Re: Iron March Forum

[Red Aegis]

Nice troll attempt.

[JewKillerX2000]

>implying you even read it
>implying you are not a waste of human accommodations
>implying you are not trying to save whatever face you have left from when 777 pulverized your dirty commie arse

[Isakenaz]

>implying you even read it
>implying you are not a waste of human accommodations
>implying you are not trying to save whatever face you have left from when 777 pulverized your dirty commie arse

Ah, the organ grinders monkey speaks

[JewKillerX2000]

>implying trotscum have not been tooting the same horn for 70 years
>implying one single revolution came out of it

lol, I am amazed at the quality of posts here. Commies are so intelligent they know not to actually construct a counter-argument but go straight to the abuse. The irony is in all the asshurt you've exhibited on your own forum, when we came looking for a simple conversation.

[AeneasHoplite]

Father goebbels says;

Only a few more years and the white race will be forced to realize that either we reassert absolute mastery over the earth's teaming biological inferiors or they will overwhelm us like a filthy black plague of locusts.
The time is not far off when a white man who recommends any 'rights' for niggers and other non-whites will be set upon by other white men who finally understand that such “do-goodism” is RACIAL TREASON!


commies mad cuz they never bomb Reykjavik
commies mad cuz they haz backwards secular humanist morality, and are traitor scum
also related, "muh multicultural morality. Morality is perceived in different ways throughout the world. That is why I can't have one"
wake up, white man

Oh no, more Fearmongering that the Blacks, Jews, Commies, will overwhelm white people like locusts.

Now before you say anything like "Anti-Racist is codeword for anti-white"
Keep in mind, White people have many different ideologies, you can't just group them all together

I know lots of white nationalists have differing ideologies that are sometimes contradictory to each other. Pro-America white separatists, Neopagan wotanists, Fascists, Primitive racialists, Christian identity. The thing they all agree on is that they're pro-White, but if they ever got what they wanted I'm sure there would be in fighting.

[JewKillerX2000]

Bro, what are you trying to say? Are you implying that racial displacement, the criminal welfare state, and cultural guilt are not real? If you are white, no matter where you live you feel the collapse of world-authority and racial hygene everywhere you go. It is not like you have to be a master in racial theory to understand, nor do you have to subscribe to national socialism to understand the present mentality of oikophobia to be suicidal.

Yes the movement is fractured, that is not a reason to fracture it further. All of these 'groups' are mostly spurges who are more concerned with feeling good about themselves than they are with actually preserving their race. They are laughable not because of our worldview but because of their pseudo-philosophizing, while avoiding any sense of action that might be constructive. As for "white people" they are lazy and apathetic because they have been robbed of the will to fight and sedated by the press, who is bought off by Jewish banks. The institution of false values is a process that takes generations, but they have done it successfully so that we are at the point where the citizenry willingly defend the government's commitment to their dissolution.

Bear in mind the apocalypse revolution scenario is completely unrealistic and irrelevant. Whites have proven in the past that because they have no identity or self worth they will let minorities piss in their side. Unless some action is taken now and the people become highly agitated, there may be no turning back in a generation, we will simply lack the population and the monopoly on international trade/military technology that we posses now. This is the generation of the last man, and if it doesn't meet that calling that it will perish in rivers of blood.

[AeneasHoplite]

Bro, what are you trying to say? Are you implying that racial displacement, the criminal welfare state, and cultural guilt are not real? If you are white, no matter where you live you feel the collapse of world-authority and racial hygene everywhere you go. It is not like you have to be a master in racial theory to understand, nor do you have to subscribe to national socialism to understand the present mentality of oikophobia to be suicidal.

Yes the movement is fractured, that is not a reason to fracture it further. All of these 'groups' are mostly spurges who are more concerned with feeling good about themselves than they are with actually preserving their race. They are laughable not because of our worldview but because of their pseudo-philosophizing, while avoiding any sense of action that might be constructive. As for "white people" they are lazy and apathetic because they have been robbed of the will to fight and sedated by the press, who is bought off by Jewish banks. The institution of false values is a process that takes generations, but they have done it successfully so that we are at the point where the citizenry willingly defend the government's commitment to their dissolution.

Bear in mind the apocalypse revolution scenario is completely unrealistic and irrelevant. Whites have proven in the past that because they have no identity or self worth they will let minorities piss in their side. Unless some action is taken now and the people become highly agitated, there may be no turning back in a generation, we will simply lack the population and the monopoly on international trade/military technology that we posses now. This is the generation of the last man, and if it doesn't meet that calling that it will perish in rivers of blood.

I can see what you mean, quite a while ago from a news article, I read that Whites now have the lowest amount of births in United States.
It's becoming a possibility they will become a minority in this country. I'm not too sure about the stats for Europe. But I'm sure there will be families who will continue to pass on generation by generation.

[>Implyin]

>WNs
>One big group
lolno. I'm a Fascist and Racialist and I hate WNs. WNs are pussy "muh civil rights" kinds, I'm all about just killing all niggers and Jews.

[Red Aegis]

I can see what you mean, quite a while ago from a news article, I read that Whites now have the lowest amount of births in United States.
It's becoming a possibility they will become a minority in this country. I'm not too sure about the stats for Europe. But I'm sure there will be families who will continue to pass on generation by generation.

Aeneas, those statistics, even if true, would not justify the use of force to change it.

[Guest777]

I can see what you mean, quite a while ago from a news article, I read that Whites now have the lowest amount of births in United States.
It's becoming a possibility they will become a minority in this country. I'm not too sure about the stats for Europe. But I'm sure there will be families who will continue to pass on generation by generation.

In the 1950's the United States was 90% white, most western european countries are less than that, and it has all been done in the last 30 years. Whats more europeans have negative birthrates, that is below replacement level. Europeans are already minorities in virtually all major cities, at least in terms of births. You can thank 'antifascist' and multicultural social teachings promoted my marxists for preventing opposition to capital ensuring a constant supply of labour to keep wages down. The same applies to women also - Low birthrates are the result of the marxist and capitalist efforts to get women into the workforce. a wage used to support a family, now there is no family so wags are less and the addition of women halves all existing paychecks. Women used to care for families, and so used to vote for governments that supported family values - now they are part of the exploited masses.

Your class war is a race war, that is what it will amount to. European workers are being bled to raise and maintain parasitic cukoos on their soil. That the workers will one day turn on their capitalist masters and crush this egg is a historic innevitability.

[ForTheFuture]

So you see a graph mapping the decline of the white race or some mixed-race kid in a che guevara tee shirt and you'll feel all miserable, but when you see pictures of the holocaust or some other genocide or some war zone far away you're responce is 'me ne frego' because they are not your kin? And you consider this a natural human reaction and otherwise would be dogoodism?

[Guest777]

Yes.

And nobody will shed a tear for us either - despite all those high ideals that are the peculiarity of our group we will be weighed by history in the only balance that counts and found wanting. We will have been proven an inferior species that biologically had no right to exist on this earth.

[Egalitarian]

>WNs
>One big group
lolno. I'm a Fascist and Racialist and I hate WNs. WNs are pussy "muh civil rights" kinds, I'm all about just killing all niggers and Jews.

Your provocation of slaughter of Africans and Semites isn't mandated and isn't something I would boast about on the internet if I adhered to such a view. Whatever, I guess; emulation of your 'Judeo-Bolshevik' counterpart is just as mandated, and becoming inducted to Fuhrer status works just like that: by acting very un-conciliatory in times of when the consequences of fanatical violence towards idle citizens has settled in.

Aeneas, those statistics, even if true, would not justify the use of force to change it.

I too have seen the statistics she (or he) speaks of. Correcting such damage is very vital. The problem with liberty is just that. . . it does not allow it. Do not interpret it as a contradiction with what I just said.

[Red Aegis]

I too have seen the statistics she (or he) speaks of. Correcting such damage is very vital. The problem with liberty is just that. . . it does not allow it. Do not interpret it as a contradiction with what I just said.

I would like to see proof of damage please. What possible criteria could you be using to judge this? I doubt that it is as objective as you think it is.

[Admin]

I am right to feel superior because you have video game crap in your avatar and all over the website.

You're in no position to make those sorts of criticisms, Benjamin. Your forum was created by a delusional Eurasian cosplayer, who is starved for recognition as a 'Russian national revolutionary'. Everything I have seen associated with Iron March — from its charter to its hilariously pitiful podcasts — makes me feel embarrassed for you.

As for the Socialist Phalanx, there is no "video game crap" in this forum's design.

The only reason I have not yet responded to a number of your inane reactionary arguments is because I haven't had the time to spend on that frivolous enterprise. So, in the meantime, I urge you to exercise a little more patience.

[ForTheFuture]

Yes.

And nobody will shed a tear for us either - despite all those high ideals that are the peculiarity of our group we will be weighed by history in the only balance that counts and found wanting. We will have been proven an inferior species that biologically had no right to exist on this earth.

So whites only legacy to future generations is in it's physical existence? If that were the case I would be tempted to agree with the future generations dismissal of our people as inferior.

[Guest777]

You're in no position to make those sorts of criticisms, Benjamin. Your forum was created by a delusional Eurasian cosplayer, who is starved for recognition as a 'Russian national revolutionary'. Everything I have seen associated with Iron March — from its charter to its hilariously pitiful podcasts — makes me feel embarrassed for you.

As for the Socialist Phalanx, there is no "video game crap" in this forum's design.

The only reason I have not yet responded to a number of your inane reactionary arguments is because I haven't had the time to spend on that frivolous enterprise. So, in the meantime, I urge you to exercise a little more patience.

This place does remind me of the interface on Red alert - I nostalgia so hard, especially at the portal. It is like, ok, how might this look any different to a website selling that mock soviet merchandise; felt onion hats and lenin schoolbags, keyrings, mugs etc - or the website for the latest Xbox release. Again all these designs, this whole leftist cyber chic thing is pretty modern, it looks nothing like anything from the actual Soviet Union. At best it is a little unimaginative, but try for a minute to seriously consider the effect it has on those coming here, especially those actually from politics. At least when we do stuff like this we carry it off with a sense of irony - the forum memes thread is exclusively for self criticism, something I thought you were supposed to practice.

As for Alex he clearly has recognition here with people posting his essays, and I reckon that makes you jelly. He has a lot going for him, he is clearly talented in graphical design and he can write. If he wanted he could use these skills to get all the recognition you speak of - He could easily have gotten to the top of this young Eurasianist group under Dugin, in fact he was invited to GRA. Unlike most of them he speaks English and French - his English is flawless and that makes him effectively invaluable. He has done all this in just a few short years - I think his website came up only last year. He has also written a book recently - that is an achievement - it is being translated by others. We will see what the results of that are in a few years, but it is not like any of us ever stop. Yes there will probably be a lot of failures but we always learn from that and adapt because we are trying to make a difference.

I would be interested to know what you are contributing if you are so quick to criticise the work of others. Not that this alone invalidates a criticism that you might have had, but I feel in this case there is a bit of hypocrisy if this discussion is still a comparison between the two forums. you have this place, what are you doing with it? you don't seem very committed to any kind of cause like we are. Our podcasts have reached legendary status despite the fact they are amateur and improvised, I have had nothing but good and constructive feedback (from non IM users) – and I can listen to them for genuine entertainment. The 'official' youtube podcasts were a good early effort. We are now looking into making it much more professional.

So whites only legacy to future generations is in it's physical existence? If that were the case I would be tempted to agree with the future generations dismissal of our people as inferior.

Nothing that will be acknowledged as such, just look at former Rhodesia and South Africa, do they consider themselves continuing a white legacy? Do they get down on their knees and thank the white men they butchered for the roads, hospitals, farms, and cities they inherited? Pft I hope you are not expecting any kind of thanks from these people, they don't have 'guilt' or will ever denigrate their people the way they did. In that sense yes, materials and hallmarks will be our only legacy - your values will be completely alien to them, and they will treat them with the contempt they deserve.

[Red Aegis]

What is wrong with you?

"Your internet forum avatar is stupid!"

"Your forum reminds me of something I saw once!"

"You're dumb and I don't have to address the actual argument!"

Seriously, grow up.

[Celtiberian]

This doesn't work - why do you have to continue breaking everything up and letting the conversation run away with whatever comes up, do you think I am made of time? What is wrong with addressing themes and arguments as a whole so it is more managable and cohernant? are you incapable of this?

Let's get a few things straight. First of all, I am addressing the substance of your arguments, but you write paragraphs which contain several points that require individual consideration. They also happen to be highly contentious, which is why I can't simply ignore them and instead respond to the general thrust of your posts. You have steered the debate thus far, so don't act as if I'm digressing into irrelevant topics. If this is consuming too much of your time, I suggest you narrow the focus of your argument.

Marxism allows these exceptions to exist because its underdog relationship fits in with its submissive and egalitarian world view – like how workers supported Marxist parties out of a civil class interest, nowhere do you find a Marxism that is sincerely nationalist.

You're correct that Marxist analysis deals with relationships of power and domination, and it does so because it's concerned with uncovering the factors that obstruct human emancipation. Of course, to a reactionary nationalist, Marxian conceptions of nationalism appear 'insincere,' but that's to be expected.

Marxism meant strength for ‘national liberation movements’, but what has it meant for say the Rhodesians? Nothing but the genocide of their people's – and this is the problem.

Like the Boers in South Africa, the Rhodesians were a pseudo-nation which had no right to colonize Zimbabwe. That obviously doesn't excuse whatever murders were committed during their expulsion from Africa, but that's a separate issue. (The same can be applied to the Moorish occupation of Spain (711-1492), for instance, so be sure not to accuse me of having an 'anti-white' bias in your response.) Most contemporary nation-states were established by a history of conquest and murder, though that doesn't render such methods defensible from an ethical standpoint. So, in my opinion, whenever an occupied population succeeds in overthrowing a colonial force, it's justified in so doing. The Boers and Rhodesians largely failed in their endeavor to create African states because the sub-Saharan demographic within 'their' territories never assimilated into the national culture those European colonists established, and one of the main reasons they didn't is because the Europeans sought to divide the society by race. The ensuing struggle was inevitable.

It is all based on narrative ; of who is oppressed, what belongs to who – it is not real life it is drawing lines in the sand – not something that applies to everyone.

The only way you could legitimately argue that Marxist analysis doesn't apply to "real life" is if it fails to accurately predict national liberation struggles. Unfortunately for you, this is not the case.

Though Marxists are still proud of their commitment to Ireland for instance, in relation to their socialist past and the troubles – we find now, a hundred years later are now imposing on them the same white guilt and multiculturalist policies, that have befallen Britain and the rest of Europe – including countries like Sweden with no colonial or oppressive histories.

Whoever attempts to imbue the Irish people (or anyone else, for that matter) with a sense of "white guilt" is doing so on the basis of cosmopolitanism and critical race theory, not Marxism. Admittedly, there are certain contemporary Marxists who also adhere to such theories, but the concepts themselves are unrelated to Marxism proper. With respect to multiculturalist policies, you're incredibly naïve if you believe they're adopted due to pressure from Marxist social engineers.

Someone like Jessie Jackson is a Marxist because it benefits his race – and he is also a democratic shill.

Jessie Jackson is a Marxist? I'd enjoy seeing evidence of this.

These Europeans were never really Marxists, not in any true sense.

Provided you're referring to cosmopolitan extremists, I agree that they aren't following Marxist theory. But if you're claiming that left-wing nationalist figures like James Connolly, Stanisław Brzozowski, and John Maclean weren't "true" Marxists, you're deceiving yourself. (I should also add that you've consistently failed to demonstrate a proficient understanding of Marxism, and are therefore in no position to judge such matters.)

A political party is not a forum

You don't say..

This is why we are coming together to develop a consistent current

If you've really developed a "consistent current," unlike your ideological predecessors, you shouldn't have any trouble summarizing it for us.

Hitler grovelled to big business by threatening them – Marxists sure are capable of performing the most impressive intellectual acrobatics on things that contradict their myths.

He only began threatening them after he assumed power, and it amounted to very little regardless. The Strasserist faction of the NSDAP did participate in strikes which made the bourgeoisie uncomfortable, but Hitler was always there to reassure them that such elements were never going to gain hegemony in the party. The Nazis blackmailed in a figurative sense; the capitalists felt compelled to fund Hitler not because the Nazis literally forced them to, but rather because they wanted to ensure that he felt an obligation to honor his commitment to defend private property.

There I was taking you seriously. I am not even going to dignify that with a response – other than the possibility that such people are masochists who enjoy hardship, though there are plenty of other ways of doing that.

I didn't suggest that they were masochists. The fascists were involved in a struggle to attain state power, so they had an incentive to endure whatever hardships befell them in the process. However, the reason they didn't shy away from physical confrontations with the Left was because there was an undeniable adventurist element among the young veterans involved in those parties.

They were weak, corrupt and nobody fought for it in the streets. Just one division is all that would have been needed but they couldn’t even muster that.

What are you talking about? There were mass demonstrations in Moscow at the height of the capitalist reforms. And "one division" wouldn't have sufficed to take on the force of the military apparatuses of those countries. Moreover, one could extend that argument to fascism: why didn't the East Germans or the Italians, for example, resist the occupying forces more adamantly if they were so devoted to the fascist cause?

Because they state quite openly they don’t need the workers, they just rule over and degrade them. In that regard who has been more influential than Hollywood, politics, news, music, and radio?

They cannot be communists if they reject the proletariat as the historical agents of revolution. Nor can they be if their objective is to "rule over and degrade" the working class. The Marxist position has always been that the revolution will represent a self-emancipation of the proletariat.

What is meant here by nation. I want Marxist definitions of nationalism.

The Marxist-Leninist definition, as propounded by Joseph Stalin, is "a historical, evolved stable community of language, territory, economic life, and psychological make-up manifested in a community of culture." Otto Bauer's Austro-Marxist definition also added that,

"The nation is a relative community of character; it is a community of character because, in any given era, a range of corresponding characteristics can be observed among the great majority of the nation's members, and because, although all nations share a number of characteristics by virtue of their humanity, there is nevertheless a range of characteristics that are peculiar to each nation and distinguish it from other nations. The nation is not an absolute, but only a relative community of character. . . The nation has a national character, but this national character merely indicates a relative commonality of the characteristics of individual behavior."
Otto Bauer, The Question of Nationalities and Social Democracy (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2000), p. 22.

Unlike the Marxist-Leninists, the Austro-Marxists didn't believe that national identity was merely a transient historical phenomenon, and in this sense shares more in common with the left-wing nationalism I adhere to. To summarize, we define the nation as a community constituted by a shared belief in and mutual commitment to co-nationals, extended in history, active in character, and marked off from other communities by a distinct public culture. The last facet is what distinguishes us most sharply from reactionary nationalist currents, because it's inherently democratic—and since fascism is elitist, and thus rejects democracy on principle (not withstanding the nonsensical attempts by intellectuals like Giovanni Gentile to portray fascist authoritarianism as possessing a 'democratic essence'), it is fundamentally at odds with the nationalism you espouse.

I think that is the logical outcome of the process – the moral consistency to the foundations of the idea and groupthink.

Only it isn't. It is the outcome of an attempt to graft onto Marxism a cosmopolitan project which neither Marx nor Engels acknowledged. Notice that I haven't argued that Marx and Engels were left-wing nationalists themselves, because that also wouldn't be accurate. The reality is that they didn't trouble themselves with the national question much, and the little they did write about the subject changed considerably throughout their lives. What is certain is that they never argued that ethnicity or national identity were destined to wither away upon the ascent of global communism, as Luxemburgists do.

That is all part of it, it is a form of self gratification, and probably also has a sexual element, this has been proven.

It hasn't been "proven." I don't deny that some activists derive satisfaction from participating in movements for social justice, but there are also those who do so simply because they believe it is the right thing to do. Kant's categorical imperative has long been followed by socialists and communists. And what makes you think that fascist activists are immune from deriving self-gratification from their activism, by the way?

the classic example of this is Peter singer's classic essay "Famine, Affluence, and Morality" on global hunger where he explains that foreign aid is a moral obligation for all individuals no matter the circumstances - irregardless of fact, like for instance how your actions might make things worse. It is all on the internet.

"I begin with the assumption that suffering and death from lack of food, shelter, and medical care are bad....if it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought, morally, to do it."

He then takes that to its logical conclusion and deconstructs any and all arguments against this logical train of thought. He proves that leftist conceptions of charity is mindless and irrational.

I'm familiar with Peter Singer's work, and his Left bona fides are sorely lacking, to put it mildly. Being an exponent of evolutionary psychology, he has been on the forefront of arguing that Marxian socialism is infeasible due to 'human nature' since the 1970s. In short, he adheres to the Thatcherite dictum of there being "no alternative" to capitalism. His utilitarian ethics are the source of his commitment to foreign aid, and he's well aware of the unintended consequences which lie in imprudently assisting Third World countries—which is why he supports only those NGOs which have empirically demonstrated progress in alleviating poverty.

For what is essentially the personal faith of thousands of nitwits in the west - world conditions over the past 40 years since the essay has written has deteriorated immeasurably - in Africa since that time the population has tripled. Originally it will reach the point of unsustainability, and what do you have then? collapse - mud hut genocide.

The deterioration of conditions in the Third World is directly attributable to the neoliberal structural adjustment programs which the West has forced these countries to adopt (and which liberals like Singer dismiss, incidentally). It has nothing whatever to do with left-wing charity, except insofar as progressively-minded individuals substitute radical activism for passively donating to charities involved in microfinance, or participating in 'ethical consumerism,' or what have you. Slavoj Žižek critiqued this phenomenon quite well in First as Tragedy, Then as Farce.

(his thesis is described in the following brief lecture)


But even the left-liberals are intelligent enough to realize that any assistance provided to the Third World is offset by unsustainable increases in population size, which is why they are constantly struggling against the Christian charities in order to provide the needy with access to contraceptives. So your argument is a complete straw man.

Dogooding is the greatest threat to mankind, it is the type of morality that says that it is better to condemn thousands to die and suffer in nuclear fire than torture a terrorist for the location of the weapon.

Nice reductio ad absurdum, you sensationalist twit.

I have demonstrated this is wrong - if do-gooding was an innate part of human biology we would have been wiped out.

Apparently you're unfamiliar with the study of human altruism. People engage in acts of generosity on a regular basis, so altruism is clearly an aspect of our Gattungswesen—though material conditions can either promote or retard its development. (And since we live in competitive capitalist societies, it's reasonable to assume that we're witnessing far less altruism than would otherwise be the case.)

Rights are illegitimate because they don't exist and are incompatible with the scientific method fascism follows

Whether you agree with them or not, rights exist because people accept their validity and actively enforce them. So, in addition to being wrong about matters of class, the allegedly "scientific method" which fascists follow falters when it comes to explaining rights.

you have evolution and that is all fine and good until you get to an animal on two legs, then he is something sacred. We say that is impossible, you either believe in the truth and apply it to yourself without egoism or you are kidding yourself.

The human species is distinct from the rest of the animal kingdom because we are endowed with cognitive faculties which facilitate reason, abstract thought, and contemplation. To quote Marx,

"A spider conducts operations which resemble those of the weaver, and the bee would put many a human architect to shame by the construction of its honeycomb cells. But what distinguishes the worst architect from the best of bees is that the architect builds the cell in his mind before he constructs it in wax. At the end of every labour-process, a result emerges which had already been conceived by the worker at the beginning, hence already existed ideally. Man not only effects a change of form in the materials of nature; he also realizes his own purpose in those materials."
Karl Marx, Capital, Vol. I (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1976), p. 284.

Applying the truth of evolution to the study of human beings will tell you how we came to exist, but not why we behave as we do—unless, of course, you subscribe to the untenable biological reductionism that is evolutionary psychology (as Peter Singer does). The truth is that, like evolution itself, human behavior emerges from a dialectical process so vexingly complex that one can hardly separate nature from nurture. Furthermore, I find it amusing that a fascist would accuse Marxism of idealizing human beings, when fascists have historically defended the very religious institutions that regard evolution as being an unacceptable heresy.

Nature has its own morality and its own laws

Wrong. The attempt to derive morality from nature is fallacious because each organism follows its own particular set of instincts. Humans, as I explained above, are unique insofar as we have the ability to choose which of our behaviors to uphold as ethical and which to condemn as unacceptable. As Stephen Jay Gould argued, even though "the range of our potential behavior is circumscribed by our biology," evolution has nevertheless provided us with a brain so flexible that it "permits us to be aggressive or peaceful, dominant or submissive, spiteful or generous," while being "rigidly predisposed toward none."

Somebody uses their natural right of superiority to abuse a child then they will be lynched and murdered by the community. that is the selection as laid down by Charles Darwin.

Actually, it isn't. Charles Darwin's major contribution to the theory of evolution was natural selection, i.e., the differential reproduction of organisms as a function of heritable traits that influence adaptation to the environment. It also happens to be a theory in crisis. But even if the neo-Darwinians succeed in defending natural selection, the modern evolutionary synthesis is destined to be relegated to the dustbin of history because the primacy evolutionary biologists currently bestow onto natural selection is being progressively undermined by findings in symbiogenesis (i.e., horizontal gene transfer), epigenetics, Lamarckian retrogenes, and dialectical biology.

I strongly recommend that you also cease discussing evolution as if you understand it in any meaningful capacity.

We don't think we are above nature - and by extension family, social norms, race, nation, etc.

As if the family unit as it's currently constituted (patriarchal), contemporary social mores, race as it's commonly understood, and the current territorial demarcations of nations are 'natural.'

No I was explaining how leftist social theories were used by big business to start the consumer revolution, but I was also pointing out that big business, particularly Hollywood and the entertainment industry was infested with Jewish communists.

Communism is antithetical to the possessive individualism that underlies bourgeois consumerism, so your argument is entirely without merit. And I already explained that the communist presence in Hollywood from the '20s-'40s is not evidence of an elite conspiracy to inculcate the masses with a socialistic ethos. The various screenwriters and directors you listed may have sought to do so, but they weren't following directives from the ruling class as you suggest (far from it). This eventually led to their being blacklisted during the McCarthyist witch trials, which effectively ended communist involvement in Hollywood. That you believe it persists to this day is evidence of your own paranoia; you may want to consider getting psychoanalyzed (har har).

You totally neglect and seem to forget how communism has operated in the west over the past hundred years, you say they are wrong and tools of capitalist oppression, but somehow they are on the gravy train and you are not. The part of communism that really believes this missed the boat.

They're on the "gravy train" because the bourgeoisie realizes that what they're producing is anything but communism, and therefore poses no threat to the status quo. What's the last radically subversive (in an anti-capitalist sense), big budget motion picture that was released?

hyper individualism is cultural Marxism which came first. If capitalism is a vulture as the analogy goes communism is the killer virus that ensures such rich pickings

Unbelievable. So the hyperindividualism which pervades throughout society today is the product of a stunningly successful plot by a small circle of cultural critics from the Frankfurt School to instill an egocentric Weltanschauung in the masses, as opposed to the logical outcome of structuring society around bourgeois social relations and the profit motive? This is why it's impossible to have a rational dialog with fascists. You suffer from the same psychological disorders that afflict all conspiracy theorists.

British communism lives in Brighton, it drives a hybrid car, visits and indie art gallery, buys hippie tat from the town, goes to a night club, buys smack, and takes an underage black youth back to its flat and allows it to brutally penetrates their anus.

You're literally forced to conflate hipsterism with communism in order to seem as if your argument possesses any validity. Pathetic.

These Marxists can't be that intelligent because they are being used by the capitalist system like moaning eight cunted hooker.

These people who you refer to as "Marxists" are almost invariably social democrats that regard Marxism as a product of the 'contemptible' legacy of Eurocentrism and philosophical positivism. I'm in academia, so I can attest to the fact that the vast preponderance of literary and cultural critics have no interest whatsoever in the revolutionary overthrow of capital; they are quite content with redistributive schemes that in no way threaten the logic of the system.

It is a monsterous inversion - but the basic leftist values one associates with him: freedom, rights, eqiality, fraternitie, egalitarianism. It is like 'socialism with a human face', well this is capitalism with a human face, but the face is no different.

I'm afraid you're going to have to do better than the asinine 'two sides of the same coin' (non-)argument. Consumerism doesn't facilitate equality or fraternity in any way, shape, or form, and "capitalism with a human face" is defined by its advocates as providing social welfare to people, so that market competition isn't permitted to allow them to fall beneath a certain arbitrarily conceived level—it's not a call for 'socialist' consumerism (a contradiction in terms, if ever there was one).

Also implyin you didn't watch that Che action movie and fap to it till you bled. Implying you don't buy mock soviet merchandise, implying you haven’t all been jewed hard.

Implying you didn't watch Der Untergang and fap to it until you bled. Implying you don't buy mock Nazi merchandise, implying you haven't been gentile'd hard.

McCarthyism was a very brief backlash against the aforementioned communist element long before the cultural revolution that saw the senator deposed and his entire movement vilified. You must agree that almost all his work was undone shortly after this.

None of his work was "undone." On the contrary, his legacy can be observed to this day in talk radio stations and Tea Party rallies across the country:

McDonald and Sunic are not in their positions because of their political views but in spite of them – a drop in the ocean of career Marxists.

And the number of self-identified Marxist professors teaching courses germane to Marxism (economics, sociology, political science) are negligible, at best.

you want to show me that Nationalism is consistant with leftism I am going to want to see it. You say I did not read your forum before hand - well link me to what I need to look at, and I will stop debating and come back in the future.

I provided you with a link to this detailed discussion of left-wing nationalism at the start of our debate, and you chose to ignore it. You should also consult the rest of the cosmopolitan sub-forum, as well as our discussions in Theory.

[Altair]

You're in no position to make those sorts of criticisms, Benjamin. Your forum was created by a delusional Eurasian cosplayer, who is starved for recognition as a 'Russian national revolutionary'. Everything I have seen associated with Iron March — from its charter to its hilariously pitiful podcasts — makes me feel embarrassed for you.

As for the Socialist Phalanx, there is no "video game crap" in this forum's design.

The only reason I have not yet responded to a number of your inane reactionary arguments is because I haven't had the time to spend on that frivolous enterprise. So, in the meantime, I urge you to exercise a little more patience.

Let us not forget how they formulate their responses. Memes, emotes, sarcastic cracks, and general mightier-than-thou troll speak. This isn't 4chan. You may enjoy conversing that way on your own forum, but if you want people to take you seriously, try to control yourselves.

And, using someone's video game related avatar as a reason to not take them seriously? Well, I suppose that is fitting for people like you, but it is ridiculous.

[Admin]

This place does remind me of the interface on Red alert - I nostalgia so hard, especially at the portal.

I stopped playing video games when I was still an adolescent. Whatever similarities exist between this forum's design and that of various games and websites are therefore purely coincidental. I make no secret of the fact that the design is strongly influenced by socialist aesthetics — just as the aforementioned games and websites are.

It is like, ok, how might this look any different to a website selling that mock soviet merchandise; felt onion hats and lenin schoolbags, keyrings, mugs etc - or the website for the latest Xbox release. Again all these designs, this whole leftist cyber chic thing is pretty modern, it looks nothing like anything from the actual Soviet Union. At best it is a little unimaginative,

That is all very ironic coming from someone who has an admitted appreciation for the 'artistic talent' of the man responsible for these pieces:

I also find your criticism ironic considering your immense admiration for America's little 'führer', George Lincoln Rockwell:

but try for a minute to seriously consider the effect it has on those coming here, especially those actually from politics. At least when we do stuff like this we carry it off with a sense of irony - the forum memes thread is exclusively for self criticism, something I thought you were supposed to practice.

Anyone can see that humor is not absent from this forum. It is, however, clearly separated from its central focus. In the case of Iron March, it appears as though those lines are blurred to such a superfluous extent that you have abandoned the very pretense of being a forum with a serious purpose.

As for Alex he clearly has recognition here with people posting his essays, and I reckon that makes you jelly.

It appears as though the only individual that demonstrated any interest in the garbage your dear leader has written was a confused reactionary who subsequently joined your forum. Incidentally, that work was immediately sent to our Opposing Views section.

He has a lot going for him, he is clearly talented in graphical design and he can write. If he wanted he could use these skills to get all the recognition you speak of - He could easily have gotten to the top of this young Eurasianist group under Dugin, in fact he was invited to GRA. Unlike most of them he speaks English and French - his English is flawless and that makes him effectively invaluable. He has done all this in just a few short years - I think his website came up only last year. He has also written a book recently - that is an achievement - it is being translated by others. We will see what the results of that are in a few years, but it is not like any of us ever stop. Yes there will probably be a lot of failures but we always learn from that and adapt because we are trying to make a difference.

Try to contain yourself. With such zealous reverence, one might assume that little Slavros is something more than another petty, irrelevant purveyor of false consciousness.

With respect to his literary 'accomplishment', I cannot help but invoke Christopher Hitchens' on the matter.

"Everybody does have a book in them, but in most cases that's where it should stay."

I would be interested to know what you are contributing if you are so quick to criticise the work of others. Not that this alone invalidates a criticism that you might have had, but I feel in this case there is a bit of hypocrisy if this discussion is still a comparison between the two forums. you have this place, what are you doing with it? you don't seem very committed to any kind of cause like we are.

You're in no position to judge my commitment to my principles. And I have absolutely no interest in informing you of what my revolutionary activities consist of.

Our podcasts have reached legendary status despite the fact they are amateur and improvised,

I hope you're being facetious.

[Rev Scare]

This place does remind me of the interface on Red alert - I nostalgia so hard, especially at the portal. It is like, ok, how might this look any different to a website selling that mock soviet merchandise; felt onion hats and lenin schoolbags, keyrings, mugs etc - or the website for the latest Xbox release.

First of all, the pitifully drab design of Iron March leaves you with absolutely no room to criticize the aesthetic preferences of other forums. Apart from the tasteless color scheme and vapid reactionary quotes, which aspect of your forum's mediocre style demands respect?

Do not be petty.

Again all these designs, this whole leftist cyber chic thing is pretty modern, it looks nothing like anything from the actual Soviet Union.

We do not strive to emulate the imagery of the Soviet Union. Why would we? It is unnecessary, anachronistic, and the USSR was but one socialist experiment in the history of working class movements. This is unlike your ragtag group of cyber-fascists, who desperately cling to some idealized past and mindlessly quote mine the inane pseudo-philosophies of dead ideologues in an effort to appear intellectual, erudite, and "elite" (a most laughable designation).

At best it is a little unimaginative, but try for a minute to seriously consider the effect it has on those coming here, especially those actually from politics.

What effect is that? We have received numerous compliments for the creative, striking, and interesting visual style that we have adopted. I find it quite attractive, but I will not engage in this trivial dispute over subjective idealizations, which is so typical of fashits.

If our forum's aesthetics are not to your tastes, then so be it. Did you come here to criticize us for our appearance? What a twit you are.

At least when we do stuff like this we carry it off with a sense of irony - the forum memes thread is exclusively for self criticism, something I thought you were supposed to practice.

Your forum is a complete and utter joke. I could not be more sincere in stating such. Your attempt to be "ironic" with memes, even if true, is inexplicably dense, and this practice transcends the realm of mere "self-criticism," which I have yet to witness to any appreciable degree on your hapless message board.

As for Alex he clearly has recognition here with people posting his essays, and I reckon that makes you jelly.

Which essays? This entire thread dedicated to Iron March is highly critical of your membership. We have seriously acknowledged "Alex" only ever to mock him, because he is a disgraceful, pretentious, asinine, and hypocritical nobody whose only true "talent" seems to be the fashionable dissemination of false consciousness.

He has a lot going for him,

Such as?

he is clearly talented in graphical design and he can write.

Even if true, this is tangential to Admin's initial criticism.

If he wanted he could use these skills to get all the recognition you speak of - He could easily have gotten to the top of this young Eurasianist group under Dugin, in fact he was invited to GRA. Unlike most of them he speaks English and French - his English is flawless and that makes him effectively invaluable. He has done all this in just a few short years - I think his website came up only last year. He has also written a book recently - that is an achievement - it is being translated by others. We will see what the results of that are in a few years, but it is not like any of us ever stop. Yes there will probably be a lot of failures but we always learn from that and adapt because we are trying to make a difference.

Quite the sycophant, aren't you? I suppose it is to be expected from a fascist dweeb on the internet. Does your "führling" Slavros truly deserve this level of adulation? How distasteful.

I would be interested to know what you are contributing if you are so quick to criticise the work of others. Not that this alone invalidates a criticism that you might have had, but I feel in this case there is a bit of hypocrisy if this discussion is still a comparison between the two forums.

Nobody here is so insecure that they would earnestly draw comparisons between this forum and your cesspool of false consciousness.

you have this place, what are you doing with it?

Discussing matters we find pertinent. This forum, considering its youth, is quite successful and truly so when juxtaposed to other failed leftist projects (e.g., Red Marx, RevLeft 2, etc.). Fortunately, we are not in the "privileged" position of drawing the refuse of other bastions of reactionary consciousness, as is Iron March.

you don't seem very committed to any kind of cause like we are.

This forum serves as a medium for discussion of revolutionary left-wing subjects, including left-wing nationalism. We do not pretend to provide a serious basis for activism, which would necessitate the formation of revolutionary organizations intended to advance working class interests. On the other hand, what, pray tell, is the committed "cause" of Iron March?

Our podcasts have reached legendary status despite the fact they are amateur and improvised, I have had nothing but good and constructive feedback (from non IM users) – and I can listen to them for genuine entertainment. The 'official' youtube podcasts were a good early effort. We are now looking into making it much more professional.

As I remarked recently, your podcasts seem to verify my suspicion that much of your general membership expresses traits associated with Asperger syndrome, which would serve the dual function of being profoundly amusing and ironic.

It is not worth explicitly condemning the inane twaddle of your recordings.

[kikehunt]

WOAH! Raging asshurt on the loose.
I hope you have a waaaaambulance somewhere on your shiny forum, because it is in dire need.

>invite ben
>explode over a casual remark about your red alert stylisms
>implying serious forum for red 'nationalists'
>implying not condescending, pretentious, wart-picking commie faggot scum

>implying their cartoon chicken-shit banner beats the glorious iron march emblems and slavro's masterful work

>not digging iron march
>2012
ht tp:/ /ww w.youtube.co m/watch?v=YmUNUarGQgE

>"forum war"
>muh forum is bigger than your forum
>around whites, internet fights

[Altair]

WOAH! Raging asshurt on the loose.
I hope you have a waaaaambulance somewhere on your shiny forum, because it is in dire need.

>invite ben
>explode over a casual remark about your red alert stylisms
>implying serious forum for red 'nationalists'
>implying not condescending, pretentious, wart-picking commie faggot scum

>implying their cartoon chicken-shit banner beats the glorious iron march emblems and slavro's masterful work

>not digging iron march
>2012
ht tp:/ /ww w.youtube.co m/watch?v=YmUNUarGQgE

>"forum war"
>muh forum is bigger than your forum
>around whites, internet fights

What is '>' even supposed to be? Can you not properly format a response?

[kikehunt]

>ignore point
>question formatting
>????
>profit

so many kikes on this forum.

also, go to 4chon /new/ and they will teach you what '>' means

[Sponsored content]