Race issue and class issue?

We all know what it means to be redpilled on the race issue. What about class in this late stage of capitalism? What is capital's relationship to racial solidarity?

We reject basically one half of liberalism on the issue of race. What about the other half? What about private property? Do we see capitalism as a force of history that ends with globalism and dystopia? Do we oppose the entrepeneur attitude as egotistical and based on the fruits of our land, blood, and labor, which together provide a social infrastructure capital spawns and accumulates from then, in materialistic, rootless fashion, dispenses with?

Much of globalization's excesses disproportionately hurt the working class economically and socially. Much of that class is the only real economic unit with an interest in the nation-state, it being attached to the land and homogeneous communities. For example, labor as something physical can never compete on an international level with capital in a digital world.

Labor holds the bulk of genetic stock, but because of their class status globalist capitalism leaves them disproportionately exposed to minorities and their bad communities, while the detached bourgeois liberals (and the disproportionate amount of Jews among them) in their wealthy, homogeneous neighborhoods laud diversity and the free flow of labor and capital, the open society.

These minorities are essentially here so our economic system can sustain its destructive philosophy of eternal growth, driving down wages and supplementing the birth rate of whites. One makes is to correct a market imbalance that makes us noncompetitive in the global market, the other is intended to solve the demographic crisis regarding the welfare state as well as ridding society of a stubborn belief and perceived entitlement to the 'middle class dream' previous generations attained.

Besides that, key to beating the communists is, as it was 80 years ago, turning away workers from marxism and having a system that looks after them, while in exchange they acknowledge their place in a meritocratic class collaborationist hierarchy and don't actually demand total socialization and abolition of property rights.

What should a western nationalist position be on the class issue? Stay true to classical liberal principles, take up almost victorian-like attitudes like red-pilled libertarians? Or do we take inspiration from a new source, the european continent, and become 'beefsteaks' by introducing a new syncretic ideology that's traditionally alien to the right wing in the anglosphere/around the atlantic?

>>>Holla Forums

"Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality, and unlike Marxism, it is patriotic.

"We might have called ourselves the Liberal Party. We chose to call ourselves the National Socialists. We are not internationalists. Our socialism is national. We demand the fulfilment of the just claims of the productive classes by the state on the basis of race solidarity. To us state and race are one."

Yes, we. A lot of historical nationalists were modernists and opposed to what were called reactionaries, the conservatives trying to hold on to their money. They didn't think you could have a cohesive society without dealing with issues of class, and that extreme inequality destabilizes the nation-state.

Classism was created by that kike Marx to distract the goys from what the kikes were upto

Class issues are as old as civilization, from slave to peasant revolts

This is Holla Forumsniggers trying to get us into bullshit class issues again. Nothing matters but race and genetics. Fuck off.

You realize fascism was born from syndicalism, right? And that historically it decried the plutocracies of the west and their nations of shopkeepers?

WE DON'T SAY TO THE RICH 'GIVE TO THE POOR,' WE SAY 'GERMAN PEOPLE, HELP EACH OTHER.'

fuck off Holla Forums

...

TransNatSoc

/thread

Fuck off Jew.

(((Class warfare))) is a spook you subhuman leftypol tranny.

You write like a faggot.

also
oxymoron

Natsoc isn't corporate syndicalism so fuck off with your Mussolini argument

The economic principles which saved Germany from runaway inflationary economic catastrophe and built the German economy into world's strongest economy while the rest of the world sunk into the great depression, are based on the writing of Gottfried Feder.

And again, learn how to now write like a retard

He also hated germany's bourgeoisie and mein kampf was full of bitching about it. It only changed for realpolitik reasons when he realized he had to use them, abandoning the SA and its revolutionary style. He still hated the materialism and plutocracy of liberal-capitalism. The nationalists of the european continent used the term 'proletarian nation' to distinguish themselves from britain et al.

It's also impossible for me to be a leftypol type since there's nothing marxist about me, and a non-marxian brand of socialism/syndicalism was always either the basis for fascism or a part of it.


I write like a normal person


Natsoc is all corporatism, and historically had a non-marxian socialist left wing owing to Germany's strong industrial working class and labor movement. I have no idea what you're talking about as it has nothing to do with mussolini. The entire point of volksgemeinschaft and class collaboration was the establishment of integral body of united interest groups. Those interests are mostly economic.

I don't know why you brought up gottfried feder.

"He remained one of the leaders of the anti-capitalistic wing of the NSDAP, and published several papers, including "National and social bases of the German state" (1920), "Das Programm der NSDAP und seine weltanschaulichen Grundlagen" ("The programme of the NSDAP and the world views it's based on," 1927) and "Was will Adolf Hitler?" ("What does Adolf Hitler want?", 1931).
Feder briefly dominated the Nazi Party's official views on financial politics, but after he became chairman of the party's economic council in 1931, his anti-capitalist views led to a great decline in financial support from Germany's major industrialists. Following pressure from Walther Funk, Albert Voegler, Gustav Krupp, Friedrich Flick, Fritz Thyssen, Hjalmar Schacht and Emil Kirdorf, Hitler decided to move the party away from Feder's economic views; when Hitler became Reichskanzler in 1933, he appointed Feder as under-secretary at the ministry of economics in July. This disappointed Feder, who had hoped for a much higher position.[citation needed]

[…]

After the Night of the Long Knives in June 1934, where SA leaders like Ernst Röhm and left-leaning party officials like Gregor Strasser were murdered, Feder lost favor with Hitler and began to withdraw from the government,[citation needed] finally becoming Professor for Settlement Policy[8] at the Technische Hochschule Berlin in December 1936, where he stayed until his death in Murnau, Bavaria, on 24 September 1941."

He even became irrelevant after the purge of the SA and left wing of the party. Also, the German economy of the 30s was completely unsustainable and required plundering of other (white countries). Hitler probably should have focused less on appeasing germany's industrialists, winning elections, and creating a fantastic military, and instead empower the SA and the party's left wing while linking up with other anti-bourgeois, anti-cosmopolitan nationalist movements.

Walther Funk was Feder's protege ( and co-author ). The idea that Feder's ideas were sidelined is not true.


Yes Hitler was against ill-gotten wealth, not wealth that was rightly earned.

So it doesn't matter if you are enslaved as long as your owners are white too?

Fuck off Jew.

Fuck off you proxy hopping kike.

Without debt, taxes, or a system based on inflation, a man is financially enslaved to no one.

Instead of quoting (((wikipedia))) articles on subjects you know nothing about, try to actually understand the topic you are condemning before condemning it, because you end up making crap arguments which are easily poked full of holes by people who know more about the subject than you.

Yes Hitler did everything for the workers but he also did not prevent one from acquiring wealth nor take it away unless there was a very good reason, like Goering for example who was very wealthy and deservedly so.

Fuck off nigger. I serve the shit race willingly.

Born from is not equivalent to. That's the same argument as "we're all born from the same ancestor so we're all the same race. The human race!" Bullshit. Now fuck off to leftypol, subnigger IQ faggot.

White, kek. Autocorrect lol

Socialism is viable with a strong eugenics program. You cannot let the failed and mentally ill breed endlessly at the expense of the competent and hard working.

...

Get out >>>Holla Forums dyke!

...

Go back to /lefty"masculinityisidentitypoliticsandaspook"pol/

Holla Forums supports a system that will inevitably lead to a form of super-capitalism. Why would I care what they have to say on the matter?

haha

Private property isn't "liberalism" dumbass.

Fucking k*rd fanboys

Citation needed.


Aryans don't consider hierarchy and fidelity to be "slavery."

Stewardship should be our credo, to ourselves, our families, and by extension of those our race and our nation. A man who is of our family should be helped; not given handouts, but a hand to reach for. Community should begin the foundation of helping others; those within are most deserving, then interspersed to our communities, and so on.

We do have a race problem. The problem is non-whites are taking over white countries. That's the problem we need to focus on. "Class issues" mean nothing compared to white genocide.

Removing the kikes and their systems of slavery and usery will lead to a new golden age.

SIEG HEIL
GAS THE KIKES
RACE WAR NOW
14/88 RAHOWA