Slovenian fist fucker says he'd vote for Trump if he could

Life under hiliaryist america

Chomscrap had actually been busy being the anarcho-liberal he is to provide full support for Clinton on a lesser evilism basis. Mind you this was before S█████ was cheated out of an honest chance by the Democraps, and that supporting S█████ was a waste of a vote because he 'would never win'.

youtube.com/watch?v=mjfBBNW0ZvU

what is fracking?
2/10 Doesn't look like Hillary to me.

Zizek confirmed for traitor

Ill ask him to make some videos in his gulag tho

Reminder that he is A GOD.

Why are Holla Forumstards always claiming people they don't like are fascists? Do you realize that fascism is inspired by marxism and is in many ways a leftist ideology?

All I said was that Trump isn't a fascist but an opportunist. Get some reading comprehension and read a book.

But somehow Ted Cruz is. Hahaha, way to misrepresent your previous post.

Stop being stupid

lel

Cruz and his fundamental theocratic desires for America come much closer to Trump's wishy washy populism. You'd have to be an American deprived of a proper education to not understand this, and I definitely do pity you.

...

...

webm

My gott

...

fucking stalinist
fucking reformist

Surely people can't be this retarded…

Two major parties deciding to sell two different new flavours of deology is not the reform needed in this day and age

Why do I always forget that Holla Forums is an imageboard of a leftist larping club?

Man people attack him for being a Fascist, conservative, "deadly jester", clown, plagarist. liberal, social democrat & stalinist all the time its rather hilarious. Zizek once claimed that one of his books was attacked for being Zionist propaganda and being anti-jewish at the same time.

hell even people from here like A.W attacks Zizek too, for liking Schelling and psychoanalysis.

It was inspired from syndicalist movements in the late 19th century

Well we have retards on the left like the right does, more news at 11.

This is terrible

here we go

>>>Holla Forums8064057

Nobody says this.

For being a marksucc (which essentially reformism or at best incrementalism), you sure seem assblasted at other incrementalist musings.

...

here comes da hells

I do agree Trump is himself less dangerous than Clinton, but what scares me more is how the GOP and general conservative attitude have changed about him since he won the nomination. They went from making him a pariah to worshiping the man. His entire public persona is designed to get stupid people to like him.

In a weird way, Clinton could also be a safe bet because now everyone openly despises her. I am genuinely afraid that Trump would become a cult of personality and Congress would kiss his ass relentlessly.

Also, fuck Pence.

This is disgusting

Thank god people like this exist so I can justify my apathy

WE WERE WRONG ALL ALONG

...

oh look Holla Forums's being retarded again

Market socialism is still revolutionary, mainly since capitalism will reject any sort of reform that threatens its existence. "Accelerationism" is a meme used to convince people you disagree with ideologically to do something convenient for you.

oh noes

devious

I don't think Holla Forums gives a shit about gommies as a threat, they mean the Left like the NYT means the left.

I say it over and over again, if you want to fuck with the elite, if you want to create an environment to build socialism, if you want to ruin the neoliberals, if you want to burn everything to the ground!

trump 2016

...

granted, this does mean trump would just be a hilarious blow to US pride

After Bush the Younger, Americans have gotten used to that.

bush was a huge didn du nuffin though, they won't find an excuse for le orange man

Wouldn't Hillary voters be the reformists here?

How so?

???

"Lesser evil" neoliberal. Basically maintain status quo, but with some token subsidies for Obamacare, public college, etc.

Nice reading comprehension, faggot.

Market socialism is incrementalist in the sense that advocating for democratic, cooperative economic units within capitalism is not a total overthrow of the dominant mode of production (capitalism).

Seemed fitting to your strawman argument faggot

Except it wasn't a strawman argument.

Faggot.

Market socialism aims to eventually abolish capitalism. You stupid fuck.

Except it was

doublefaggot

Let him be, somehow his centrally planned economy involves no trade because magic

Hence, it is incrementalist.

I never said I was against market socialism, all I said was that market socialism is incrementalist. You also deduced that calling market socialism incrementalist must mean I'm for central planning.

Am I getting wewd?

wew

Come on now

That's not what market socialism is.

Yes, and you are dead wrong.

So yes?

Look back at our exchange, faggot.

The evolutionary strategy among market socialists (who do not otherwise have a base of authority) is to advocate for cooperative enterprise within the confines of capitalism.

To contrast this with a direct, non-internal adoption of market socialism to gradually subvert the hegemony of autocratic enterprise, you can look at for example Yugoslavia where the state planned economy was legislatively replaced by cooperative units the Yugoslav federation.

Reddit already seething

I'm not the user you are debating with. I just saw you wanted a wew, so I gave you one. Here, take this too: wew.

All I see is strawmans and backpedals

A wew to you too then.

Then so be it, turbonerd.

and wews

wew

strawpersyns*

But you see, even your idol agrees with us!

He is a traitor now

...

FUCKING NORMALFAGS GET THE FUCK OFF MY BOARD REEEEEEEEEEE

...

Holla Forums here, I promice I won't do that. But hey why not just celebrate with us

Zizek clearly misunderstands how th right wing apropiating the workers movement will be the final blow to the left

Holla Forums knows this but they simply aren't aware of the importance

Honestly the USSR lend lease is one of the strangest things the US has ever done.

Neither Trump nor Cruz are Fascists. You know, here's an idea: try to get the definition of Fascism from actual Fascists?
Maybe they'd you know, you know more about it, than you?
Or do you like it when non socialists define what socialism is? No? Are you hypocrites?

Also, that image: can you guys not even do sarcasm correctly?
That picture is a complete failure at funny sarcasm.

I suppose. Better than that bitch hillary

You did read right?

From Holla Forums, I don't recall any time we've ever raided your board, why would we in the future. We don't really care about you guys or find you a threat in any way.
We'd prefer aiming our smugness at the Jewish media after he wins the elections.

He even quoted it

i wish he was, rather than a conservative civic nationalist. or are you using the "everything i don't like is fascism" definition?

this. calling everything fascist is like when conservitards call Obongo a marxist

This. We're one imageboard after all.

Can you guys start officially supporting Asserists? I want them >>>/out/

Is this fascist, mr. expert sir?
youtube.com/watch?v=vt-vG_TdOT4

or maybe webm related?

Literally every time B████ lost a major primary state.

Did you not read what I said? Or do you not see me also linking to another guy who called Trump a Fascist? Then called Cruz a Fascist. Do you see? Good. Now try to follow me here.
I said "neither of them are Fascist". Are you still with me little fella? Ok?
Let's go over it once more:
"Neither Trump nor Cruz are Fascist"
One of the guys I replied to called Trump one, the other called Cruz one. Are you still following me?
Ok, I will now explain to you as simply as possible: Trump is an old fashioned Founding Father type Constitutionalist.
Cruz is an insane religious zealot and wants a Theocracy.

American Constitutionalist.
And
Theocracy.

Neither of these two things are Fascism.

I hope you got it this time little fella, I'd hate to repeat myself.

Yes, we have shitposting guerrillas instead, kek

No, it is not… You are just proving my point. You guys really don't understand what Fascism is, do you?
Well, I can see some of the guys here do. Many replies already have admitted that indeed Trump nor Cruz are Fascists.

Mussolini was a Fascist.
Hitler was not a Fascist. Not Socialism is a very different system from Fascism.

If you want to know what Fascism is, learn Italian Fascist literature.

Mussolini was more of a socialist than Hitler, and that's not really saying much considering Hitler wasn't a socialist at all (see night of the long knives, et c).

Not that guy, I would never see either Cruz or Trump as fascists, but:
How so?

Haha I had forgotten how butthurt you cucks are about N at io naa l Socialism that your board automatically turns it to "Not" every time.
Heh. It is socialism, it's just the kind that actually works. Which explains your butthurt about the name, really.

Here, have this WEBM of antifas beating up and robbing a boy with Down Syndrome.

Coz if your system can only be saved if fueled by an imperialist war machine it suuure works just fine.

Strasser brothers and Röhm beg to differ :^)

soviet union?

Won't Hillary and WW3 benefit us more?

NazSocism is definitely not socialism. Regardless, it's "working"ness required that Germany start invading to restore depleted resources before being crushed by the rest of the world.

Try again

Not at all.
You don't seem to understand yourself what socialism means if you think Knight of the Long Knives somehow contradicts with that.
Röhm deserved to die, he wanted to stop the people from being freed.

Wow, someone with manners. I will tell you because you are nice.
There are many differences, but the very core tenet and belief of both ideologies is completely the opposite from each other, which is all you need to know.

In Fascism, the state is the absolute authority, the thing considered most important, and above all else. Every decision of the people in Fascism is to somehow support the state.

In Not Socialism, the race is considered the most important and above all else, even above the state by far. Every decision of the state in N a t io nal Socialism is supposed to somehow benefit the race.

Some quotes from Mussolini and Hitler to explain this.

In Mussolini’s word’s:

“The Fascist conception of the state is all-embracing: outside of it no human or spiritual values can exist, much less have any real worth. Thus understood, Fascism is totalitarian, and the Fascist state — a synthesis and a unit of all values — interprets, develops and potentiates the whole life of a people…It is not the nation that generates the state…Rather it is the state which creates the nation, conferring volition and, therefore, real life on a people…In the Fascist conception, the state is an absolute before which individuals and groups are relative…”

To the Not Socialist, on the other hand, it is our Race, not the state, which is all-important. In Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler wrote:

“The state is a means to an end. Its end lies in the preservation and advancement of a community of physically and spiritually similar creatures… States which do not serve this purpose are misbegotten monstrosities in fact.” (II:2)

...

I didn't mean to directly insinuate that Cruz is a fascist, but rather that he comes much closer to it.

Go ahead. Surprise me.

Not necessarily. Useful idiotism is a thing.

I don't. But I don't really care about anyone's feefees.

Basically what I said. And that this comes closer to the opportunist populism Trump espouses.

He was. Fascism is defined as the merger of enterprise and the state coupled with fervent ethnonationalism and romanticization of ethnic culture and history.

Fascism was originally, before Mussolini even, a more actually reactionary tendency within syndicalism (revolutionary trade unionism).

Define 'socialism'. Unless it refers to privatizing and extending executive authority to a nation state to you, I'd love to hear about you.

We wordfiltered it for the bantz, but actual butthurt gets us too every time.

When you purge the socialist elements and people from your party only to privatise your economy later then I think it should serve as a very salient example of their being NOT socialist.

Then enlighten us what is socialism as an economic system.

Welp, guess I'm voting for Trump now.

It seems like it is nearing time for me to take my leave as I have no interest in arguing with uneducated fools that do not understand what N a t io nal Socialism as an ideology and system even is like. You seem to have gotten all your information from Jews, not from actual Nat io na l Socialists. Kind of odd, don't you think, getting the information from the enemies of that ideal? Why would they be truthful?

Na tio nal Socialism is not imperialist. It is interventionist, but it has no interest in conquering other lands for itself. It is basically interventionist -> once other nations are Nat Soc -> isolationist.
Secondly, the economy was better than the economy in any other nation in history, ever. Especially before the war. Such is economy without Jewish capitalists, usury and fraudulent money printing. They printed one mark for every one mark worth of work done in the nation. It works, unlike leftist Socialism.

Nonsense. It required no such thing, nor did Germany have any depleted resources. It was an economic powerhouse, rising even further above. It would have done even better if the war could have been avoided. Germany wanted the war least of all. Educate yourself on why the war happened and who were behind it.

Good thing no such thing happened in Germany. To be accurate, Nat Soc is the middle ground between Capitalism and Socialism. It takes the best of both worlds, combines them, and throws the bad parts into the trash from both. You are delusional if you think the state committed "massive privatization" of businesses. Businesses were owned by the business owners just usual, except laws regulated that they are not allowed to conduct business in any way that harms the German race. That was the rule that had to be followed.

You have zero understanding of what Fascism is. I explained earlier what the difference between Fascism and Nat Soc is. They are as different from each other as Libertarianism and Liberalism are.

No such thing was done. Stop reading Jewish nonsense.

Well, right-libertarianism can be regarded as a subtype of economic liberalism, since it promotes deregulation and economic Laissez-faire in capitalist system

Germa Bel is not Jewish, idiot.

You wot? Then neocons are isolationist in the same sense.

So it was capitalism with regulations, unless you have some USA-tier definition of socialism that states it's a big guv with lotsa regulations. But that question is solved by answering , so yeah

Zizek is a far-right plant confirmed.

then why was that what happened

Hillary and Obama are not deporting people you stupid faggots, they just changed the definition of deportations to "anybody they catch and tell to go back at the border" while at the same time revoking the DHS's muh privilege to pursue suspects outside of a very small jurisdiction.

I thought the left was supposed to be anti-globalist? Oh wait its just because you're uber butthurt the Soviet Union had to beg "muh bourgeois" for money to beat a small swampland country. You faggots would have absolutely no problem with Fascism if Hitler didn't spank your fucking booties in the early 40s.

I thought Obama's "record number of deportations" was mostly due to clearing out Bush' backlog of deportation cases?

You are a stupid person

Huh, I don't know, that sounds kind of exactly like modern imperialism. Replace Nazi with liberal democracy and you're pretty close to describing the American foreign policy of the last 70 years.

That statement doesn't mean anything in and of itself. What does "better economy" mean? Economy describes, in large terms, the way a society distributes scarce resources, does best economy then mean "best distribution of resources"? In that case you can just say it is without being held accountable for the claim since you didn't specify any normative standard to hold it to.

What? That makes no sense. Did they use non-accumulative currency? Did they abolish the market?

I have an inkling that you don't actually know what socialism is.

Inkling is slowly growing into a large suspicion.
What is the middle ground between having a state that protects private property rights, and not having any central enforcement of private property?
What is the middle ground between having a class of people working wage labour, and not having such a class?
&c.

That doesn't refute what the guy you're responding to said, nothing of that part of your response does actually.

It is.

I'm pretty sure Axis didn't win the war. Also Hitler and Mussolini were both class collaborationist faggots, so I assure you we would have problem.

Zizek, or at least his Vermont professor friend, is correct.

In response to trump the unspoken neoliberal consensus has come out and I'd stating itself plainly.

When trump says democrats have done nothing for black communities over the decades the neoliberal consensus comes out: actually, things in the black inner cities are great the way they are.

When he condemns corruption and promises to hold the highest officials to the word of the law he is denounced with shock and disbelief.

When he condemns decades of American intervention as disastrous we find out that those actions were correct and yes, given the chance, they would do it all again

When he points out the corruption of the major parties we are told this was ordinary and the actions of experienced politicians

We are told that yes, free trade and open immigration is hurting domestic workers, but this is intentional

And most of all, we are told that no matter what evil you support, it's okay as long as you are on the side of Love and against Hate

This is quite dangerous. What can we do to dismantle a consensus that has become so bold?

It is: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-globalization_movement. The left pioneered anti-globalization because it rightfully saw globalization as a scheme to expand and maximize exploitation hiding behind internationalist facades. The only force directly upholding globalization has been the state on order of private enterprise, and indirectly through private lobbyists.

Despite his rhetoric, Trump will be a neoliberal centrist president just like Hillary. And no, he will not put boots on the ground in Libya.

Truth of the matter is that poor reactionary white people (Trump's base) are actually more susceptible to socialistic propagandizing than upper middle class liberals. When Trump turns out to be a neoliberal centrist it will be fairly easy to bring some of his base into our fold. Hillary's supporters (limosuine liberals) will never be convinced that their Queen is wrong. Just look at how staunchly those same liberals still support Obama.

I know the knee-jerk reaction these days is to disagree with Zizek, but I think he's right here.

how did that turn out again?

I realized that my previous post is pretty dismissive in its language. (I'm I'm )
In case you're still here, I'm actually interested in what you have to say. I would really like to know in what sense Nazi germany could be said to be a "middle ground between socialism and capitalism" because I genuinely don't understand how that could be. The way those terms are used regularly I understand them to be mutually exclusive.
Likewise I'm sure you know more about the economical history of Nazi Germany than me, you just don't seem to argue anything or hold any clear position other than that Nazi is positive.

why

write

like

this

you

faggot

?

...

Not him but because the default text box is small, so a smaller sentence bunches together and looks longer than it is.

you can expand the text box

Not the original guy, but as I've understood it, NazSoc fluctuates between privatizing and nationalizing companies/services/industries as needed.

Because it prioritizes the race, it greatly discourages infighting or unrest. Thus it grants people the ability to have private industry whilst restricting the ability for larger companies or cartels to have significant influence (as if they're being wasteful or exploitative they can just be nationalized, then the benefits distributed.)

Hitler was against both Capitalism and Communists ideologically, but did have sympathy for some aspects of each. Which you can see via the pre-WW2 international relations between Hitler's Germany, the US, and the USSR.

Note however, that I am not a Nazi myself but I do agree with the original guy's point of it being closer to center.

This! Also, they weren't even that racialist. Read Veronica Clark.

bump
A bit late to the party but my friend just freaked out over the news, pretty sure he may be self-harming again, had to share.

wew lad

It's inspired partially by the work of one Marxist, Georges Sorel. And it doesn't really take any kind of Marxist values or traditionally Marxist theory from him either. Sorel just argued that a rational and methodically laid out vision of a post-capitalist future wouldn't be a message that resonates with the average prole, so he advocated embracing spiritualism, irrationalism etc to appeal to emotion and whip people into a revolutionary fervour. Mussolini took that idea and applied it to the creation of a supreme, militant, and all pervasive national state based around Social Darwinism and nationalism. Mussolini also takes Marxist class analysis and uses it to try to find ways to "reconcile" the bourgeoisie and proletariat of the same nation for the good of that nation.

TLDR: Fascism takes some Marxist concepts like class analysis and Sorel's socialist irrationalism and uses it for totally different ends and goals.

Zizi would have voted for SYRIZA and look how that turned out.

This line shows how blindingly ignorant you are
That's capitalism, you mong.

ub.edu/graap/nazi.pdf

he is right tho

Fine and all Zizek but none of that matters. Literally only climate change matters. These two candidates are idiots.

why live

wtf i love trump now

America really needs accelerationism so the system can collapse onto itself.

Acceleration is a poisonous lie! Supporting social counterrevolution is not a path to revolution. Creating even worse conditions for the proletariat will not raise class consciousness. Why should any worker follow you when you advocated supported attacks on their standard of living?

marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1888/free-trade/

>But, in general, the protective system of our day is conservative, while the free trade system is destructive. It breaks up old nationalities and pushes the antagonism of the proletariat and the bourgeoisie to the extreme point'. In a word, the free trade system hastens the social revolution. It is in this revolutionary sense alone, gentlemen, that I vote in favor of free trade.
Accelerationism is as old as historical materialism. Even Marx and Engels themselves knew that communists everywhere around the world should encourage anything that further antagonizes the proletariat into smelling the roses. Without a proper revolutionary, class conscious basis for our ideas, the communist movement has no better tactic for winning over popular support for even a basic anti-capitalist attitude.

however, that argues to accelerate capitalist development. both Hillary and Trump represent capitalist decay.

That quote is literally true.

While both posture for war in their own way, the former promises to give us a little more healthcare than Obama did and pass a few civil laws that would give gays and trannies a safe space, while the latter promises to increase deregulation and appoint heavily conservative justices. Because of this, Hillary's policies feign a leaning towards the center left's ruling ideology which disarms a lot of potential for an increased leftwards lean in popular discontent, while Trump will only encourage more left wing opposition. Even the progressive left os starting to understand this, see: youtube.com/watch?v=Vg68IdhMm8g.