Natsoc/right-wing critiques of capitalism

If you can't read German, it makes for a nice interest to pursue.

A lot of people like Duolingo for learning. Some prefer Rosetta Stone, even if they don't tailor their program to the natural use and foibles of the language they're trying to teach you.

I'd advise getting a German-English dictionary for vocabulary and making use of Duolingo to teach you the structure of the language.

You sound like a college commie.

archive.org/details/HitlersRevolutionByRichardTedor_383

What are the downsides of being conquered, besides rape and pillage?

absolutely. just read this guys ideas on capitalism. drop all the naive internationalist shit by adding a side of guy #2. viola, you have NSDAP

wtf it ate my pics

That's not what I said at all you illiterate. I said capitalism doesn't exist and I explained why.

Your argument is still shit. Capitalism can't exist because it dissolves society, culture, community, human bonds, etc into goo. It's literally the economic side of the degeneracy coin

Not sure of my opinion on all of this yet, frankly, considering how relatively little I know how economics and its models, but I just want to say +1 to calling out atheism for being degenerate and ignoring the part of man that isn't materialistic. It's frankly a menace to society, and especially any form of modern society… not to mention that the atheistic alternatives, their 'explanations' of everything has so many holes that I'm astonished even the atheist retards haven't seen them at this point.

I'll ask this though, now that I'm thinking about it: If capitalism doesn't provide the incentive to improve the product, what other economic model does?

A nationalist form of market socialism where the state is an organic entity consistent of the people. Something almost akin to the national syndicalism as described by Mosley.

Forgive my lack of understanding, but I take that to mean that the improvements within a nationalist form of market socialism would be driven not due to money, but due to the will of the people, basically, who want things to improve for the sake of a greater and happier nation?

Essentially, yes. The state would be a democratic entity, however, that can only work in an ethnically homogeneous society. Basically only citizens would be allowed to vote. Citizens would essentially have to be ethnic natives who served mandatory time in the military as a form of civil service. Those who are physically unable to be in the military would have to do some sort of other civil service in order to gain citizenship.

*male citizens

Natsoc/left-wing critiques of capitalism
FTFY. The so-called anti-capitalist right spouts nothing but leftist talking.

*talking points

lolberts please leave. You're no longer welcome here.

I'd be very careful with naming a specific model as far as fascism comes, as you've said it must be organic and therefore is in it's entirety depended on people. There is no fault with any specific (non)model so far as it works on the species in question. For example, it would be silly to apply anything but communism to ants.

For that reason, there is no one unique concrete model known as fascism and it's applications vary with people.

Forgot pic.

Come now, even I can tell that while the general concepts may be similar from the left and the right anti-capitalists, but the reasoning is different. And the reasoning is the most important thing because reasoning affects the execution of an idea.

Top tier post. Materialism is not the true nature of man, which is why dialectic materialism (the debate between capitalism and communism) constructed by the Hegelian leftists is wrong. It would be the correct solution if we were soulless machines, but we're not.

TL;DR All of Holla Forums's critiques of capitalism/communism come from our metaphysics, which is nonmaterialistic.

Dude, that is easy to find. What is hard to find is nationalistic books that are pro-capitalist. Nationalist Libertarian discussion is hated more than actual shill threads.

Issue with this is that capitalism is not intended to be a system of morals. It is a fulfillment of validity.

In a capitalistic economy people are free to act "un-capitalistic", but in a planned economy nobody can choose to be capitalistic.

Also I have not seen a single difference in arguments for Prussian socialism and Bernie voter's arguments for democratic socialism.

Capitalism is built off of the values of the third estate when power shifted from the upper class (first and second eststes) to the middle class (bourgeois) during the European enlightenement. Translating the bible in vernacular allowed the masses to understand Jesus's true message of cuckoldry that had been hidden in Latin by the chur h for so many years. Enlightenment values of egalitarianism and globalism launched the world into revolt against the world of tradition and into the modern era of capitalism, dominated by the middle class and their materialistic obsession.

The materialistic values of the burgeous has pulled the world out of abject poverty into the greatest level of material wealth the world has ever seen. Modern technology has provided us with a life of abundant cheap food, luxurious household appliances, indoor plumbing, and electric lighting. But are we happy? No; suicide rates and antidepressant use are skyrocketing. The west is in an existential crisis. In a world where God is dead, we are all nihilists. In the pursuit of profit, corporations have destroyed nature, imported a horde of migrants, and preached egalitarianism so that we all may consume equally.

Fascism offers the west a return to a life that has meaning. Its highest virtue is beauty and the transcendence of what it means to be man through heroic action. Natsoc, specifically, focuses on the family and community, on veneration your ancestors and loving your own race and culture. The right offers a bastion against nihilism and self-hatred that have destroyed everything good in human existence.

Back to Venezuela, Berniefags

GTFO lolberturdian

Capitalism guided by a system of morals that recognize the true nature of man can be successful, but it requires an enlightened government/populace.

Increasing free will is positive, decreasing it is negative, so capitalism is morally superior to communism, is it not?

Prussian socialism and democratic socialism are exceedingly similar (correct me if I'm wrong), the difference seems to be the scope of who constitutes a nation. This is why people talk of homogeneous societies being more successful, more trust, and so on.

Saved

And communism does the same thing, how are these problems of communism and not problems of materialism?

Good post, mate, good post. Though I think it prudent to mention that while capitalism has done much for the advancement of society and technology and what have you, other economic models could very much do the same. Nazi Germany didn't use capitalism, and yet it became an economic powerhouse *while* still having former problems latching on. If we could form a society without having the problems of the past affecting things the way Nazi Germany did, there's no doubt in my mind that the greatest, most productive society in the world could be created.

Mind you, I don't think what I've said is even disagreeing with you, just kind of complementing what you've said.

how are these problems of capitalism, I meant

Me neither, that's why leftypol oves it.
They think that putting "german" in front of socialism makes it more palatable around here. It doesn't. Socialism always fails.

youtube.com/watch?v=3NqG2lAojNQ

People need to read more Hitler. Like wtf are you even talking about.

I am not a libertarian, but at least they are right when it comes to free enterprise enterprise and capitalistm in the american tradition. You on the other hand are a larping crypto-commie who has never been right about anything. Go back to leftypol where you belong.

Yeah, I guess I only saw the materialist/nonmaterialist and nationalist/globalist differences as the two defining differences, so yeah they're really different, but it's only two worldview changes, which is why I said they were similar.

...

Austrian economics isn't a unified school and austrian economic thought runs the spectrum from extremely protectionist to libertaran paradise.

Saved.

Back to the oven, kike

fuck off you socialist

Austrian economics is the economic system of the Holy roman empire & Austro-hungarian empire.
The Habsburgs were generally in favor of laissez-faire capitalism, as a matter of economic policy, as long as it did not interfere with what they perceived as "good governance". The founding fathers of austrian economics were austrians who worked as economists for the Habsburgs in Vienna, hence austrian economics.

...

Oh, that's what you meant, I was thinking in terms of Mises and Hayek and other 20th century developments.

While I do not directly deny this, I do believe I am living better off now, then had I been alive during most other times in history. I have the ability to get up off my ass and into the woods and establish a settlement of my own, isolated from everything if I choose, for as little as $10K.

Heck, with a little persuasion, I could probably score a hot wife and bring her out there with me under the right circumstances. In fact, there are people doing this, they just don't post here.

If you are willing to sacrifice it, you can even have some modern comforts in your isolated wooden abode, wherever that may be, and for the most part, you will not be bothered. Certainty not bothered to the extent you would have been at other times in history.

Lastly, if you didn't already grasp most of history, this is clearly the generation of over-comforted cry babies. Defeatists at the core, some gravitate towards cuckdom, in whatever form it takes, albeit the SJW or christ variety or (((Refugee))). Most men in America, if they choose to, can tap in to their will power and do something off the grid.

By no means is it easy, however it is absolutely possible. All you have to do is start by getting up off your ass.

There are none, besides Jews of course, which has got nothing to do with capitalism

go back to leftypol

Those glaring typos are killing me

A post celebrating fascism being associated with a picture of Evola is what's killing me. Evola wrote a small book criticizing Fascism for failing to grasp the true meaning and spirit of a return to traditional values and beliefs.

Evola praised it for being a well intentioned step in the right direction.

He thought that natsoc was a lost cause becuase it's very roots were populist and it was obsessed with industry and mechanization.

However, he believed that if Italy had remained neutral that he could have helped guide Mussolini down the correct path towards traditionalism.

wat

Evola didn't know his shit as much as some people imagine.

pdfarchive.info/pdf/S/Se/Serrano_Miguel_-_Miguel_Serrano_on_Integral_Radical_Traditionalists_and_Julius_Evola.pdf

Re-write it in a way that calms your autism and share with us user

Ofcourse, I do the same, Fascism is preferable to liberal democracy in almost every way. The fact the Mussolini didn't have Evola executed is testament to the amicable and respectful relationship the two had.

And as you say he was not a fan at all of the Nazi's.

Which is why I still take exception to attaching an image of Evola to a post that offers Fascism and National Socialism as the alternative to modern western liberalism is I think inappropriate as Evola had his alternative separate from 20th century nationalism.

I'm not saying this as an Evola fanboy either, I just think it's an inaccuracy, rhetoric without truth is just empty noise.

bump

where is the communist you are arguing against?

It was fucktard. NatSoc =! NRx. NatSoc is not right-wing. it is not about hierarchy, elitism, etc (or at least wasn't originally). NatSoc is about Blood, Soil and Struggle.

I hope that pic is satire.

illuminate yourself bruh

Open your mind

yea because those sound like real populist ideas in 1920-30 germany

This is 100% true.

But Capitalism by nature increases the ignorance of materialism.

not an argument

Please rephrase. What you just said doesn't make sense. Keep in mind that Robert Michels left Germany and ended up a fascist because he thought it was "more democratic" than the relevant alternatives (liberalism, SocDem, USSR)

I'm not as up on post war history as I should be but I understood Germany for Germans and bullets for the degenerates and kikes were very popular positions after the chaos of Weimar.

woah this is some blatant jewing
>>>/oven/

...

I'd support private banking as in "everyone may open up a bank"
That way every town can have at least one bank that stays in touch with the people.
That's how banks used to work. Someone from the community started a bank, the townfolk deposited money,
which was then used to make loans to businesses whose enterprise in return paid for the bank and the interest payments of the depositors. A win-win situation.

It's a bad kind of feel

the reference was on purpose, and half ironic. At the same time, please explain

Literally nothing wrong with NRx

except that mencius moldbug is a pretentious verbose kike, and everything else about it is pure LARPing faggotry.

LARPing is too kind, it's ERP

Jeez, I wonder who that someone could be….
Banking is not a noble trade, it's essentially nothing more than simple usury.

Traditionalism, and almost everything Evola wrote is good, and undeniably right, but NRx is incurably infected with post-ancap pussies and assorted shitbirds who refuse to acknowledge the situation as it is today. Most of them barely read traditionalist material, let alone comprehend the soul of the ideas they supposedly base themselves on.

Free trade as a concept or idea, is fine. It's just no State will actually participate in free trade because of competition between themselves.

checked

Anyone who comes to the Right or comes to be a Reactionary via lolbergtardianism should not be trusted.

I wouldn't say that, but if you're just replacing economy with society, and free markets with monarchism (or some other gay shit), you're mentally unlikely to produce anything of value.

Pic related is a man who is living proof you can have national interests before economics. But you still can have a fully functional capitalist free market system.

Lolburtardians need to study pinochet. He is the embodiment of fascism and libertarianism coming towards a working relationsship that not only works but leftists still are superbutthurt over.

forgot picture

are you fucking retarded?

so they are just as wrong as the commies but because of the intentions and feelings it will somehow work out?

It's easy, really. Capitalism puts profit before anything else. That's wrong. Transcendent goes first, then its institutions - king and aristocracy, Church, local community. After all of that profit may be looked at.

To stop profit from being the end all and to keep local harmony, protectionism needs to be reinstated, global economy heavily penalized and reduced and local economy refocused on what's needed not what can be sold.

What should be discussed is how do we get there. A long term solution would certainly be reinstatement of social class generally dictated by blood, since it puts a ceiling on power the money can buy.

Pretty much. I put lolburtardians who want open borders in the communist camp. If we ever got a pinochet, I would argue that they also need to get free rides in my helicopter.

To trade and help brother nations in the white part of the world is just good. So trade can be good if it's done in a smart way and not in the lolburtardian or conservacuck american way.

If it's impossible to produce at home, it should be traded. Otherwise, not really and in small quantities privately.

yes! poes law did it. so liberal and capitalist fucks cant decide whether they want a state/goverment/dictatorship-free society or do they need a big daddy to keep the capitalist bullies away

so which is it? you want a state-regulated capitalism with

or do you want a capitalist society with no restrictions by a goverment apparatus?
we all know where that leads to