Far-rightists on this site?

[Nakosis]

I think the problem is the definition of these words is so loose as to be meaningless. I identify as socially conservative but economically liberal. This puts me almost literally nowhere. I could theoretically post in the Communism/Socialism area but I doubt very much my socially conservative views would be very welcome there. Just like my leftist economic views would not be welcome in the Conservative area, or my socially conservative views in the Liberal area.

I feel weird like that too, but in the opposite direction.

 

[Revoltingest]

A forum specifically made for an ideology that has a significant portion of racism and supremacism built in by definition would violate RF's mission statement.

Fascism doesn't require racism to be what it is.
Authoritarianism & nationalism appear to be fundamental....is that really contrary to RF's mission?
Both of those are represented here.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

This says what it's not, but not what it is.
Description by apophosis?

As for my interests, I'm mostly interested in the revival of traditional European religion and culture. The pre-Christian ethos. I'm against capitalism and prefer a local form of green communalism. I don't lile the Abrahamic religions and feel that they're responsible for much of the decline of the modern world and the spiritual malaise of the West. I don't have a problem with things like atheism, LGBT stuff (I'd prefer it to become a non-issue) and I'm not a racist but do think that heritage matters in a general way (I think everyone should take pride in who they are). I'm opposed to globalization and free trade.

I can agree with much of the Identarian movement and the European New Right. Neo-Fascism is always an interest of mine, too.

 

[Revoltingest]

I would imagine because it wouldn't yield anything other than "Zionists run the world", "black people are less intelligent on average because biology" and """The Jews """.

Any posts which violate the forum's mission could be moderated.
That would leave authoritarians who are nationalists.
The question is whether there are many of those, & do they want their own area.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Fascism doesn't require racism to be what it is.
Authoritarianism & nationalism appear to be fundamental....is that really contrary to RF's mission?
Both of those are represented here.

It's a thorny issue; it could generate (valid) complaints if we moderated someone for racist posts in a "Fascist Only" forum while letting other fascists express themselves freely. Why would we moderate the racist posts when racism is a genuine part of many fascists' view of fascism? We would basically be in a position of dictating what was or wasn't "true fascism."

Big can of worms, although it wouldn't be the only issue with said forum.

 

[Revoltingest]

As for my interests, I'm mostly interested in the revival of traditional European religion and culture. The pre-Christian ethos. I'm against capitalism and prefer a local form of green communalism. I don't lile the Abrahamic religions and feel that they're responsible for much of the decline of the modern world and the spiritual malaise of the West. I don't have a problem with things like atheism, LGBT stuff (I'd prefer it to become a non-issue) and I'm not a racist but do think that heritage matters in a general way (I think everyone should take pride in who they are). I'm opposed to globalization and free trade.

I can agree with much of the Identarian movement and the European New Right. Neo-Fascism is always an interest of mine, too.

That seems a very narrow & unusual perspective.
I wonder how many others there are?

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

Are there any far-rightists on this site such as neo-Fascists, right-wing nationalists (especially ethnic nationalists), national anarchists, revolutionary conservatives, traditionalists (particularly of Evola's Traditionalist School), European New Rightists, etc.?

I know RF skews leftist with some mainstream conservatives and religious fundamentalists thrown in but what about those on the "extremes" of the right? Should there be political boards for them? We have communist and socialist subforums but no nationalist subforum, for instance. Is there any interest in these? I would be interested in talking more about these things in a civil manner. The European New Right (like Alain de Benoist) is pretty intriguing to me, for example.

What are your thoughts?

Wow

Total protonic reversal.

Somebody obviously crossed the streams.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

That seems a very narrow & unusual perspective.
I wonder how many others there are?

The others don't have to agree completely with me. Just people on the fringes who don't really fit the other subforums but are right-wing socially and more Third Postionist or non-free market capitalist economically.

 

[Revoltingest]

It's a thorny issue; it could generate (valid) complaints if we moderated someone for racist posts in a "Fascist Only" forum while letting other fascists express themselves freely. Why would we moderate the racist posts when racism is a genuine part of many fascists' view of fascism? We would basically be in a position of dictating what was or wasn't "true fascism."

Big can of worms, although it wouldn't be the only issue with said forum.

Simple....
Don't allow racism anywhere.
Fascists can post all they want about fascism.
The same is true of other groups here who are regularly accused of being racists, eg, conservatives, Trumpets, libertarians, white folk.

 

[Revoltingest]

The others don't have to agree completely with me. Just people on the fringes who don't really fit the other subforums but are right-wing socially and more Third Postionist or non-free market capitalist economically.

Seems reasonable to me.
(I won't be joining though.)

 

[sun rise]

Sub-forums would seem to be the way to go avoiding the lunatic fringe. Otherwise, we'd have "pro-terrorist" Islamic forums also having to be allowed and I agree it's 'beyond the pale'.

 

[Revoltingest]

Sub-forums would seem to be the way to go avoiding the lunatic fringe. Otherwise, we'd have "pro-terrorist" Islamic forums also having to be allowed and I agree it's 'beyond the pale'.

Terrorism is illegal, & therefore not allowed here.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Sub-forums would seem to be the way to go avoiding the lunatic fringe. Otherwise, we'd have "pro-terrorist" Islamic forums also having to be allowed and I agree it's 'beyond the pale'.

I think expressly suporting terrorism would be against the rules.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Simple....
Don't allow racism anywhere.
Fascists can post all they want about fascism.
The same is true of other groups here who are regularly accused of being racists, eg, conservatives, Trumpets, libertarians, white folk.

The staff would have to discuss that, but like I said, a fascist forum is a very remote possibility. Many other prospects for a new right-wing forum would take considerable priority over a fascist forum.

 

[Revoltingest]

The staff would have to discuss that, but like I said, a fascist forum is a very remote possibility. Many other prospects for a new right-wing forum would take considerable priority over a fascist forum.

We already have a specific proposal in this thread.
I see no fundamental difficulty with it.
Is ideological opposition a factor?
What does "right wing" mean to you....& to staff?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

The staff would have to discuss that, but like I said, a fascist forum is a very remote possibility. Many other prospects for a new right-wing forum would take considerable priority over a fascist forum.

Doesn't have to be a Fascist forum. Maybe a Nationalist forum, for a start.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Sub-forums would seem to be the way to go avoiding the lunatic fringe. Otherwise, we'd have "pro-terrorist" Islamic forums also having to be allowed and I agree it's 'beyond the pale'.

Supporting terrorism is an absolutely surefire way to get moderated, so there has never been and will never be a "pro-terrorist" forum here.

 

[YmirGF]

Terrorism is illegal, & therefore not allowed here.

But freedom fighters are admired, if not encouraged. Ya know, that truth to power BS...

 

[Revoltingest]

But freedom fighters are admired, if not encouraged. Ya know, that truth to power BS...

Freedom fighters are "terrorists" until they win, & then govern.
Think of Menachem Begin's transformation after the King David Hotel bombing.
So no....no advocacy of illegal acts.

Note:
Staff appear to allow an exception for progressive non-violent acts such as civil disobedience.

 

[Debater Slayer]

We already have a specific proposal in this thread.
I see no fundamental difficulty with it.

Fully working out whether there would be any game-breaking difficulties with a proposal for a new forum section requires staff discussion. What I've said here is to clarify that this specific idea is unlikely even in its cradle.

Is ideological opposition a factor?

No. The RF rules are the yardstick we use when evaluating forum-related proposals.

What does "right wing" mean to you....& to staff?

That's too general of a question for me to answer without context. Assessing it on a case-by-case basis as needed is generally a smoother approach in a lot of cases.