What do you think of Nationalist Spain? Why aren’t there any theocractic Christian countries today? Isn’t clerical facism the best form of government?

[WhiteBoyChill]

I’m not Spanish myself but I would’ve really liked to have grown up in the Franco era.

It just seems like a much better time to have been alive than just the way things currently are in my own country today.

Right now there just isn’t really a whole lot to feel optimistic about.

I would’ve liked to have lived under a society where the state actually encouraged church participation and used religion and an open embrace of nationalism as a unifying tool for bringing people together, instead of dividing society based on arbitrary things like race and social class.

Who’s with me?

But if I had to guess, it’s just like anything else in western society where most young Spaniards have probably been taught in school to think Franco was bad.

Just like most young Americans have been taught to think the founding fathers were all evil white men that owned slaves.

[Exterminatore]

Overall I like Spain under Franco. I think a clerical fascist government has excellent potential to be the best form of government provided it is dually ensured we don’t see the things in such a government we have typically seen with fascist governments (political murder etc.)


However one major criticism I have of Franco’s government was his treatment of the Basques. That part of his tenure I find deplorable. Otherwise I think his government was an excellent example of what good be with a morally guided fascist government.


There are many Spaniards who look back on that time with fondness and wish to see a reversion to a similar style of government.


Frankly, I enjoy freedom. However we can see the problem with the freedom we have in America. Without self discipline and prudence such freedom turns into a degenerate and hedonistic ravel. Freedom as we have it can really only work to the extent the individual take personal responsibility and acts morally. However, at least half of us in America are unable to do this. It will be and is becoming our down fall.


When there is freedom without prudence, without self discipline, without the will to self sufficient, and without morality it degenerates into what we have now. Gender confused masses, ungodly displays of homosexuality and the like in public, the week claiming they are oppressed because they lack the strength to be free and take accountability and blame everyone but themselves for their lives.


Having the freedoms we have allows those who hate America to use its freedoms against it. Using free speech to continually undermine it. Using the press to do likewise. No country can survive with internal enemies bent on its destruction and traditional way of life. Seeking to morph it into something it was not intended to be and without the ability to silence or otherwise remove from society those who are in fact it’s enemies.


In regards to the woke folk. These are internal enemies. They are not people with simply a different political view. They are tyrants who seek the destruction of America, Christianity, and traditional values. There is no room for these types in America, as stated, because they seek its destruction and to replace it with a mindless humanistic system that is doomed to fail.

[WhiteBoyChill]

“Without self discipline and prudence such freedom turns into a degenerate and hedonistic ravel”.

Precisely my problem lol. Freedom in America has really led us down a seriously dark path as of late. People aren’t mature enough today to manage freedom appropriately like they did in the past. Too many people are using the power of freedom to promote evil and degeneracy and societal decay and anarchy and collapse. Freedom without limits has consequences and it only leads us further astray from God almighty.

In the past people were sane enough to the point where freedom was viable but the state has developed so many internal enemies hellbent on its destruction to the point where we need tighter control to ensure societal order and survival.

[KrakenAttackin]

@Exterminatore. Holy shit, very well said! Our democracy (or Republic) can't survive with the "wokeness" that's is a cancer eating away all the best aspects of our country. Self-hating liberals who want to be destroyed and to destroy everyone else with them, are turning this country upside down. Our country is rapidly approaching a major historical shift of some kind. This shift could be a renewed sense or patriotism and determination to fight the internal cancer, OR it could be a complete surrender to wokeness and the inevitable watch -lists, suppression of liberties, detention camps, and outright executions in good leftist fashion.

[Exterminatore]

@Kraken

Thanks man! I consider myself to be a neo clerical fascist. I say neo because I do admit that fascism does need adjustment. Historically we have seen with it an abundance of political murder and other problems. My main problem with it is that it’s totalitarian, a one party system, without checks and balances. This leaves too much room for a Hitler like figure.

However can you have Fascism without totalitarianism? I don’t think so, because it is a central feature of it, and my only opposition to such a system is as stated. Too much room for the takeover by someone with wicked intents.

I never thought I’d one day say these things but I find myself hard pressed to see another path forward.

I have no issue with all of our freedoms, however they are being used against us, and for things that are obviously bad for any country.

Take freedom of speech for example. I have no problem with criticizing the government and it’s agents or policies. This would never be allowed in traditional fascism. Where I do have a problem with freedom of speech is one could use it to support our enemies, as was done during the Vietnam War. Freedom of speech is also used to promote every manner of sexual degeneracy, racism (particularly against whites), sexism (particularly against men), and the denouncing Judeo-Christian values. Well…. should some of these things be allowed to be said? I don’t think so. Not merely because I do not like them but because they are utterly dangerous and defy God and the proof is all around us.

I have no problem with freedom of the press, but a person would have to be mentally retarded to see how the left wing controls 95% or better of all forms of mass communication. From movies, to social media, to the news.

It is abundantly clear the Woke Folk want a: post Christian, post traditional society. They want to erase traditional family values. They want to utterly destroy Judeo-Christian morality. They want to form a new version of America based on

[Exterminatore]

Liberalism and Woke ideology. They will stop at nothing to do this.

So they use media and the press to do this. I ask you…. should we not maybe limit this freedom? It’s being used before our eyes to influence the whole of society and transform the country into something it, and no other country, or empire has ever been. Something profoundly dangerous.

I don’t think we’re approaching a major shift. I think the shift has happened and I am thoroughly convinced there is no chance we will revert to sanity. I am thoroughly convinced the Woke folk and hard core lefties will win. They already have in Britain, Canada, and have majority influenced many other countries teetering on the brink.

America is inseparable from Judeo-Christian principles. We were founded on them. We were never a theocracy. We were always secular, however our entire system of law for the the whole of this nations history was founded on these guiding principals.

There in lies the problem. We are a republic, where all have the right to vote. If a majority of the population is onboard with removing these elements of society, what will stop them? Nothing, and I can assure you a nation guided by extremely liberal and Woke philosophy cannot survive. If that’s not clearly evident now to all, it never will be.

These people are militant in their agendas. BLM for example has openly starred it seeks the destruction of the family. Families are the building blocks of society. This is why the married get additional tax benefits.

Freedom requires great responsibility. In theory, I can literally do anything humanly possible. Do I? No. Because I know not every path is wise, regardless of how much I may desire to do something, I filter it though self discipline, wisdom and conscience. Those things determine what choices I make. I don’t just do any manner of thing because I want to, particularly if it is unwise. Sure I’d love to drink booze all day every day. Do I? No. Why? It’s stupid.

[Exterminatore]

So what to do about all this?

As @WhiteBoyChill stated. Our freedoms were fine in the past…. when the vast majority of society could exercise them
Sensibly. We can see that at least half of us cannot anymore. Freedom for that half is the headlong indulgence in every vice.

Self sufficiency is also required for freedom. You’re only as free to the extent you do not rely on anyone else. Once you must rely on the government for say, welfare money, they own you. You dance to their tune or the gravy train is cut off. Freedom is hard. Most people can’t handle it. They want someone to lead and provide for them because the individual price of freedom is self discipline and to the furthest extent possible, being self reliant. Most people can’t handle this. They prefer peaceable slavery.

So what to do about this? It’s got me feeling like we cannot handle freedom, much as a child or adolescent cannot handle freedom because they lack the wisdom to do so.

All that said, all I know is as a nation the death knell has already been sounded. We’re on life support and the way of life we always had is going, going, gone.

[WhiteBoyChill]

Its a sad thing because I almost feel as though we’ll need some sort of Revolution similar to the Spanish Civil War to save the country.

[KrakenAttackin]

@Exterminatore. Again, very well said.

[KrakenAttackin]

We may soon evolve past voting, as we see how the left steels elections. What comes next won't be pleasant for the left.

[WhiteBoyChill]

@KrakenAttackin Exactly. There’s only so much more abuse conservatives will take

[Exterminatore]

@Kraken

Thanks again.

[slatyb]

Why? That's a reasonable question, In Europe after Luther the Christians were strongly split between Catholics and Protestants. Meanwhile, the scientific enlightenment were happening and the European educated elite were becoming more secular by the day. The last capital sentence for heresy in Scotland was carried out in the early 18th century and the literati of Scotland were horrified. That was the beginning of the end for the intrusion of the church in civil matters in Scotland and soon after in the rest of western Europe.

[WhiteBoyChill]

Lol so the Enlightment pretty much vanquished all power of the church in Civil Society

[alice55]

I'm not sure about the Franco era being so well because in France we have a tons of Spanish immigrant and they came here to escape Franco (even according to my father the Franco era was a really harsh time and he's extremely nationalistic and support LePen)

The best era according to majority of French people is the De Gaulle era so one of a very strong and powerful president who had all the power and only used referendum (asking to the French people what they want and not some rich elite deputy) to create new laws and he was also a very faithful Catholic.

[WhiteBoyChill]

Yeah he was pretty cool. Philippe Pétain definitely wasn’t though. Imagine siding with crazy Germans

[WhitneySnow]

Omg no! He tortured people to death. And some of the founding fathers (not all) were white men who owned slaves (evil is a matter of opinion).

[WhiteBoyChill]

Yeah. He tortured anarchists and communists to death. So be it.

[Exterminatore]

I would say it would have been more moral to simply detain them permanently or deport them but I find it impossible to shed any tears for those people.

Their doctrines are dangerous and evil and they need to be removed from society so they many not influence others.

[Avicenna]

Well, as someone whose grandfather was from there, let me tell you what Franco's Spain was like.

Poor, isolated, backward, ethnic minorities persecuted and not permitted to use their own languages. Franco did divide people. On purpose.

Franco put bounties on the heads of a number of people who fought against him. Huge numbers of people fled the country as refugees after he came to power. Political prisoners were held in concentration camps and prisons until after Franco's death.

Does that sound like the kind of place you would want to live?

[WhiteBoyChill]

He went after Communists and socialists so I see no particular wrongdoings there.

He was for law and order and went after those that sought anarchy.

[Exterminatore]

I see no problem there either, however he did persecute the Basques unjustly so far as I’m concerned and that is the one major criticism I have of him. What he did to them was ruthless and uncalled for.

However, as for the godless communists….. well….. as it’s been said, the only good commie is a dead one, and better dead than red. Commies I see as people holding to an extremely dangerous political philosophy. They love to martyr Christians and Jews. So as for them, I’ll shed a tear next time I take a piss for them.

[WhiteBoyChill]

@Exterminatore And perhaps the Basques were treated unjust, but there surely are things we can learn from him and I suppose no leader is truly perfect after all. Besides of course the son of Christ himself.

Overall I still find myself wishing I grew up in that environment though, so I could experience the unity and nationalism of a Christian state.

[Avicenna]

It wasn't just Basques Franco persecuted. He persecuted (among others) Catalans, Andalusian, Galicians, Jews, Protestants and Roma.

"Perhaps treated Basques unjust" is nowhere close to accurate. It was full repression and human rights violations.

While it's true that Communists persecute lots of people, and that they are anti-Semitic, let's not excuse Franco's repression.

[WhiteBoyChill]

Well I’m not so sure I see that as being much of an issue

[Exterminatore]

@avi

I think we could probably use the term Catalans as synonymous with Basques as that’s the general reason they hailed from going north along the French border.

I am unaware of his persecution of the other groups you mentioned. I will have to research that.

Anyway, I think if you exclude these things you had a pretty great leader in Franco.

[Avicenna]

@Exterminatore: No dictator is a great leader.

[monorprise]

If the federal Goverment actually honored the 1st amendment as it was written we could have states in theses united States giving us just such an opportunity.

I admit I too would like to live in an explicitly christian country, where everyone in the state is strongly encouraged to adopt christian values or live somewhere else.

[jshm2]

You need to get your fucking head examined. Franco butchered, raped and imprisoned thousands. He made the term "White Terror" refer to his regime.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Terror_(Spain)

[WhiteBoyChill]

They were enemies of state trying to upend society and cause anarchy though. He was for law and order.

Would I have cared if Police fired upon BLM protesters torching city blocks in the summer of 2020? Absolutely not

[Agagagagaga]

“White terror” sounds awesome.

[Agagagagaga]

@WhiteBoyChill Agreed.

[KrakenAttackin]

@WhiteBoyChill. Yeah, I am at that point as well.

[Anonymous]

The failure of left wing politics and the indifference of left wing politics of citizens plight is giving rise to right wing politics in Europe.

[WhiteBoyChill]

Precisely right.

[RyanK9b]

Facism is the Italian version.
Nationalism is so far the best option.
Socialism on a national base with a leader which is in the biological ground structure of humans to have a hierarchy.

[mommymommymommy]

Isn't that what americans fought to get away from

A KINGDOM, in england? SPAIN, AND FRANCE

[WhiteBoyChill]

Perhaps so but Franco wasn’t King. He was “El Caudillo”

[mommymommymommy]

Franco would have been WWII, not pre wwii

[WhiteBoyChill]

He ascended to his position at the conclusion of the Spanish Civil War in 1939, and remained there until 1975

[mommymommymommy]

We're not talking about wwii. I'm talking the time of kingdoms. When england, spain, and france were still kingdoms. I get franco was a douchebag, but, im saying america broke away from kingdoms, to gain what we call "freedom" today, something you republicucks, want to take away

[Exterminatore]

@mommie

Yes well, when half the country thinks a man can become a woman, there are 257 genders, and blacks and women are oppressed, when arguably they have more advantages than anyone…. yeah….. it has to be asked…. can we actually handle freedom? Based on what I see, probably not. Perhaps more firm measures are required as that is not freedom, but rather degenerate hedonism and if it could be, it should be crushed with ferocity. Along with every other woke ideal, and as for those who espouse them, they should be silenced, or else removed from society (not killed, but placed in dormitories) where they can influence no one, and can be just as vile as they like away from the rest of us who have decency and common sense.

[WhiteBoyChill]

Except Spain was not referred to as a Kingdom during Franco’s rule

[monorprise]

@mommymommymommy Not even remotely close! What Americans wanted was a place for their own religious denominations to live.

At the time of the American revolution many if not most States had established religious laws. Something that would continue in some form or anther for anther 100 years.

The 1st amendment to the Federal Constitution was actually is actually written explicitly to keep the federal goverment from interfering with the existing STATE laws establishment of religion.
That is why it says CONGRESS shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion.

The states were very much aware of their religious differences and afraid that other denominations of other States would use the common Federal goverment to impose upon them.

Indeed even the famous phrase "Desperation of church & state" originated in a letter illustrating this legal insinuation. Where the a member of a religious minority was trying to get Thomas Jefferson to help him against the Establish religion laws of the State of Connecticut, as Jefferson was explaining why he couldn't do anything.

[Exterminatore]

@mommy

You’re mostly wrong there. Probably 98% of colonial America was Protestant. Yes, of varying denominations, but they did not fear each other.

The reason for that provision is, if one say believe in predestination, and another in free will as it relates to salvation…. our founders didn’t want torture, imprisonment, and killing over such things.

The purpose of the Constitution was to limit the power of the federal government. They did not want to see occur again what did in Europe in times past.

Madison wanted a Bill of Rights as he acknowledged the Constitution does restrain the federal government, but he wanted the first 10 amendments listed as granted individual rights, which could not be altered. The Constitution can be altered or amended. The Bill of Rights cannot be.

On that note, I hope you’re not a 2nd Amendment hater. You could eliminate it from the Constitution, but it changes nothing because there is no process to alter the Bill of Rights and that freedom is granted there also.

[Anonymous]

No, I hear of Spain getting more and more tyrannical in the name of feminism and the like. I am pretty sure there is a law that counts a man farting as abuse against his partner.

I am staying the hell away from there.

[WhiteBoyChill]

I was talking about Francoist Spain

[Opinion Owner]

Oh, well fascism is a stupid philosophy so still no.

[WhiteBoyChill]

I find it genius

[Opinion Owner]

Good for you. Go establish a country under this rule and see how it does.

[WhiteBoyChill]

What land is there in the world that’s left unclaimed? Antarctica?

[Opinion Owner]

I dunno figure it out. Just leave everyone who wants nothing to do with your utopia out.

[WhiteBoyChill]

You avoided the question simply because there is no answer for it. Now how about you get lost, seeing as you are the one who invited yourself to my space

[Opinion Owner]

I already gave you your answer. I think it's stupid because socialism (which fascsim is a type of contrary to popular belief) never works.

[WhiteBoyChill]

Fascism did work though. Hitler dug Germany out of the Great Depression.

[Opinion Owner]

Nazism is equally as stupid but they weren't fascists. They hated fascists actually. The only reason Hitler let Mussolini join him is under the condition that he would do something about the Jewish population within Italy.