Should progressivism/liberalism just be banned srs?

[disillusioned]

Know it sounds extreme but tbh the more I think about this subject matter the more I lean towards the notion that there is simply no objective social benefit to putting up with this garbage. Name me even just a single fucking thing that progressive/liberal ideology has actually contributed to society that hasn't backfired massively?

-Female suffrage: Literally responsible for 90% of modern social ills.
-Minority rights: Cucked bullshit. I can feel sorry for minorities in certain countries like the USA where many of them were actually brought over against their will but in just about any other country I have no sympathy.
-Open borders: Has accelerated demographic decline while also harming the lower classes.
-Religious freedom: Like feminism it has contributed to demographic decline via degeneracy & lack of incentive to breed.
-Sexual liberation: Ditto.

Sorry but almost literally everything about progressivism is socially corrosive horseshit. Normies obviously won't see it that way because they are brainwashed and degenerate, but anybody who looks objectively at the facts can plainly see that progressivism/liberalism is actually nothing more than civilizational cancer. Would anything of value actually be lost if it was just banned entirely? The idea should be implemented as following:

1. Women and minorities are stripped of all politcal rights including voting and running for political offices. In the event that your nation is multi-ethnic (that is there is no overwhelming demographic majority) then balkanization should be implemented first and each major demographic given their own nation state.

2. Religious membership and being married with a minimum of 2 children is required before anybody can run for any political offices, though which religion isn't relevant insofar as it isn't something gay and soy.

3. In order to actually vote, one must merely be a married native male with at least 2 children. Your vote counts 2x as much however if you are also a property owner since property owners have a higher stake in the economy.

Implement these 3 rules and 99% of the entire world's problems would go away instantly.

 

[Roping Subhuman]

YES

 

[balding17yomanletcel]

Yes squidro.

 

[Deleted member 4464]

YES

 

[hairyballscel]

Whats the reasoning behind why women and minorities shouldn't be allowed to vote?

 

[Deleted member 6789]

No because white girls need to let brown sub humans like me fuck them

 

[Blackout.xl]

u can’t ban a political ideology, especially anything
In the leftist sphere. That’s how you get leftist “liberation” groups that engage in terrorism and subversion.

You need to make the next generation based and institute an education system based around traditionalism and nationalism first. Do this and you won’t need a ban

 

[Deleted member 2597]

Whats the reasoning behind why women and minorities shouldn't be allowed to vote?

Minorities should

 

[Blackout.xl]

Whats the reasoning behind why women and minorities shouldn't be allowed to vote?

As for minorities, I don’t know. There’s no reason to not let them vote

as for women, they tend to vote based on emotion and what sounds more “moral” over pragmatism. This is why women tend to vote leftist more often than men. They also vote for self benefits that help single moms and so on, which is good for them but not good for the SMV of males or the stability of the sexual market

 

[hairyballscel]

As for minorities, I don’t know. There’s no reason to not let them vote

as for women, they tend to vote based on emotion and what sounds more “moral” over pragmatism. This is why women tend to vote leftist more often than men. They also vote for self benefits that help single moms and so on, which is good for them but not good for the SMV of males or the stability of the sexual market

kinda true tbh

2. Religious membership and being married with a minimum of 2 children is required before anybody can run for any political offices, though which religion isn't relevant insofar as it isn't something gay and soy.

Why does having kids mean you're fit to run a country? And i dont get the hate for atheism on this site, I'm an atheist but i don't shove it in peoples faces nor do I disrespect peoples beliefs for choosing to follow a religion...

 

[Deleted member 2597]

Shouldn't there be like a national test you must pass to be able to vote.

 

[disillusioned]

Whats the reasoning behind why women and minorities shouldn't be allowed to vote?

Women are emotional and greedy cunts that don't care about their countries. That and because letting women vote will lead to feminism and sexual liberation, which leads to demographic decline. Letting minorities vote does the same thing, since most will just vote for anything except the status-quo simply out of ethnic tribalism. Look at blacks in the USA. It doesn't matter that democrats are actually fucking them over, they still get 70-90% of their vote anyway for no reason other than racial tribalism. Letting minorities vote is almost as destructive as letting women vote.

u can’t ban a political ideology, especially anything
In the leftist sphere. That’s how you get leftist “liberation” groups that engage in terrorism and subversion.

Tbh if you just implemented the 3 rules above I don't think a ban would even really be needed. Basically 70% of the progressive voting base would vanish over night. And just lol at ranting about leftist "terrorism". Most of these people are cucks who would never have the stomach for actual war.

As for minorities, I don’t know. There’s no reason to not let them vote

Yes there is. While men are more rational than women in general, tribalism is the exception to that rule. The absolute very moment the ethnic demographics of a country are warped, tribalism completely destroys politics. Most men will not vote anything except whatever they think will aid "their side" while trying to harm the "other side". There isn't a single example of a successful multi-ethnic democracy in history. Within 10-20 years you can expect to see civil war or even genocide in the west as a result of ethnic strife. Allowing minorities to vote is easily just as self-destructive as letting women vote. It's national suicide.

Why does having kids mean you're fit to run a country?

It means you have an actual stake in the future of your country, since your children will inherit the mess you left them.

 

[Deleted member 2597]

So if minorities are not allowed to vote woudn't it create conflict as well of land owners votes counting double, there will be lots of conflict between the classes, doesent seem ideal.

 

[animus]

You are mostly right. But there is no going back, thats just not how it works out usually. Pandora's box has been opened. It will have to run its course to extreme and western society will eventually collapse. Then it will be taken over by something more sustainable. But how long it will take? No idea. These things can drag out for quite a while. I wouldnt hold my breath..

 

[Black Pill Prophet]

Yes brother

 

[disillusioned]

So if minorities are not allowed to vote woudn't it create conflict as well of land owners votes counting double, there will be lots of conflict between the classes, doesent seem ideal.

If the amount of minorities is large (10+%) then they should be given their own country. Tbh I think this will actually start happening in real life within a few decades. I can picture the USA or even nations like France getting broken up into smaller countries. If the amount of minorities is low (sub-10%) and more aren't let in then they will probably just mix with the locals after a while anyway.

As for property owners vs non-owners, there are 2 things to keep in mind:

1. Property isn't just something massive or expensive like homes or land. It can even be things like cars/autos. Not only rich people are property owners.

2. The rationale is that property owners have a bigger reason to care about fiscal policy. Things like taxes, state of economy etc affect them much more. It thus makes sense they get to have their vote count for more. In past eras ONLY property voters were allowed to vote, but I think that is just dat extreme.

 

[Deleted member 2597]

If the amount of minorities is large (10+%) then they should be given their own country. Tbh I think this will actually start happening in real life within a few decades. I can picture the USA or even nations like France getting broken up into smaller countries. If the amount of minorities is low (sub-10%) and more aren't let in then they will probably just mix with the locals after a while anyway.

As for property owners vs non-owners, there are 2 things to keep in mind:

1. Property isn't just something massive or expensive like homes or land. It can even be things like cars/autos. Not only rich people are property owners.

2. The rationale is that property owners have a bigger reason to care about fiscal policy. Things like taxes, state of economy etc affect them much more. It thus makes sense they get to have their vote count for more. In past eras ONLY property voters were allowed to vote, but I think that is just dat extreme.

High iq

 

[Deleted member 4310]

 

[disillusioned]

Tbh I'm kinda changing my mind about the religion part. I think just being married with 2 children is good enough.

 

[Deleted member 4310]

I don't care about any of this anymore tbh, I just cope with vidya and food and don't give a shit about society. Imagine raising your cortisol over useless shit that only benefits Chad and Stacy anyways.

While insells are working their ass off trying to make strides in politics and science Chad and Stacy just enjoy each other's bodies and get to do what's truly important in life, having sex.

 

[NoBonezForMoanz]

Tbh I'm kinda changing my mind about the religion part. I think just being married with 2 children is good enough.

Yeah that would probably be then used as social classes/ organizations etc which wouldn't be perfect