in West Africa to a global trade network through the trans-Saharan trade routes. Because Europe wasn’t particularly rich in terms of natural resources it was predisposed toward expansion. The survival strategies embedded in the culture reveal much about the society and its setting.
In the Greek pantheon, we see Aries, God of war, and Poseidon, God of the sea among others. It reveals a society forged in conflict and expansion. Dominance of the sea was a necessary component, and along with it came the representative deities that accompanied that need. Supremacy over critical access points to Asia would be the driving force for major events in Western Europe for millennia — from the expansion of Greece into North Africa to the Crusades and finally to the age of exploration and Columbus's voyages in 1492. For our story, it’s important to note that Alexander III of Macedon extended the Greek empire into Egypt in 322 BC, and in doing so, Greece gained a major foothold along the spice route that granted them access to India, and by extension, China. When Rome supplanted Greece, Europe’s control of North Africa under Rome extended even further. Along with its expansion into North Africa, Rome fortified the Trans-Saharan trade routes. In the process, West Africa was more firmly linked into the Trans-Sahara network, and into a global system of trade that eventually extended from West Africa to China.
Rome made significant adjustments to its society and culture that fed in part off of critical access points like Egypt, but that all started to crumble with the fall of the Roman Empire around the 5th century A.D. By the mid 7th century, things in Europe took a turn for the worse as another key player arrived on the scene. With the Islamic expansion into North Africa, Western Europe was significantly cut off from its critical lifeline. The centerpiece around which they structured so much of their society was jerked out from under them. That’s when things really start to go bad. While Eastern Europe maintained access to the east through Constantinople, in Western Europe crime rates soared, infant mortality rose to as high as 50%, malnutrition was rampant, and warlordism was the order of the day. To top it off, bubonic plague killed up to half of the European population – it was a violent time, but maybe it’s the inevitable result of a society that pins its prosperity on a specific set of conditions, and those conditions are jerked out from under them.
In the Trans-Sahara region, Rome’s decline left a vacuum that led to West Africa’s expansion. When Ghana — the first of 3 major empires in West Africa – began to expand between the 5th and 8th centuries, the centerpiece around which it structured its prosperity was Trans-Saharan trade. Ghana’s main resource, gold, was traded pound for pound at the same value as salt. Salt is critical in preserving food for long distance trade, and that’s just one example of how West Africa and its society began to pivot around its coveted Trans-Saharan trade. Another example was Ghana’s adoption of Asian camels that were better suited for long distance trade than the African variety. Are we seeing the pattern yet? Mali — the second major west African Empire — supplanted Ghana in the thirteenth century. By then, the Islamic Caliphates had secured control over the north African trade routes linking the trans-Saharan routes to Egypt. Interestingly, in another adjustment aimed at solidifying access to its lifeline, Mali became the first Islamic empire in West Africa, and that is the stage that Mansa Musa stepped onto. Mansa Musa, the emperor of Mali undertook a legendary pilgrimage in 1324. His caravan spread so much gold over the Trans-Sahara region on his way to Mecca that it took the city of Cairo over a decade to recover from the inflation. In doing so, he accomplished two things. First, he established a demand. His kingdom had more gold than it knew what to do with, but that doesn’t do too much good unless you can find people who want it. So his pilgrimage put people on notice by letting everyone know, “Hey, I’ve got the goods.” Second, he established himself as a prominent player in the Trans-Saharan trade — the source of his wealth, the key to the kingdom’s prosperity, and yet another egg that West Africa placed in the basket of Trans-Saharan trade.
From 1461 to 1591, Songhai — the last of the three major West African Empires — emerged. But it emerged onto a landscape that was already in the process of shifting. Europe was already encroaching on the Guinea coast where Portuguese traders had already established a foothold. By the fall of Songhai the Atlantic slave trade was already well underway. Just like that, a thousand years of wealth and prosperity in West Africa came to an end in just a few decades. What happened? One last critical event that took place far from West Africa, was nevertheless critical in the chain of events leading to the Atlantic slave trade -- the fall of Constantinople.
Constantinople was the Eastern Roman Empire’s last gateway to Asia. In 1453 Constantinople fell to Islamic expansion under the Ottomans. It was the fall of Constantinople that forced Europe to seek alternate routes to Asia. Prompting Spain to hire Christopher Columbus in 1492, and prompting the Portuguese to circumnavigate Africa, which it finally did in 1499. As it turns out, to this day it's much easier to transport goods by ship than it is by plane, train, automobile or any other method. When an alternate route to Asia was found, Africa was effectively cut out of the picture and the trans-Saharan trade fell into disuse. As with Rome, the fundamental assumption on which West Africa based its prosperity had been jerked right out from under them, and the results were similar. Various kingdoms vying for supremacy over a crumbling way of life. Just as the medieval period had been in Europe, this was a very violent time in West Africa in which warring factions came into conflict with one another, captured one another, and sold one another. Africa’s decline came in a critical time when Europe was in a state of expansion. Venturing to Asia by sea and circumnavigating Africa, Europe sought to establish ports along the way in order to restock ships, and repair sails and prompting the need to establish colonies — all at a time when Africa was in a state of decline and was ripe for colonization. Here it’s important to discuss the role of slavery not just in West Africa but in human history. Slavery is as old as human history itself, but historically, slavery has tended to go hand-in-hand with conquest — where you find one you tend to find the other. For example, the Egyptians would conquer their neighbors and make slaves of them. The Greeks conquered their neighbors and made slaves of them. The Romans did the same thing. So, as society began to fall apart and West Africa descended into conflict and chaos the one commodity they had plenty of — the one that goes hand-in-hand with conflict — happened to be slavery. That also happened to be very commodity that Portugal was in high demand for at the time. Just as Mali adjusted in response to Islamic controlled north African trade routes, a similar adjustment took place to meet the Portuguese demand for slaves. Still, I’ve often heard it asked “How is it that these Africans sold other Africans to Europeans?” Two things are important here. First, it's important to understand that traffic in slavery was not a new phenomenon, along with expansion and conquest, slaves had been trafficked over the Trans-Saharan trade routes for a thousand years before Europeans arrived on the scene. There's no reason to think Africans would feel any differently about the trafficking of human beings after Portugal arrived and Europeans needed the one commodity that Africa had plenty of — slaves. Second, It's important to understand that Africans at that time didn’t think of themselves as Africans any more than Europeans thought of themselves as Europeans. I’ve never heard anyone ask the question, “How is it that over hundreds of years of conflict between Spain, France and England that these Europeans are killing other Europeans?” That’s because Europeans thought of themselves as Spanish, French and English — not as Europeans. In the same way, West Africans thought of themselves not as Africans, but as Ibos, Ashante, Dahomeans, and Yorubans. Again, before Modern Age people were seen as a Nation, a Nation was seen as the people.
So, as we can see, it was a specific chain of events from Egypt, to Greece, to Rome ,the spread of Islam and the rise of Ghana, Mali and Songhai and to the fall of Constantinople that let Africa from its wealthy kingdoms to the slave trade and era of colonization.
Of course, these events of corruption, economic instability and violence embedded into the ethnocultural and systemic norm of the region and of the people.
Let's address the elephant in the room. Subsaharan Africa has the lowest average IQ scores in the world. People have different theories for why that is. Whether they believe it is largely innate or a result of environment or they debate IQ's reliability entirely. But we do know one thing. IQ is strongly correlated with long-term planning and impulse control. And the history of subsaharan Africa is one of extreme selection for short-termism. Africans that try to invest in the future often end up poorer than those that focused on immediate resource extraction. And frequently the fruits of their labor were taken by force. Don't forget African resource extraction wasn't just for material goods, but also for slaves. They had some of the largest slave economies in the world with perpetual demand amongst themselves and from Arab nations for over a thousand years and a major surge when Europeans entered that market. The idea that Europeans ran into the African interior, kidnapped people on mass and then put them into ships is a fantasy. In reality, foreign merchants would go to African kingdoms and buy slaves from them as had been standard practice in Africa for thousands of years. Is enslaving your own people and selling them to foreigners a good long-term strategy for a civilization? No. But it does make you rich in the short term. Is neglecting your infrastructure a good long-term strategy? No. But it does mean less work right now. Is relying on perpetual foreign aid instead of developing your own industry a good long-term strategy? Obviously not. But it does make your political elites a lot of money. Short-termism is terrible for any people. And if Africans don't overcome it, they can forget having any grander societal ambitions.
But what do Africans do instead of trying to do anything in order to fix their country? Migrate to where society actually works, the West. Governments which allow this to happen are also to blame.
There are two questions now: 1) Is it moral to initiate Remigration? 2) What should be done then?
In Catholic Social Teaching, there is a thing called “Right not to Migrate”, is the fundamental belief that people should be able to flourish in their own homeland. The Church teaches that leaving one's country should always be a choice, not a desperate necessity caused by poverty, violence, or persecution. Pope Francis has highlighted that the right to remain in one's native land is older, more deeply rooted, and broader than the right to migrate. It requires that communities have access to the basic necessities of life, dignity, and peace. Catholic teaching calls on prosperous nations to welcome foreigners to the extent they are able, while also recognizing that states have a sovereign right to regulate their borders and maintain the common good. The people must act if they want their nation, therefore themselves, to be saved.
“But the people can’t because of economic instability, why don’t we just help them by giving them more money?”
We did, over a trillion dollars, and somehow poverty grew.
“That doesn’t make sense. Money fixes problems.”
Only if the system works, money doesn’t build foundations, it just through whatever is already there.
“But aid rebuilt Europe after the war.”
Europe already had courts, laws, tax systems. Aid didn’t create order, it accelerated order that already existed.
“So Africa just needed more time?”
It needed institutions, instead, we sent cash, and cash in weak systems becomes power, not progress. “So, where did the money actually go?”
Private jets, offshore accounts, presidential palaces, some of it never even touched the people it was meant for.
“Then why didn’t citizens vote those leaders out?”
The leaders didn’t depend on the citizens, they depended on donors. No taxes, no accountability, no consequences.
“But aid still builds schools and sends food, right?”
Sometimes, but free food kills the farmers, free clothes kills the factories. Charity can quietly erase local jobs.
“So instead of growth, it created dependence…”
Exactly, when help never leaves, people stop building, they start waiting.
“Then what makes a country actually rich?”
Boring things, property rights, rule of law, local business. Governments are afraid of their voters, not handouts.
“So the problem was never a lack of money…”
It was lack of systems, you can donate cash, you can’t donate accountability. And without that, even a trillion dollars disappear. We are making the same error with the African migrants in Europe from those same countries. They didn't learn the lesson, we’re just acting like those same governments towards them, maintaining them by giving them welfare with the money of the nation’s taxpayers.
Solving institutional weakness and corruption in Sub-Saharan Africa requires homegrown political will, transparent public financial management, and digital infrastructure to cut out intermediaries. Progress relies on robust legal frameworks, economic diversification, and active civic engagement to enforce accountability. But we should really look at the pragmatic current of globalist and corporate agencies trying to save singular individuals. Trying to save local villages from time to time is not solving the problem brick by brick, it is just bailing out a sinking boat with a teacup. We should try to avoid military intervention from the West, so we can evitate to turn the country into an equally worse state with a different regime or into a western zogbot puppet. We must destroy the system from within. The most efficient way is by empowering Civil Society and Whistleblowers, enacting strict, functional legal protections for whistleblowers and actively supporting independent journalism to investigate financial crimes, Creating a "coalition of citizens" who are able to monitor public spending and hold local governments accountable without fear of retaliation. The only problem would be implementing it.
As a fierceful Catholic, y’all would be asking “What’s the Catholic Church’s take on this?” Is it morally just or right to think so?”
Well, to understand how the Catholic Church views "Ethnic Patriotism", that is the idea that distinct Ethnocultural nations have a natural right to self-determination, self-governance, and the preservation of their heritage and demographic cohesion, we have to look at Catholic Social Teaching, Thomistic philosophy, and the writings of Popes. Catholic doctrine views the nation and love of country as natural, good, and morally necessary, but, of course, there are ethical boundaries around how nationhood should be maintained. Human beings are inherently social, and society is built in concentric circles starting with the family, expanding to the nation (patria), and ultimately extending to the universal human family. St. Thomas Aquinas categorized patriotism under the virtue of pietas (piety), which falls under Justice. Just as you owe a special debt of gratitude and love to your parents under the Fourth Commandment ("Honor your father and mother"), you owe a similar debt to your homeland, which provided your language, culture, security, and heritage. John Paul II, In his final book, Memory and Identity, argued that the nation is a "natural society" (like the family) rather than an artificial contract. He affirmed that wanting to preserve a nation’s history, traditions, language, and cultural identity is a healthy, natural human impulse that has nothing to do with racism or bigotry.
Catholic Social Teaching also strongly defends the right of distinct peoples to govern themselves and protect their cultural identity. John Paul II famously noted before UNESCO that a nation exists primarily through and for its culture. He supported the right of nations—especially those oppressed or dominated by empires (such as Poland under partition or Soviet occupation)—to assert their political independence and form their own sovereign state. CST recognizes that a state functions best when there is a shared moral, cultural, and civic bond among its citizens.
When it comes to migration, whether it’s for the common good, economic stability or ethnic homogeneity, the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 2241) says that: "The more prosperous nations are obliged, to the extent they are able, to welcome the foreigner... Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions... Immigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them."
It is explicitly stating that for the common good, such as social harmony and cultural cohesion, the nation has the sovereign right to regulate migration, control the borders and selective immigration. And I’m more convinced than ever that this is the case.
However we have to understand that both remigration and immigration must be inherently selective and never total. We should rather repatriate and let migrate people based on a classist meritocracy system rather than just ancestry, however this does not mean it just be inherently colourblind, we must also take into account pattern recognition. What was the last time you ever heard a Korean or a Chilean migrant in Europe commit a race-motivated murder, or sexually assaulting an underage girl? While you keep seeing those crimes being committed by South-Asians and Sub-Saharan Africans constantly on the news or being shown on statistics. Again, this doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be accepting those people from those regions just because they come from them. Of course, if they’re highly educated and their plan is to integrate then we shall welcome them.
Lastly, a migrant will never be the nationality of the country he migrated to, or at least that on an ethnocultural level, not a legal one. A migrant will never be Italian, he will never be part of the nation. Citizenship is not a shared history and culture. The migrant can absolutely integrate or even assimilate into society and contribute to it, get a job, pay taxes, learn our language, but again, that doesn’t make him worthy to wear the badge of being “Italian”. For no reason he should be treated differently or as less on a legal and economic level, but he is different in an ethnocultural one. Because i do not believe there is a better, superior race, but i do believe there are different ethnic groups all around the world that have the duty to protect their homogeneity, their history, their culture, their virtues and that the World as we know it shouldn’t become a Melting Pot just because in the name of “Equality” and “Empathy”. Because real diversity can only exist through preserving it, not mixing it up.

It should be also noted that even as an Ethnopluralist I do not advocate for the total balkanization of a region or a country just because it has multiple ethnicities within it, but just the homogenous ethnic and cultural preservation of the community.

The Three Worlds

The Three Worlds, better classified as 1st, 2nd and 3rd worlds, are a geopolitical term originated in the Cold War to identify the status of nations-states.
In this section I will explore the terminology, use, evolution, origine of these terms and reinterpret them. I'm usually against these political labels, but it's very interesting and it's a matter that needs to be clarified.
1st World :
The First World, also referred as the West, it's a geopolitical, social and economic entity that revolves around the North Atlantic sphere, primarily the "larger" North America and the vast majority of File:EuroNat.png Europe, generally referring to N.A.T.O. and the E.U. This term originated in the early 50's coined by the French demographer Alfred Sauvy to describe the geopolitical and economic status of the Western Block, therefore the Capitalist, Democratic countries aligned with the United States and NATO during the Cold War. Of course its status quo evolves, so does its definition, but first we have to explore how can this definition be applied to the past. We have already stated it can and it does evolve, does this mean that the Cold War definition of it, it's an evolution of a previous status of the "First World"? Absolutely. Same goes for the other 2 worlds. However, while we easily can determine the previous status of the 1st world like the Allies in World War 2 or the Entente Power in World War 1, how back does it go? Or better, When and where does it start? Industrial Revolution? Enlightenment? Renaissance? The discover of America? The Middle Ages? We could go on without a clear answer, so let me do it brief for you: Roughly 6,000 to 5,000 years ago in Mesopotamia by the File:SumeruErem.png Sumerian civilization, the first civilization. Essentially, the start of the actual "1st World" Started with [the eurasian] civilization, if followed the evolutionary line. This was followed by the Akkadian Empire, Neo-Sumerian Period, Babylonian Empire, Assyrian Empire and Neo-Babylonian Empire. This, undoubtedly, does not reside only at these civilizations, as it is a fact that Mesopotamia influenced outer civilizations like ancient Greece, India, Canaan, Egypt, who are going to influence other civilizations like the Romans, Arabs, Persia, Israel and many others. Rome was the main bridge between the original, expanding, multipolar and fragmented 1st world and the new, more rigid, compact 1st world. Exactly why it was a transition, the original 1st world didn't have an exact end nor the new 1st world had an exact start, especially considering that the Roman Empire fell in 1453 when the new 1st world period had begun time ago, nor its expansion determined the end of the old 1st world, because its expansion wasn't a single, stable and coherent moment. But these changes do not come naturally, if you think about the fall of the Western Roman Empire, the one that started the Middle Ages, was an enormous change for the 1st world and wasn't something that "came naturally" but a combination of sustained Germanic barbarian invasions, economic collapse, severe political instability, and military decay. Same goes for every major change within this civilization, Especially Enlightenment, that changed the course of Western civilization for ever. Now, however, let's talk about the future, how will it evolve? There are two paths in which it can evolve.
1) The Neoreactionary Path. With the extremely rapid growth of AI and the staunchly majoritarian victory of the conservative wing with a File:ConNeolib.png Neoliberal, very pro-west and mildly Eurosceptic position that it's fueling Nrx thought and with growing conservative politicians, it creats an ultimate File:NRxCon.png Neoreactionaryism-Neoconservatism-Neoliberalism File:NrxNeolib.png fusion.
2) The Liberal path. We already saw examples of this like the premiership of File:Starmer2.png Stramer and of File:TonyBlair2.png Blair in the UK, Canada under Justin Trudeau's premiership, France under Macron or non-governmental examples like the World Economic Forum. Essentially, staunchly liberal, File:Progress.png left-leaning, pro-immigration, File:Auth3way.png third way, Corporatocratic, globalist, very internationalist, Klepto-Oligarchic and like the previous wing, highly File:GlobInterv.png neoconservative (leaning more on the EU side). Both these sides are inherently anti-reactionary and anti-traditionalist, "returning" to previous timeline of the 1st world doesn't not go against this doctrine, but a need to return to a previous stage, a primal instinct, that calls the past of an alive civilization, leaving the modern, rotten, decaying and current evolutionary stage that rooted from Enlightenment, which poisoned the West. In the end, Enlightenment is exactly what killed western Organicism, replacing the state with a machine. Thath's also the very same reason why Reactionaryism calls for a "Counter-Revolution" instead of an "evolution" or a "revolution".
2nd World :
The Second World , like the previous, came from an original ideal and nation-state to then develop and deposit itself in a hemisphere with an united ideal/goal. When it started? It's hard to tell. It mainly depends if we mean a movement of an idea or the establishment of that idea. In the original interpretation of it, a country to become "2nd World" needs to be an originally 1st world or even 3rd world country, then it has to radically shift (usually trough a revolution of sort or a change of regime) into economically centralized, highly welfarist, highly regulationist, rapidly developing, urbanization and usually socially progressive that opposes the western hemisphere. Essentially having a socialized economy, this includes Proto-Socialism, Non-Marxian Socialist, State Socialism, Left-State Capitalism, File:EconUltraLeft.png Communism, ect. However, we know that these worlds evolve, radically most of the time, or even revolt. Like with Enlightenment and Capitalism in the West.
Based on the previous description, the first country to be considered "2nd World" is often thought to be the Mauryan Empire, due to have economic and social factor very similar to what I described a 2nd world country, many historians have considered its economy to be "proto-socialist". The main pillars of the second world were The First French Republic under the Jacobins and the Soviet Union. I want first want to talk about Jacobin France. While I variously claimed that the Jacobins are Proto-Fascists (or at least have highly influenced fascism) due to their Totalitarian, Populist, Revolutionary, Nationalist, Anti-Monarchist, Anti-Reactionary and Modernist nature, as for Mussolini said "History does not travel backwards. The Fascist doctrine has not taken De Maistre as its prophet. Monarchical absolutism is of the past, and so is ecclesiolatry. Dead and done for are feudal privileges and the division of society into closed, uncommunicating castes." The Jacobins also influenced the foundations of Socialism and Marxism, making Jacobinism a predecessor of both Yes, Jacobinism is Fascist Socialist cry about it.
After Jacobin France other fundamental Thinkers and Movements of Socialism and Communism rised. Paraguay under José Gaspar Rodríguez de Francia, the Paris Commune and ideologies like Bavouvism, Blanquism and Marxism. This could be considered the rise of what most people would consider what is know as the 2nd world. From this moment the 2nd World would be considered purely ideological unlike the 1st World which is usually associated with the Western Hemisphere. But however, like the West, it will evolve from what it was once ideologically to be simply an alignment of countries that are part of the Eastern Block.
The Cold War definition starts in 1917, the foundation of the Soviet Union and the later establishment of his satellites. During the Cold War, any country in the ComIntern, was under the Soviet Block, under Soviet occupation or aligned with the Soviet sphere. WIP

3rd World :
WIP

The Epstein Files : The Most Wonderful Secret

NOTE : THIS SECTION ADDRESSES SENSITIVE AND DISTURBING REAL-WOLRD EVENTS INVOLVING JEFFREY EPSTEIN INCLUDING SEXUAL EXPLOITATION, ABUSE OF MINORS, AND SUICIDE. THE SUBJECT MATTER MAY BE DISTRESSING. READER DISCRETION IS ADVISED.

Introduction :

There aren't words strong enough to describe that feeling you may get reading some of the latest files in the ongoing Epstein saga. The pictures and videos you find online are merely just a few of the thousands of images and videos that appear within these files. I look at these and get disgusted, these are the same people that go up on stages in front of millions of Americans like you and preach to us about human rights, virtue signals about how much of a better person they are and lie to us, blatantly lie to our faces. The point of this section is to make sense of the allegations thrown at our leaders and some of our most notable public figures. I fell like the way the DOJ has gone about releasing these files has been shady, corrupt and objectively very confusing. I want to lay out the worst allegations out here in the sun for you to see with clarity.

Legal disclaimer : Legally, everything I talk about is still an allegation and a documented claim. I have rigorously fact checked my sources and will provide them upon request. A majority of these allegations and information comes from public records provided by the DOJ on the Epstein files case.

Chapter I : An American Disgrace

The first figure I want to examine is Donald Trump.

In 2016, Donald Trump sold us the idea that he was going to be the savior of America. He pointed out an obviously broken system that was failing millions of Americans and promised to be the change, the one to "drain the swamp". He built the largest populist movement in modern American history off the back of one promise, Make America Great Again. After Epstein was claimed to have committed suicide in 2019, Trump's term ended the following year, and it looked like this case was going to be swept under the rug. In 2024, Trump announced his third campaign for president under the same promises. This time adding to that list with the promise of releasing the Epstein files for the public to see.

During the interview with Donald Trump led by Lex Friedman, Trump suggested that he'll release Jeffrey Epstein's client list if elected

Trump and Epstein have a long and complicated relationship, one that is longer than many people would like to admit. Trump has long asserted that his close friendship with the child sex trafficker ended after the duo had a falling out over real estate in Palm Beach, ultimately ending contact altogether after 2006 when a grand jury indicted Epstein on state charges related to prostitution. This is also when many notable figures such as Bill Gates and Howard Lutnick claimed they also stopped communications with Epstein. In newly released files, it has Epstein emailing William Riley saying, "Before I call Trump with regard Virginia, are there any other alternatives?"
This message was sent in 2011, nearly half a decade after Trump claimed to have been in communications with Epstein. It is not clear who Riley is, though a decorated Iraq war veteran known as William Sasha Riley was identified in 2025 as another one of Epstein's victims by Substack writer Lisa Noel Volden. Riley claimed his adoptive father, William Bill Kyle Riley, worked as a pilot for Epstein and trafficked him to the Global Predator.
Epstein had claimed in a number of private email exchanges that he had damaging information on Trump. In an additional 2011 email to his accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein said that Trump had spent hours at his house with Virginia Giuffre and that Trump was quote "the dog that didn't bark".
Trump is mentioned nearly 5,000 times in the publicly available files. Even if he maintains that he hasn't communicated with Epstein since 2006, the fact that his name appears this frequently is disturbing and calls for serious questioning. However, potentially the most damning document including Trump's name is a 2016 file that recounts an incident with an unnamed victim in a party hosted by Epstein. In the document, it states that a quote, "Jane Doe was enticed to cross state lines to visit with Epstein and Trump to perform sexual acts on both adult men at special parties hosted by Epstein." Doe was told that this was to further her modeling career and something that she had to do. During the summer of 1994 after her seventh grade school year ended, Doe took a three-day bus trip from her father's home in the Midwest under the pretense that she would be visiting her grandmother. Doe traveled instead to New York City in order to start a modeling career. During the first party, Doe was asked to strip down to her underwear and give a massage to Epstein.
Doe was asked by Epstein to do sexual acts, but she refused. Doe was later asked to massage the penis of Epstein's guest, Donald Trump, with her hands. Doe was told that this was what she had to do in order to get a job, and Doe complied. During the second party, Doe was asked to perform oral sex on Trump and complied. During the third party, Doe was made to perform oral sex on Trump with another young girl named [REDACTED]. During the fourth visit, Doe was raped by Trump, vaginally penetrating Doe with his penis. Epstein was angry that Trump was the one to take Doe's virginity and then went on to rape Doe by vaginal and anal penetration with his penis. Doe struggled and was struck by both men during the assault. Doe was then threatened with violence by both men to not make any report of what happened. Quote, "We'll make you disappear like [REDACTED]." Doe was not paid for this final party.
The figure mentioned in this document is not only the leader of the United States but in charge of policies that go on to affect the entire world through a ripple effect. I fear a lot of Americans don't understand that their influence affects the greater world. trends that begin ere politically find their way into Europe, which then find their way into Asia and Africa. It is extremely repulsive, and it makes me physically ill. Knowing this unnamed victim had just finished seventh grade is heinous. There genuinely is no word to describe the feeling you get while reading and talking about these acts committed by Trump.
What blows my mind is that most people will still find some twisted way to defend and cope into believing that this is all just a democratic hoax and that a 12-year-old girl would perjure herself and conjure thoughts like this just to lie.

Chapter II : Lutnick’s Lies

The next figure I want to examine is Howard Lutnick.

Howard Lutnick currently serves as the 41st United States Secretary of Commerce, having been confirmed by the US Senate and taking office in February 2025 under President Trump. Before his venture in the cabinet, Lutnick was president and CEO of Cantor Fitzgerald and later its chairman. Under his leadership, the firm became a major player in fixed income trading, particularly US Treasury securities. Lutnick was first linked to Epstein through property records dating back to 1998 when Lutnick purchased a Manhattan townhouse from Epstein. Their friendship seemed to last for years until in October 2025, Lutnick gave an interview reported by the New York Post in which he described an encounter from around 2005 with Epstein at his New York home. He said after that visit, quote, "In the six to eight steps it takes to get from his house to my house, my wife and I decided that I will never be in the room with that disgusting person ever again." Lutnick was lying. Email records from 2012 show Lutnick directly corresponding with Epstein and his assistant Lesie Grath. In this email, Lutnick is recorded saying, quote, "Hi Jeff, We are landing in St. Thomas early Saturday afternoon and planning to head over to St. Barts on Monday at some point. Where are you located? What is the exact location for my captain? Does Sunday evening for dinner sound good? I have another couple, Michael and Marcy Lairman, and each of us has four children. Two 16s, two 14s, a 13, a 12, an 11, and a 7-year-old."

Lutnick has a very important position in the US government, advising the president on economic policy, promoting job creation, and fostering industrial growth. He took an oath under the Constitution after being sworn in. And he lied to us on national television.

Chapter III : Bill Gates

The next figure I want to examine is Bill Gates.

The billionaire businessman, philanthropist, and creator of Microsoft. Bill Gates is one of, if not the richest person on Earth. One of the wealthiest people to have ever lived with an estimated net worth of $115 billion. Gates is implicated in these files with numerous mentions discussing financial plans and funding for projects to be contributed by Epstein.
One of the most damning files implicating Bill Gates is him asking for medications that he can covertly give to his wife at the time, Melinda Gates, after contracting an STD from Russian girls. Epstein writing to Bill Gates says, quote, "To add insult to the injury, you then implore me to please delete the emails regarding your STD. your request that I provide you antibiotics that you can surreptitiously give to Melinda and the description of your penis. You also made it clear to me that I am not to refer to that as another topic that must remain between the two of us."
Gates fervently denies any connection with Epstein well after his original indictment and claims that the email Epstein doctorred was sent to himself and is full of makebelieve claims.

Bill Gates : "It's factually true that I was only at dinners, you know, I never went to the island. I never met any women. And so, you know, the more that comes out, the more clear it'll be uh that although the time was a mistake, it had nothing to do with that kind of behavior."
He never meet women because he was meeting girls.

It's very odd that one of the wealthiest and most powerful people in the world maintain such a relationship with Epstein well after he had been convicted for numerous sex crimes. There have been rumors of an alleged conversation between Gates and Epstein discussing a pandemic around 2017. I unfortunately can't find the file or reference to this conversation. So for now it is just a theory.

Chapter IV : Many Friends

For the final part of this section, I wanted to shed some light on figures that briefly appear in the files with very disturbing connotations.

Firstly, I wanted to show this conversation of Epstein and Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem, the CEO of the DP World, a massive company responsible for handling roughly 10% of global container trade. In the conversation with Epstein regarding a restaurant in Beijing, Bin Sulayem says, quote, "The penises are often dipped in soy or hot sauce. For women, eating penises is supposed to be good for the skin. For Chinese guests, eating the sexual organs is not a test of courage, but rather a treatment for their libido."

Following that disturbing account, I wanted to show this email of UCLA neurologist Mark Tramo. In an email to Epstein, Tramo states in the postcript that quote "was just reading today that newborns will suck on a pacifier more vigorously if it triggers playback of a recording of her/ his mother's voice than another woman's voice."

Next, I would like to show a victim's account of a party that happened on one of Epstein's yachts in the early 2000s. In 2019, a redacted victim claimed "he witnessed African-Amean males having sex with white blonde females, all of whom were bleeding during intercourse. He was a victim of a type of ritualistic sacrifice in which his feet were cut with a scimitar but left no scarring. On the yacht, he witnessed babies being dismembered, their intestines removed, and individuals eating the feces from these intestines. He was also raped by George Bush 1 (Senior).

Lastly, I wanted to talk about Michael Jackson.
For nearly two decades, Michael Jackson has had his name slandered with allegations of him being a pedophile and a child groomer. It is known that Michael Jackson was a supporter of Palestine and had major conflict with his record label and Tommy Mottola. It should also be known that Mottola supported Israel and is Jewish.

The audio here below is one of the last recorded conversations of Michael Jackson before his passing :

File:MichealJackson'sFinalPhoneCall.mp3

"They could frame me and say i overdose with drugs"
In 2009, MJ died because of lethal levels of drugs in his system.

With the most recent batch of files being released, it should be stated that Michael Jackson was cleared of all of his allegations. It should be known that he was never a pedophile. It should also be known that a large majority of people that defend Israel are listed by name and have numerous allegations of pedophilia.

Finally, the last file I wanted to talk about is one that claims that Jeffrey Epstein is still alive.
On August 10th, 2019, an individual anonymously posted on 4chan the morning of Epstein's death, claiming he witnessed weird things happening at the prison before Epstein's death was announced. Roberto Grijalva, an officer at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York, has been identified as the anonymous prison employee who posted on 4chan claiming Epstein left his cell Friday evening, shackled in a medical wheelchair, while at the same time, an unauthorized trip van arrived at the prison, which he believes took Epstein away the night before the news broke of his death. The employee is quoted saying, "Not saying anything after this pls do not try to dox me but last night after 04:15 count they took him medical in a wheelchair front cuffed but not 1 triage nurse says they spoke to him. Next thing we know a trip van shows up? We do not do releases on the weekends unless a judge orders it. Next thing we know, he's put in a single man cell and hangs himself? Here's the thing, the trip van did NOT sign in and we did not record the plate number and a guy in a green dress military outfit was in the back of the van according to the tower guy who let him thru the gate. You guys i am shaking right now but i think they switched him out."
It's not known where Epstein could be. Various theories suggests he allegedly continues his operation in a new location under a potentially new name. One of these theories proposes that Epstein has made his new operation in Somaliland. Epstein and his associates explored various business and investment opportunities in Somaliland, a self-declared state in the Horn of Africa rather than the internationally recognized territory of Somalia. A file show an interest in the region's economic potential, including water resources and financial services, as well as its geopolitical status. Additionally, Associates of Epstein proposed developing Somaliwood studios in Somali land for film and media production across Africa and the Arab world.
With all the vitriol that has been thrown at Somalians as of recent, it's not a hard theory to believe.
The perfect escape would be to this region of Africa. Not to mention on December 26, 2025, Israel became the first country to formally recognize Somali land. Knowing Epstein's deep connection with Mossad in Israel, this remains a very high possibility, but everything is alleged.

Chapter V : Conclusion

The story of Jeffrey Epstein is disturbing. It's a story about how someone so visible, so protected, existed in plain sight.
Surrounded by perpetrators and enablers who contributed to the abuse of minors for nearly four decades, the entire world is looking down on America for this.
And not a single outlet of legacy media is reporting this.
It's almost like they want this issue to be swept under the rug and for the abusers to go unpunished like they have been for the last 40 years.
This is a story of power and corruption, one where the consequences fall on us. It's your duty as an Americans to choose whether or not to accept this reality because it will have ramifications for the entire world for the rest of history.

If certain people are above the laws of a society, do we really have a society anymore? I'm just a teen and I have zero faith in the government. I feel so jaded that the people of this very western civilization have to continue to go to work every single day, barely making enough money to survive for themself. while hundreds of their dollars are funneled into taxes that these billionaires and these politicians use to create chaos and depravity in the world. The money they earned is being funneled to Israel to commit a genocide against Palestinians on a scale that is truly unbelievable.
What infuriates me the most is that a large percentage of the perpetrators of these horrific crimes will be dead in the next 20 years or so. And I highly doubt anyone will see any fraction of jail time or justifiable retribution for what they did. For example, Ghislaine Maxwell; She recently got transferred to a prison that is basically a summer camp. She is having the time of her life there. The victims remain unknown and their stories are hidden behind black boxes of redactions. a government that willingly chooses to protect the identity of pedophiles and abusers. The CIA is currently making memes, making jokes, and attempting to make light out of the worst thing that's happened in American history. I feel like we as a generation have become so desensitized to this. I genuinely believe we don't understand the true severity of the situation. And I hope there's an outcome where we as people wake up to this, change the system and begin a new before it's really too late.

Matthew 18:10 :
"See that you do not despise one of these little ones. For I tell you that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven"

May the victims of dead & alive be granted peace.

All sources come from the official Epstein files. I encourage you to read for yourself.

May God have mercy on our souls.

Relationships

IdeologiesSelf InsertsWorld-Building/LARP

The Paragon

Meet

• Communitarianism - I will always prioritize the Community and the Common Good, it's what keeps society civil and united. But many communitarian models are too egalitarian and progressive. Yet, still undoubtedly necessary and important.

Passable

• Cosmopolitanism - You're fine as long you're solely religious and spiritual and do not advocate for a World government.
• Reactionary Modernism - Not necessarily problematic although that name is misleading, a Reactionary can never be a Modernist, "Technological Reactionaryism" or something among those lines would be better, that of course if you aren't Modernist, which in the case you are, well, better remove the first part of your name. Anyways, assuming you aren't Modernist, theoretically-wise while again, not problematic, I don't really think your focus is correct. I'm not opposed to technological development, but at the current moment it isn't a priority, and we should rather focus on actions that can actually help sustain or to begin with start a reaction, like evangelization. Again, we are not Luddites, we shouldn't reject technological progress, but focusing on it just ain't it at the moment.

Complicated

• State Capitalism - In theory, you have a better approach towards Corporations than Distributism, but unlike him, you're extremely regulationist and centralist, ending up owning and controlling any single small business and big company. Essentially abolishing markets, which in my economy markets aren't abolished but exist through regulations and localization.
• Orthodox Theocracy - Nice guys, but fail to understand that The Holy Spirit proceeds from The Father and The Son and fail to recognize the unique superiority of the Bishop of Rome, which there is even archeological proof of. tho most of you are also obsessed and/or larpers

Flawed

• Reactionary Republicanism - You're in theory better than modern republicanism but republics, while they can be Godly, they can't be a formal God-established hereditary authority. And historically you were often deeply corrupted, functioning as oligarchical merchant states rather than an organ serving God and its people. Modern day reinterpretations who seek Traditionalism are fine tho.
• Libertarian Reactionaryism - Reactionary Libertarians claim that Public Law was a product of Liberalism coming from early modern Europe and was not the historical foundation of legal order but a relatively late development associated with the reception of Roman law. This thesis is false because Public Law was a thing in the Middle Ages and it was a fragmented, hierarchical system based on personal loyalty, land tenure, and custom rather than centralized state control, unlike how they claim it was. They also claim that institutions such as the medieval Church, local courts, and guilds are viewed as autonomous sources of legal authority that limited the consolidation of political power and constrained rulers, rather than as embryonic forms of the modern state, they claim these institutions sustained trans-local private-law order that inhibited the development of sovereign public law. This is false because Public Law in the Middle Ages was defined by the intersection of feudal law (between lords and vassals), canon law (church law), and emerging royal authority, with local customary law managing daily order. Thus meaning those institutions were the foundation belifies of Public Law. Private Law in the Middle Ages was rather a complex, fragmented system heavily influenced by local customs, Germanic tribal traditions, Roman law, and Canon law and its distinction from Public Law was often heavily blurred, as feudalism privatized many public functions.Public law, governing the state and community, was often indistinguishable from the personal, contractual relationships of lord and vassal, while private law dealt with local disputes, property, and customs.
• Reactionary Liberalism - Someone has to read only the first 15 lines of this page to realize you're not reactionary. You're a basic form of liberalism that civically has mainstream conservative and alt-lite tendencies (which are already Liberal by their own), so really you should be named "Liberal Liberalism". You're extremely moderate compared to any other form of Reactionaryism, Your pure "de-jure" form is inherently oxymoronic and contradictory. Your real-life "de-facto" form has nothing of Reactionary and everything of Liberal, you're a joke and useless regarding the start of a Reaction against Modernity.
• Ceremonial Monarchism - An insult to Monarchy, Tradition, Heredity and Divine institution. I'm not putting you in "Wicked" because you're not a Republican, at least on paper, even if you have still all of its qualities.

Wicked

• Republicanism - Worst form of government, nothing but an amalgamation of Enlightenment, Liberalism, Pragmatism and pure Rationalism. The government of the Atheists and Modernists, that kills Organicism and Divine Right in favor of a malfunctioning secularized mechanism.
• National Capitalism - A combination of the three worst products of Enlightenment in one. From Bourgeois Nazism to forms of Liberalism I couldn't find a shred of positivity in you.
• Futurism - Modernity is entirely flawed, do not think that accelerating it is going to have any positive effect. Fundamentally, you're the antithesis of Reaction, you want to go forward for a freer future from the roots of the past, but the present is rotten and has already blocked the passage. The only thing we can do is to cave out the poison and return to the organic and the eternal. Your philosophy is merely based on aesthetics and an innate hate for the past.
• Neoconservatism - I hate the fact that the West is primarily and only associated with you. You're the reason why many reactionaries are anti-western and/or pro-third world. They, however, do not realize that the West was the foundation of Counter-Revolutionary, Aristocratic and Integralist beliefs and that searching for a new third way against the West is going against the principle of Reaction and leaning towards Modernist Third Positionism. You're also barely conservative and just Liberal and Globalist.

Foul Miscreation and Ungodly

• Nazism - Angry modernist idiot who worships the state, hates Christianity, created racial hierarchies out of pseudoscience, hates disabled people, committed mass genocides of white people and almost destroyed Europe for some foolish beliefs. There's no reason why I, or anyone else should support you.
• Esoteric Fascism - Nazi, Esoteric, Pagan, Satanic, Anti-Reactionary, Hyper-Technologist, Schizo... Truly impeccable!
• State Liberalism - There's not much I need to say on why I oppose you, someone only needs to take glimpse at your page, but I'll still do some commentary. I don't believe you're totally fictional, but you're definitely strawmaned, like for believing the extermination of all white people, heterosexuals and men. There are still some governments somewhat similar to yours.
• Transgenderism - You will never be a real woman. You have no womb, you have no ovaries, you have no eggs. You're a homosexual man twisted by drugs and surgery into a crude mockery of nature's perfection. All the validation you get is two-faced and half-hearted. Behind your back, people mock you. Your parents are disgusted and ashamed of you. Your friends laugh at your ghoulish appearance behind closed doors. Men are utterly repulsed by you. Thousands of years of evolution have allowed men to sniff out frauds with incredible efficiency. Even trannies who pass look uncanny and unnatural to a man. Your bone structure is a dead giveaway. And even if you manage to get a drunk guy home with you, he'll turn tail and bolt the second he gets a whiff of your diseased, infected ax wound. You will never be happy. You wrench out a fake smile every single morning and tell yourself it's going to be okay. But deep inside you feel the depression creeping up like a weed, ready to crush you under the unbearable weight. Eventually it'll be too much to bear. You'll buy a rope, tie a noose, put it around your neck and plunge into the cold abyss. Your parents will find you, heartbroken but relieved that they no longer have to live with the unbearable shame and disappointment. They'll bury you with a headstone marked with your birth name, and every passerby for the rest of eternity will know a man is buried there. Your body will decay and go back to the dust, and all that will remain of your legacy is a skeleton that is unmistakably male. This is your fate. This is what you chose. There's no turning back.
• Queer Anarchism - Worst form of Anarchism possible.
  • Fuck off. BE GAY, DO CRIMES
  • I'm going to rape you
  • W-what??
  • That'd be gay and a crime
  • That's not what I meant...
  • Bend over

Tanzanite

Gemerald

• Template:Energeneralism - Probably the closest ideology to mine, I don't really disagree on anything expect one thing, absolute monarchy, absolute monarchy is a literal violation of Natural Law and thus de-legitimizes the King.

Gem

• MP-HJ Thought - One of my favorite and similar ideologies, my main critique is protestantism, considering that I'm an ultramontane, your advocacy for religious freedom/tolerance and separation of church and state (politics), albeit not in a secular way, is questioning to my eyes. The Anglican Church wasn't any less """"fundamentalist"""" than the Catholic Church, or at least in its early decades, but tbh even if I'm a tradcath I don't oppose Vatican 2 because that would be schismatic, so you do the same with your church (thought you guys have female bishops so you should really start questioning what your church is doing). Also your "quasi-libertarianism" as in of authority enforced by non-state authority it's still authority nonetheless, that's like calling the Middle Ages libertarians because feudal landlords, the church and mercenaries had authority oh wait you do.
• Patrickism - Very based orthodox, economy is good, not a fan of absolutism and paleoconservatism but still great, I also find you're classical reactionaryism interesting which isn't like mine which is more revolutionary.

Ruby

• File:Deitap.png Southern American Socialism - so over all this ideology is pretty good, especially the culture and the Decentralized Planned Economy, while elective monarchism isn't my favorite, the revolutionary-traditionalist government led by a monarch crowned by the Pope is great, the downsides? well, socialism, nationalism, Revolutionary Syndicalism (not my favorite form of syndicalism) and criticism of reactionaryism, yes enlightenment is inherently evil. still pretty good overall.
• Template:Zankism - hi fellow rea- what? you don't use the r-word because it's a derogatory term made by the French? well you still remain one. but moving on, Critique of Politics, monarchism, Accelerationism are all nice, despite you being a pag- oh c'mon, not even the p-word? fine. despite you being "religiously esoteric" which is some bullshit mixed up together, still good for not liking "the cathedral" and the Jacobins, zionists, atheists, prostitution and humanism. Still, I'm very skeptic of your Quasi-Libertarianism, neutrality for capitalism (which is Bourgeois rule and not aristocratic/elite, anti-traditionalist, pro-enlightenment and the fact that it is amoralistic is the problem with it). I'm also skeptic of your "pan-white nationalism" if we can call it like that, I disagree with you that race is real and more important than ethnicity, ethnicity is more local rooted and familiar to the people of the nation, white people do not have a common culture, if anything there's some connections between different white people's local culture but that is really it.

Steel

• Italian Neomonarchism - Despite being Italian, monarchist, a patriot and catholic, you're exactly what Félix Sardá y Salvany described in his book, "Liberalism Is a Sin", you're a "Catholic Liberal" which calling you catholic is already an exaggeration, this thesis of liberal catholicism has been condemned by the church for years, like the Syllabus of errors, a book wrote by Pope Pius IX which contains all heresies and errors which are contained in liberalism.
• File:DariusDuck.png DariusDuck Thought - Look who's back. I really like your importance for tradition and your welfare, while democracy and technocravy are not my favorite because to me it contradicts traditional society (but to be fair you only want to preserve tradition, not making it the status quo), tho statism is nice while Anti-Bureaucracy not really. guild and decentralized corporatism are really my favorite part of your economics, the free market and lack of regulation it's what i dislike about it the most, While the aboltion of the corrupt banking system is based. I have to put you here because of huge differencies like liberalism and free market economy and it's a very rationalist ideology, which contradicts with mine.

Iron

• File:ACPMIcon.png Austrian Critical PostMonarchism - your monarchism is good, so is your catholicism of course, your economy could be better but still good, but christian progressive and pro-choice is fucking ass bro, heresy type shi, being pro-life isn't a catholic "opinion" it's an absolute doctrine that must respected in order to consider you even a christian, sorry but you lost me with that one.

Rust

• File:Balduko.png Baldukism - generic Para-fascists, at least you like corporatism (kind of) and nobility despite you liking Machiavellianism and what the fuck, the fuck you mean terror, hell nah that's some Himmler shit.
• Thalassoism - also a para-fascist, somewhat better than the above, but you're still a nationalist, totalitarian, putinist and a Kaiserboo.
• File:Carangejo.png Template:WM/MiraPCBA - like the above but a patriot instead of nationalist which is good but still a capitalist

Anthracite

• Template:Terminism - While Tripartism, anti-corporatocracy and protectionism are really nice, you're a nationalist, liberal, republican, capitalist and moderate conservative, which takes a lot of points away. but still better than what we have in the US right now.

Coal

• File:Fernando3800.png Fernando3800ism - super-jewy conservatism number #9794859174
• File:Dzsocdem.png Algerian Social Democracy - Yet another third wordlist who wants to fix his country with the west's status quo. At least you like communitarianism I guess.

Brimstone

• Template:Radical Republicanism - Nothing but an actual idealist obssesed with the jacobins, coping into thinking his view of romanticism is the only correct and applicable one, while ignoring the fact that his legacy is all a product of enlightenment. Populist, revolutionary nationalist, national spirit, republican, hates tradition, Dictatorship of Law, centralist and sucks giovanni gentile's dick, you're basically an early fascist in socialist and progressive clothes.
• Template:Gatorism - Le heckin' wholesome 100 big chungus ideology par excellence!
  • File:High-FloridaMan.png - What?
    • - you graduated from reddit university nigga

Antimatter

• Template:Xeno-Anarchism - the name already makes me want to kill myself. I don't think it's necessarily to explain why all the thing you believe go against my beliefs, so I will just list them. Anti-Economy, anti-work (most retarted shit ever), Anarcho-Communism, Individualist Communism (I'm crine), Egoism, Communization Theory, Anarcho-Transhumanism 🥀, Post-Leftism (I hate the ideology to death), Gender Accelerationism, Xenofeminism. And yes you are a degenerate, cry about it. Btw, your dad is right, autistic people do need "Help" to have their Identities explained.
• Confederate Crusadism - im fucking crine bro
• File:UnityTotal.png Complete Totalitarianism - hell nah nigga

Tanzanite

Gemerald

Gem

Ruby

Steel

• File:LabourThalasso.png Labour Thalassoism - Not bad but still socialist and nationalist.
• File:Bekekertje.png Bekekertjeism - Third positionism and traditionalism is ok, but i don't like socialism and racism towards gypsies

Iron

Rust

Anthracite

Coal

• File:Carangejo.png Reconstructed Carangejoism - Similar to the original but zionist, neocon, liberal and neoliberal so worse
• File:AHW.png AHW Model - mid

Brimstone

• File:DudemanTheDude.png DudemanTheDudeism - how about nah.
  • File:DudemanTheDude.png - hey, Dudeman here, Ion really give a shit abt this i still dont fucking understand why some weirdo made an ideology after me
  • - "Weirdo" you goon to userball porn
  • File:DudemanTheDude.png - that was 6 fucking years ago
  • - Then explain why did you made Hatsune Miku a tangible being? Is this for gooner stuff?
  • File:DudemanTheDude.png - "gooner stuff" and i intended to have an overarching story to that timeline which had some kind of weird civil rights movement for people that were born in pods and people that have cybernetic implants
  • - That's actually pretty dumb making a fictional robotic people exist
  • File:DudemanTheDude.png - let me cook in peace bruhhhhh
  • - Okay then
  • - what the fuck is happening
  • File:DudemanTheDude.png - so sorry this is happening on your weird ideology page thing. i js wanted to leave my 2 cents here and it ended up snowballing into that one meme with "PELEA DE RETRASADOS" text
• File:Biofascism.png Biofascism - so like odalism but monarchist, so like uhh, hell nah.

Antimatter

Comments

Got to user talk page