As anti-Israel sentiment creeps into mainstream conservative discourse, a number of Jewish authors — some who try to interface with white radicals — have sought to counter this rising tendency with proverbial Pavlovian bell-ringing: opposition to Zionism is the agenda of “brown people,” “the woke left,” “anti-whites,” and “Third Worldism.”
that 90% white third world country, could become a typical advanced european country in 15 years.
if america paid blacks one years worth of the country's GDP, to build a new liberia for african-americans to go to, the next years GDP would quadruple.
The term “Third Worldist” has become (regardless of what it once meant) a term to basically get white people to support neo-liberalism by appealing to “racism” (which has a very loose meaning).
I would bet members of the formerly termed “alt-right” strategically are more supportive of Niger than any Western European government. Not out of a love for black people, but simply because Niger is doing things they wish they could do, and because they are making a stand against the Global American Empire.
The question is this: “Is the right wing dumb?”
If they are, then they will be hoodwinked. If not they will see through this.
Thanks for addressing the vagueness of how people use these terms. I know what I envision when I hear the term "third world." However, even though unpleasant behaviors happen in these geographic locations, their governments are joining BRICS. Excellent remarks as always.
This feels like an intentionally ignorant reading of critiques of third worldism. While a more well thought out defense of third worldism, the audience of this piece is still the people in this comments section praising Africa as the "only place on Earth where Christianity is really flourishing." So what! It's Africa!
Obviously Third Worldism isn't referring to the Cold War era theory. It refers to unfettered support for any regime anywhere that is percieved to go against "le evil white/Jooish cabal" no matter what and it often takes the form of revolutionary talking points within a leftist moral frame. That's why I consider these people akin to leftists. It's an ideology which is directly in line with leftism and the associated "US-elite sponsored anti-white sentiment" the author speaks of. The two have the same leftist roots. Third Worldism is the leftist desire for the destruction of the white race. It doesn't matter whether you're triumphing South Africa for owning da Jooz or owning whitey.
The author then gives a bunch of unrelated examples of the U.S. supporting Third Worldism (Of course! Third Worldism was born from leftists in the State Department!) and talks about how the based things Israel did weren't actually based or whatever, I don't really care because who gives a fuck about Israel?
>You won’t hear most Western leftists defend the right of Ugandans to pass anti-LGBT legislation, which the Africans have defended in anti-imperialist, third worldist terms.
Certainly not, but are they calling conventions at the UN to sanction Uganda? Would they have the same response to Hungary doing so?
All you do is sarcastically dismiss critics of "JOOISH" and Zionist power without refuting any argument. All of your arguments are addressed in the piece, you just decided to ignore them and just repeat illogical neo-con assertions. Everyone, including European colonialists, has engaged in "third worldism." The Dutch and British were attacking the Spanish for being racist to the Indians back in the 1600s, it wasn't invented by leftists in the state department or the USSR.
Marx, like all universalists, was pro colonialism.
Anyone doing anything significant to fight against the Satanic left is currently in the third-world. That's the reality of the matter. Africa is the only place on Earth where Christianity is really flourishing. Leftists are functionally white-supremacists (or more specifically Jewish supremacists) when it comes to foreign policy because they realize modern Jews and their gentile white allies are the most degenerate, "progressive" race on Earth.
This is an inconvenient fact for both the right and the left, but it doesn't have to be. The west is basically dead. If you want to save what "the West" once was, your best bet is in so called "second world" and "third world" countries like Russia, El Salvador, and Uganda. If Afghanistan were Christian I'd add it to the top of the list. Their reforms are extremely impressive.
On the other hand, if you want to fight for "the West" as some kind of fixed racial-geopolitical entity, then you should join Richard Spencer in voting for the democratic party. They're not as keen on sacrificing their dominance as some think they are. They're just smart about it. They know they can import a slave class of immigrants and get away with it as long as they keep them dependent on welfare and throw their children in government schools, but they will certainly ensure the survival of their people and a future for their race, if not any of the lower classes of whites.
I would gladly sacrifice my standard of living and reside in a third world or second world soviet-bloc tier country if it was 90% white.
that 90% white third world country, could become a typical advanced european country in 15 years.
if america paid blacks one years worth of the country's GDP, to build a new liberia for african-americans to go to, the next years GDP would quadruple.
but you can't have nice things.
During the 1930s, a mix of Wotan & egalitarianism made the German people & their talking head AH strategically stupid.
But hey, they had "nice things," for a sec, and then got emasculated to this day.
Sounds swell, jump on.
This is pure retardation. Congrats.
The term “Third Worldist” has become (regardless of what it once meant) a term to basically get white people to support neo-liberalism by appealing to “racism” (which has a very loose meaning).
I would bet members of the formerly termed “alt-right” strategically are more supportive of Niger than any Western European government. Not out of a love for black people, but simply because Niger is doing things they wish they could do, and because they are making a stand against the Global American Empire.
The question is this: “Is the right wing dumb?”
If they are, then they will be hoodwinked. If not they will see through this.
Phenomenal article, Joe. I have nothing else to add other than say that you are brilliant. I mean that from the bottom of my heart.
Thank you Serb Bro!
Thanks for addressing the vagueness of how people use these terms. I know what I envision when I hear the term "third world." However, even though unpleasant behaviors happen in these geographic locations, their governments are joining BRICS. Excellent remarks as always.
This feels like an intentionally ignorant reading of critiques of third worldism. While a more well thought out defense of third worldism, the audience of this piece is still the people in this comments section praising Africa as the "only place on Earth where Christianity is really flourishing." So what! It's Africa!
Obviously Third Worldism isn't referring to the Cold War era theory. It refers to unfettered support for any regime anywhere that is percieved to go against "le evil white/Jooish cabal" no matter what and it often takes the form of revolutionary talking points within a leftist moral frame. That's why I consider these people akin to leftists. It's an ideology which is directly in line with leftism and the associated "US-elite sponsored anti-white sentiment" the author speaks of. The two have the same leftist roots. Third Worldism is the leftist desire for the destruction of the white race. It doesn't matter whether you're triumphing South Africa for owning da Jooz or owning whitey.
The author then gives a bunch of unrelated examples of the U.S. supporting Third Worldism (Of course! Third Worldism was born from leftists in the State Department!) and talks about how the based things Israel did weren't actually based or whatever, I don't really care because who gives a fuck about Israel?
>You won’t hear most Western leftists defend the right of Ugandans to pass anti-LGBT legislation, which the Africans have defended in anti-imperialist, third worldist terms.
Certainly not, but are they calling conventions at the UN to sanction Uganda? Would they have the same response to Hungary doing so?
All you do is sarcastically dismiss critics of "JOOISH" and Zionist power without refuting any argument. All of your arguments are addressed in the piece, you just decided to ignore them and just repeat illogical neo-con assertions. Everyone, including European colonialists, has engaged in "third worldism." The Dutch and British were attacking the Spanish for being racist to the Indians back in the 1600s, it wasn't invented by leftists in the state department or the USSR.
Marx, like all universalists, was pro colonialism.
You really said what I noticed in the right wing no wonder there’s disdain for the groypers kids they push buttons that Zionist dislike
What are you waiting to move to Transnistria, then? They even have a jewish tankie prime minister, like you people like
What does Transnistria or its prime minister have to do with the article?
Do you have Twitter ?
Anyone doing anything significant to fight against the Satanic left is currently in the third-world. That's the reality of the matter. Africa is the only place on Earth where Christianity is really flourishing. Leftists are functionally white-supremacists (or more specifically Jewish supremacists) when it comes to foreign policy because they realize modern Jews and their gentile white allies are the most degenerate, "progressive" race on Earth.
This is an inconvenient fact for both the right and the left, but it doesn't have to be. The west is basically dead. If you want to save what "the West" once was, your best bet is in so called "second world" and "third world" countries like Russia, El Salvador, and Uganda. If Afghanistan were Christian I'd add it to the top of the list. Their reforms are extremely impressive.
On the other hand, if you want to fight for "the West" as some kind of fixed racial-geopolitical entity, then you should join Richard Spencer in voting for the democratic party. They're not as keen on sacrificing their dominance as some think they are. They're just smart about it. They know they can import a slave class of immigrants and get away with it as long as they keep them dependent on welfare and throw their children in government schools, but they will certainly ensure the survival of their people and a future for their race, if not any of the lower classes of whites.
God bless the destruction of the Judaeo-American government.