/lit/ - Literature

>>11990003
>Zionism is a scapegoat designed to conveniently explain the effects of technocapital to people who emotionally desire someone to blame.
Which gets to the question of whether there is anyone to blame, whether there is any enemy to oppose, and can we win, which are the main questions I have in this discussion anyway.

Who is to blame? Those who promote the stimulation of desire, and those who allow that process to go on (myself included). Are Jews involved? Absolutely, as are members of every other group.

Who is the enemy? I'll post an excerpt below to elaborate on who I think should be opposed.
The Aryanist opposes any non-Aryanist, and would say that the Jew is merely the archetypal form of that enemy as the ultimate tribalist - individuals of any group can manifest the same traits though, and they have to be opposed just as much.
In Schmitt's sense the Aryanist chooses to fight the war against war - against the political distinction

Can it be won? I am hopeless, and that is what leads one to fight, because there is nothing to lose.

From http://aryanism.net/politics/technology/

>The key distinction to be made is between using technology to facilitate what we are capable of doing anyway, with or without the aid of technology, and using technology to enable to be done what could not have been done at all absent technology. Technology that eases existing burdens is noble; technology that tempts new desires is ignoble. Technology that saves time and energy is noble; technology that consumes time and energy is ignoble. Technology that simplifies life is noble; technology that complexifies life is ignoble. We can hence broadly distinguish between the Aryan technology of automation (derived from roots “auto-” + “mat-” meaning “spontaneously acting”), motivated by the will to freedom, and the non-Aryan technology of machinery (derived from root “magh-” meaning “to have power”), motivated by the will to power.

>Control over technology in any genuinely ideological direction requires state participation, as market-driven economics encourages new technology of all kinds so long as they can stimulate investment and/or lead to consumer demand. The technological directives of a National Socialist state are well-defined: optimize automation and eliminate machinery.

>No matter what field of technology we examine, we come to the same conclusion: the real problem is not the technology, but the people. In Aryan hands, machines would not be dangerous because Aryans would destroy them; in non-Aryan hands, even automata become dangerous because non-Aryans would find some way to use them to serve their greed. So long as non-Aryans exist, even if we destroy machines and erase the knowledge of building them, they could be invented again and built again... Thus the fundamental solution to the problem of technology rests not merely in phasing out machines, but in phasing out non-Aryan genetics. Only in this way can we be sure machines will never reappear