Would you prefer a system based on Agrarianism?

[Preacher]

ARYANISM |  Agrarianism

 

[Toro]

I have worked on a farm,it was for my grandfather he owned 28 acres. I have never felt a better sense of self accomplishment and pride and felt like I put in a hard day's work than when I worked with him on his property. I felt connected to that property because it was in my blood. It was just something to love about working very hard but doing so on your own property for your family and not for some multimillion dollar corporation. Here is a link to Agrarianism for those that don't know what I am talking about.

Personally I find society so detached and in a rush and technology has made that worse IMO.

Agrarianism - Wikipedia

No.

Farming sucks.

 

[AnCap'n_Murica]

I doubt they would enjoy a horse drawn plow and a daily exercise in sod busting,, insect removal and disposal, all the live long day...

 

[Moonglow]

I doubt they would enjoy a horse drawn plow and a daily exercise in sod busting,, insect removal and disposal, all the live long day...

View attachment 98676

 

[The Great Goose]

Before the late 1800s America was an agrarian, pioneering and sea faring nation. I think that a lot of conservatives want a government that is best suited for that type of society. For better or worse we've had a humongous industrial revolution and beyond. Liberals want a government that is suited for the post industrial world.

There is no going back to a pre-industrial society. It may be nice to dream about, but it ain't gonna happen. There is not enough land for everyone - not even close. Besides, the skills needed to live an agrarian life must be taught starting at birth - even then the agrarian life get tough.

Somehow people adapt in this post industrial society. Many lose themselves and any values. Some however retain their humanity.

So pretty much unless the country collapses it won't go back to a full fledged society based on Agrarianism.

You are leaning away from National socialism and towards fascism, Odium.

I agree though, getting back to the land and natural pursuits is better than National socialism.

I was never a National Socialist. I was a Racial Socialist. Also how is this Fascism? I haven't looked into it yet but I do believe the NS did enjoy Agrarianism and pushed it as well...like I said haven't really looked into it completely. I believe one can be for Agrarianism and for National or Racial Socialism. Actually I think the 2 can be VERY closely connected.

Fascism was more about going back, traditionalism, while national socialism was more innovative.

 

[Preacher]

Before the late 1800s America was an agrarian, pioneering and sea faring nation. I think that a lot of conservatives want a government that is best suited for that type of society. For better or worse we've had a humongous industrial revolution and beyond. Liberals want a government that is suited for the post industrial world.

There is no going back to a pre-industrial society. It may be nice to dream about, but it ain't gonna happen. There is not enough land for everyone - not even close. Besides, the skills needed to live an agrarian life must be taught starting at birth - even then the agrarian life get tough.

Somehow people adapt in this post industrial society. Many lose themselves and any values. Some however retain their humanity.

So pretty much unless the country collapses it won't go back to a full fledged society based on Agrarianism.

You are leaning away from National socialism and towards fascism, Odium.

I agree though, getting back to the land and natural pursuits is better than National socialism.

I was never a National Socialist. I was a Racial Socialist. Also how is this Fascism? I haven't looked into it yet but I do believe the NS did enjoy Agrarianism and pushed it as well...like I said haven't really looked into it completely. I believe one can be for Agrarianism and for National or Racial Socialism. Actually I think the 2 can be VERY closely connected.

Fascism was more about going back, traditionalism, while national socialism was more innovative.

Seems to me that both were like that. I mean Fascism IS a combining of state and corporate power....I would almost say it was a reverse. That neither really wanted a society based on Agrarianism but I think NS realized its place and potential in a community whereas Fascism it would seem would want to eradicate it to make sure the workers were helping the state via working for the corporations.

 

[Richard-H]

ARYANISM | Agrarianism

Why stop there? Why not sing the glories of living in a cave and eating raw meat? Why not outlaw fire and the wheel? The glorious savage!

You may find it easy to revert to a primal state, but the rest of us left that behind many many generations ago.

 

[Richard-H]

Before the late 1800s America was an agrarian, pioneering and sea faring nation. I think that a lot of conservatives want a government that is best suited for that type of society. For better or worse we've had a humongous industrial revolution and beyond. Liberals want a government that is suited for the post industrial world.

There is no going back to a pre-industrial society. It may be nice to dream about, but it ain't gonna happen. There is not enough land for everyone - not even close. Besides, the skills needed to live an agrarian life must be taught starting at birth - even then the agrarian life get tough.

Somehow people adapt in this post industrial society. Many lose themselves and any values. Some however retain their humanity.

So pretty much unless the country collapses it won't go back to a full fledged society based on Agrarianism.

You are leaning away from National socialism and towards fascism, Odium.

I agree though, getting back to the land and natural pursuits is better than National socialism.

I was never a National Socialist. I was a Racial Socialist. Also how is this Fascism? I haven't looked into it yet but I do believe the NS did enjoy Agrarianism and pushed it as well...like I said haven't really looked into it completely. I believe one can be for Agrarianism and for National or Racial Socialism. Actually I think the 2 can be VERY closely connected.

Fascism was more about going back, traditionalism, while national socialism was more innovative.

Seems to me that both were like that. I mean Fascism IS a combining of state and corporate power....I would almost say it was a reverse. That neither really wanted a society based on Agrarianism but I think NS realized its place and potential in a community whereas Fascism it would seem would want to eradicate it to make sure the workers were helping the state via working for the corporations.

Wow do you have a fundamental misunderstanding of fascism!

The term fascism was created by Mussolini. It was an anti-thesis of the growing socialist/communist sympathies of the Italian workers - most of whom were agrarian workers. Fascism is a dictatorship of the wealthy - as opposed to a dictatorship of the workers.

Mussolini needed to use Nationalism to win over support from middle class and working class people. He used fanatic Italian nationalism to gain that support. He knew that there were millions of pissed off Italian vets from WWI who had fought a brutal war against the Austrians (and yes the Italian Austrian front was as brutal as any other front in WWI). These vets felt they had been used and abused and had no gains for having won the war. He used them as thugs against his political enemies.

That is what fascism is - a dictatorship of the wealthy disguised as nationalism.

Isn't it amazing how Donald Trump, a New York City born millionaire has duped so many working class Americans into supporting him? Do you really believe he has the interests of working class Americans at heart?

If so, I'd say I have a bridge to sell you...but it looks like the Donald already has.

 

[Richard-H]

Good night. Time for a beer and a T.V. show - then bed. I gotta work tomorrow.

 

[Preacher]

Before the late 1800s America was an agrarian, pioneering and sea faring nation. I think that a lot of conservatives want a government that is best suited for that type of society. For better or worse we've had a humongous industrial revolution and beyond. Liberals want a government that is suited for the post industrial world.

There is no going back to a pre-industrial society. It may be nice to dream about, but it ain't gonna happen. There is not enough land for everyone - not even close. Besides, the skills needed to live an agrarian life must be taught starting at birth - even then the agrarian life get tough.

Somehow people adapt in this post industrial society. Many lose themselves and any values. Some however retain their humanity.

So pretty much unless the country collapses it won't go back to a full fledged society based on Agrarianism.

You are leaning away from National socialism and towards fascism, Odium.

I agree though, getting back to the land and natural pursuits is better than National socialism.

I was never a National Socialist. I was a Racial Socialist. Also how is this Fascism? I haven't looked into it yet but I do believe the NS did enjoy Agrarianism and pushed it as well...like I said haven't really looked into it completely. I believe one can be for Agrarianism and for National or Racial Socialism. Actually I think the 2 can be VERY closely connected.

Fascism was more about going back, traditionalism, while national socialism was more innovative.

Seems to me that both were like that. I mean Fascism IS a combining of state and corporate power....I would almost say it was a reverse. That neither really wanted a society based on Agrarianism but I think NS realized its place and potential in a community whereas Fascism it would seem would want to eradicate it to make sure the workers were helping the state via working for the corporations.

Wow do you have a fundamental misunderstanding of fascism!

The term fascism was created by Mussolini. It was an anti-thesis of the growing socialist/communist sympathies of the Italian workers - most of whom were agrarian workers. Fascism is a dictatorship of the wealthy - as opposed to a dictatorship of the workers.

Mussolini needed to use Nationalism to win over support from middle class and working class people. He used fanatic Italian nationalism to gain that support. He knew that there were millions of pissed off Italian vets from WWI who had fought a brutal war against the Austrians (and yes the Italian Austrian front was as brutal as any other front in WWI). These vets felt they had been used and abused and had no gains for having won the war. He used them as thugs against his political enemies.

That is what fascism is - a dictatorship of the wealthy disguised as nationalism.

Isn't it amazing how Donald Trump, a New York City born millionaire has duped so many working class Americans into supporting him? Do you really believe he has the interests of working class Americans at heart?

If so, I'd say I have a bridge to sell you...but it looks like the Donald already has.

If that's the case with Trump then he is no worse than Clinton would have been. As has been said with Clinton we knew EXACTLY what we were getting. At least with Trump there is the unknown factor. Plus WHY would a billionaire need to run for president if the people that were running were going to do the same thing he would do? Makes no sense.

 

[Preacher]

ARYANISM | Agrarianism

Why stop there? Why not sing the glories of living in a cave and eating raw meat? Why not outlaw fire and the wheel? The glorious savage!

You may find it easy to revert to a primal state, but the rest of us left that behind many many generations ago.

Yes because modernism is WONDERFUL! You can enjoy modernism I never have. I enjoy technology but I would give it up in a heartbeat to have a society based on Agrarianism. You like most liberals take EVERYTHING to the most extreme and you are laughed at instead your possible point being made.