Back to the Land, Back to Your People

Seeing the post below, and looking at the tags and metadata, I wondered why it might be getting downranked by the X algo...

"freedom_of_speech_not_reach_author_label_enabled": {"value": true},
"freedom_of_speech_not_reach_fetch_enabled": {"value": true},
"freedom_of_speech_not_reach_pivot_enabled": {"value": true},

Synopsis: Basically, the post argues that Fascism is yet another False God of Civilization and Modernity whose ultimate aim is to dissolve our heritage into the melting pot and increase our dependence on a system of centralized control. Naturally, I wanted to dig in and understand more of the arguments, and why they might be controversial...

Here is the text of the original post:

Many claim that "we lost WWII" and that Fascism can be the true savior of our nations.

However, Fascism is too progressive to make our nations great again.

Here's a "dissident" critique of fascism, using  Mussolini's best ideas.

Fascism demands the total deletion of individual identity and forces him to serve the state.

Mussolini writes:

“Outside history man is a nonentity. Fascism is therefore opposed to all individualistic abstractions".

Man is merely the servant of the state.

If an individual opposes the expansion of the state, he is to be stamped out of existence — this is directly against our value of freedom of speech.

If an individual wishes to refrain from participation in the state, he is framed in the following way:

“it is impossible to conceive any individual existing outside the State unless he be a savage whose home is in the solitude of the sandy desert."

The individual is framed as a subhuman, "savage" incapable of realizing any of his ancestral traditions of self-reliance.

For the Americans, fascism can be seen as an opposite.

Our traditions are related to a type of rugged individualism that promotes a life of "off grid"  responsibility and self-production of goods.

Under fascism, our frontiersman ethos is spat upon and viewed as the enemy.

“Anti-individualistic, the Fascist conception of life stresses the importance of the State and accepts the individual only in so far as his interests coincide with those of the State."

Self-sufficient communities would be banned and instead would be forced to serve expansion.

The American lives in the same manner now, in which his life is a sacrifice to the expansion of economic progress.

He has already been forced out of his ancestral agrarian lands into urbanized conditions that oppresses his individual agency.

Fascism worsens this trend.

The American is told to abandon his frontier lands and take to the cities to be a positive contributor to progress.

He migrates constantly, breaking ties with his family and clan, preventing cohesion and the development of personal power.

He is already subject to total state control that mandates he lock himself in his home for years on end and force vaccinate with bioweapons to maintain the illusion of a comfortable life.

Fascism would only strengthen this state and bring us further from our traditions.

Fascism fails to support the individual traditions of a nation as primary aim:

“In spite of the theories of conservation and renovation, of tradition and progress expounded by the right and the left, we do not cling desperately to the past as to a last board of salvation"

Fascism, much like Liberalism and Communism forcibly removes the traditional identity of its people and instead replaces the identity with that of progress as highest aim.

The progress may be slower than liberalism, yet it still demands total subservience to progress as its god

The Americans would degenerate and become:

“Not a race, nor a geographically defined region, but a people, historically perpetuating itself; a multitude unified by an idea and imbued with the will to live, the will to power, self-consciousness, personality."

The Americans would no longer be viewed as a unique ethnicity, but rather Europeans.

The Europeans would not be viewed as Europeans, rather than individually distinct groups: French, British, etc.

This mixing would further take us away from our unique, traditional identities.

The collective will to progress becomes the sole purpose of life.

“It stands for a principle which becomes the central motive of man as a member of civilized society".

We would continue to attempt to build a civilized society.

Civilization itself is anti-American.

We are not meant to be a civilized folk.

We are meant to reject the totality of the modern, civilized world as decadent.

It is our right of passage to discard all modern progressive ideals and favor lives of extreme asceticism — this was the basis of our frontier movement.

Rather than revive our agrarian traditions and the frontier independence that would free our people from progressive advancement, our duty, much like we have now, would become the forever expansion of technological progress.

Our current priority as "global police" and "attack dogs" of foreign rulers would not only continue, but worsen.

“Fascism does not, generally speaking, believe in the possibility or utility of perpetual peace.”

Any isolationism from global affairs would scorned.

We would continue to war with foreign nations and force them to extinguish their unique morals, traditions, and expressions.

Now, we subvert and destroy nations under the guise of "democracy".

We would do the same, but only with the word "fascism".

The forever wars would continue the same outcome: destruction of local identities and a forced progress.

In this system, as with our current regime, the Afghan must not be afghan, but instead a modern person.

The Vietnamese must not be Vietnamese, but instead a modern person.

Fascism, Communism, and Liberalism may appear to have different names and principles, but the core is the same:

"discard pacifism as a cloak for cowardly supine renunciation in contradistinction to self-sacrifice.

War alone keys up all human energies to their maximum tension"

Each political philosophy is code for the same, base principle: total destruction of individual, traditional difference, and a replacement with the supremacy of progress.

Each is an enemy that degenerates whatever unique ethnic group it possesses into a collective sameness.

We hear of the promotion of Fascism because it is necessary to expand the surveillance state.

My predication is that we are constantly bombarded with Fascist promotions precisely to make us all comfortable with public exclamations of anti semitism.

This promotion could then encourage the enactment of anti-semitism laws that could lead to the retroactive banning, fining, and imprisonment of members who supported elements of fascist philosophy.

This is a false movement to ensnare and imprison would-be revolutionaries.

• URL: https://x.com/RoguesPhilo/status/1879155532235452775
• Link to his substack: https://substack.com/@roguesphilosophy

Key Points and Spiciest Takes

• The article argues against fascism from an unconventional angle - not because it's too extreme, but because it's too progressive and modernizing
• Claims fascism, communism, and liberalism are actually similar in their core aims of destroying traditional identities
• Argues that civilization itself is "anti-American" and that Americans should embrace an anti-civilizational, ascetic frontier lifestyle
• Suggests current American urbanization and COVID measures represent state control similar to fascism
• Claims America's role as "global police" serves foreign rulers
• Argues that modern political movements all serve to destroy ethnic uniqueness
• Civilization is presented as inherently negative
• COVID measures and mandates described as "bioweapons"
• Suggests modern democracy and fascism have the same outcomes
• Claims there's a conspiracy to promote fascism to later criminalize its supporters
• Argues against racial/ethnic mixing as destructive to "traditional identities"

Why it might be getting deboosted/deamplified on X

• References to ethnic separation and anti-mixing views
• COVID vaccine/mandate skepticism
• Anti-state messaging
• Discussion of potential false flag operations
• Critical view of modernization and progress

Who benefits, and who loses out, from said deamplification?

Those who benefit:

• Government institutions
• Urban development advocates
• Mainstream political movements
• Public health officials
• Globalization proponents
• Tech companies and modernization advocates

Those who lose:

• Rural/frontier lifestyle advocates
• Traditional community activists
• Anti-globalization groups
• Vaccine skeptics
• Local autonomy movements
• Cultural preservation groups

Even though it's technically arguing against fascism, the post might trigger moderation flags due to the discussions of ethnicity, criticism of the state, and espousing of various "spicy" theories.

The groups that lose from this sort of content being deboosted have a lot in common.

Common threads among these groups

• Emphasis on local/individual sovereignty over centralized control
• Skepticism of technological "progress" and modernization
• Value traditional knowledge and practices over expert/institutional authority
• Prefer small-scale, direct community relationships
• Distrust of large institutional power (corporate, governmental, or financial)
• Focus on self-reliance and practical skills
• Opposition to standardization and homogenization of culture/society

Notable Historical Figures who embodied these values

Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862), American naturalist, essayist, philosopher. Lived self-sufficiently at Walden Pond. Civil disobedience advocate.

Key quotes:

• "That government is best which governs least."
• "I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to teach."

Wendell Berry (1934-present), Kentucky farmer, poet, environmental activist. Advocates for sustainable agriculture and traditional farming. Critic of modern industrial society.

Key quotes:

• "The great enemy of freedom is the alignment of political power with wealth."
• "What I stand for is what I stand on."

Ted Kaczynski (1942-2023), Mathematician turned anti-technology philosopher. Wrote extensively about the psychological effects of modern society.

Key quotes:

• "The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race."
• "In modern industrial society only minimal effort is necessary to satisfy one's physical needs."

E.F. Schumacher (1911-1977), Economist and philosopher. Advocated for appropriate technology and local economies. Author of "Small is Beautiful".

Key quotes:

• "Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius - and a lot of courage - to move in the opposite direction."
• "The system of nature, of which man is a part, tends to be self-balancing, self-adjusting, self-cleansing."

Ralph Borsodi (1886-1977), Back-to-the-land pioneer. Advocated for self-sufficient homesteading. Founded several experimental communities.

Key quotes:

• "The tendency to gather in cities is not progress; it is merely gregariousness."
• "Go back to the land - not as a protest against progress, but as a foundation for real progress."

These figures, despite their different backgrounds and specific focuses, share a common thread of:

• Advocating for human-scale technology and communities
• Questioning unlimited progress and growth
• Promoting self-reliance and local autonomy
• Warning against the psychological and social costs of industrial society
• Emphasizing the importance of direct connection to land and nature

Their ideas remain influential among various modern movements focused on:

• Homesteading
• Local Food Systems, Herdshares
• Traditional Crafts and Skills
• Alternative Education
• Environmental Preservation
• Cultural Autonomy
• Individual Soveriegnty and Decentralized Communities