Third way

I hope you are joking.

>>>Holla Forums
Shit fucking memes, shit fucking logic, no fucking hope for you.

If you want to understand economics which stupid faggots like you never actually do Then read work by Gottfried Feder.

...

No, I'm not.

...

This smells like newfaggotry or time wasting. Even if not, you don't seem to be making sense to me. You seem to be talking about Marxism as though it's a racial or ethnic ethos, so I'm not sure you even understand the concepts you're espousing here. Marxism is belief in classlessness economically. So, an anti-Marxist socialist economy would be socialism based on socio-economic classes??? These things are mutually exclusive. I assume you're trying to say 'cultural Marxism', which is more of a colloquialism than anything Marx ever tried to foment. All socialism prior to 'cultural Marxism' was this, so you aren't suggesting something new.

Socialism as an economic system is and always will be a complete and unmitigated failure. I don't feel the need to explain why, it should be obvious and others have done it ad infinitum. You talking about coupling it with nationalism (of any type, civic or ethnic or whatever) as a 'third option' is a non-sequitur. The first experiments in socialism in the New World occurred among a relatively small group of all-white, all-English settlers and it still failed. Nationalism can only barely motivate people better than the realization that 'someone's got to do it, and if I don't, everyone will starve'. Profit motive is the only viable individual motivator for anyone who isn't a nationalist zealot. Period. That's why Millenials aren't particularly motivated by wage — higher or lower wages within the range of what's obtainable do not result in drastically better or worse outcomes. That's why they we? more highly value leisure and overall seek to do less work. This is the inevitable result of normalizing outcomes between rich and poor.

...

I don't propose something new, but am trying to find social-nationalist. Non-Marxist socialism would be socialism that does not promote communalization. Communalization being communities which have no rich or poor and industries are all organizrd through worker's self management.
Non-Marxist socialism would be socialism without the end goal of communalization.

I just want to find out the ideas of social nationalist, as it makes no sense to me.

This is were I (OP) stands politically.

Lurk moar, and read about it before you start creating threads about it.

Its National Socialist. Go read about it and fascism.

Marxism is actually an ethnic ideology - every single time it has been put into practice you end up with a two-tier society where the jews at the top sit like effendi and eat while the goyim beneath them toil in hardship and deprivation.

On the other hand, you always need a bit of socialism. There are legitimate roles and purposes for the state, and almost every single white person will say that there's nothing wrong with giving wounded or disabled combat veterans benefits to make sure they don't end up dying on the street.

I have no clue what you are trying to say, but it has no relevance to the ideas of National Socialism. 'Non-Marxist socialism would be socialism without the end goal of communalization', what the hell are you talking about? You're basically asking to be spoonfed here. Go to /pdfs/, there's plenty of original period books there to educate yourself with. Particularly look for the Nazi party platform, it's on there somewhere.

...

Have a batter version.

This test is probably the worst one on the whole internet. I don't know why it gets so much use.

...

No, jews and Holla Forums will hang dotr

If you're not within the rectangle (with the exception of God Emperor) then you should fuck off back to 4chan.

>>>/pdfs/109
>>>/pdfs/96
>>>/pdfs/410
>>>/pdfs/567
>>>/pdfs/799

This shit should be unforgivable on fullchan, especially on a NatSoc thread.

A real treasure trove.

Added to bookmarks

laraj.ca/AGwiki/index.php

national socialism wasnt socialism as in subsidization like it is in america. it was mostly free market and advocated for the protection of private property. the state simply intervened for the good of the people in certain circumstances. unlike muh liberty 1776 capitalism where kikes gained control.

The most compatible leftist economic ideology with nationalism is mutualism, I believe. There is also national syndicalism, which fascism loosely takes from.

Best Post in thread.

Socialism is the act of socializing (that is, spreading the cost of across everyone) something. Doesn't matter what it is. Whatever you socialize will immediately begin rotting as soon as the people who created it are done with it. It's employing the gift economic model until the gifting ends, and then it's down the shitter, that's why historically civil servants are just the dead-last bottom rung of society.

Yes, that does include roads and infrastructure and shit, but don't confuse me with an ancap. It simply is the case, and has to be strategized around. I get that you're like, 13, and you don't understand what socialism is as a concept, but that's what it is. It has the "benefit" of destratifying (communalizing, as you put it) society because outcomes are normalized. Without this feature, you do not have socialism. These things happen simultaneously, always, period, anything else is magical thinking.

I get what you're saying, but I'm obviously not about to defend the proposed design of socialism, especially when only morons buy into it. Yes, the outcome is always jews at the top, that's why they always promote it.

Pick one, Schlomo.

the board name is >>>/thirdposition/ you fucking newfaggots

"Third Way" is what the labour parties did in the 90's

fuck off niggercholowopkikeredskinmickeyeskimocheeseheadseppo scum

National socialism?

didn't even read all the way.
I'm ashamed tbh

I don't know where else to ask this, so I'll ask it here. If there's any other thread where this is more appropriate, please redirect me to it.

Now the question.

In which order should I read the National Socialist books?

hahaha…. NO. The third way was Germans and the like teaming up with mudslimes to genocide the kikes. But you know, whatever pseudo intellectual bullshit you want to play at like you have Civilization or other type of videogame is fine. You'll never do anything.

All; Hey guys, lets invent a system combining TWO things we don't understand haha.

No, they called it that way precisely to bury the older meaning. National Socialism is the third way, and was called such by writers and politicians during the 20s and 30s. Mussolini, for example.

No. Neocons are cryptoleftists. AKA Jews. And good goy, of course.

Look at all these fucking hipster faggots from 4chan and their faggot charts

You mean Strasserism? It has some interesting points but is way too autistic about socialism.

en.metapedia.org/wiki/Strasserism
youtu.be/Y0AjHeTyuxg

It's Communism.

Yeah basically.

What’s the difference between a Strasserist and an Communist? Six months.

Fuckers.

Oh, you mean literally National Socialism?

I'm confused because people seem to be saying that national socialism doesn't have socialist economics

It doesn't. OP is a newfag retard who got the third way confused.

see the middle 3 links in:

Wish mods would ban newfags like OP. It's bad enough they're posting at all, but creating threads when they should've been lurking is a sin. Another thread died for this juvenile's spoon feeding.

a military is a social program, public workers for roads and utilities are part of social programs. the socialism you are thinking of is mass redistribution of wealth to subsidize those who feel as though they are being oppressed. national socialism destroys communism because the state exists for the strength of its people, its race. subsidizing everyone who feels oppressed weakens your nation and people and this is why communism always fails. a national socialist government steps in when people are actually being oppressed by an immoral entity. thing is, the state doesnt really need to intervene economically that often when you remove jews and promote the love of your people. national socialism is free market to a reasonable degree, pretty much ensuring ancap memes dont become reality.

Gnadsey Germany was Socialist in the sense that Germans looked after each other, rich and poor all had to help advance the nation. Organisations like Kraft Durch Freude and Hitlerjugend made sure all Germans were treated "equally", i.e no one was left behind so to speak.

There were classes, different jobs payed different salaries, they had a free market with free enterprise, yet they were socialists.

We don't know what the long term effects of National Socialism are because it only lasted 12 years. The USSR lasted 70 years before it collapsed. Maybe there is a chance it would work out but I'm sceptical about it.

NO
Your pyramid scheme collapsed right away, pleb.

Fuck JESUS KIKE AND ALL YOUR JEWISH MAsters INLCUDING PUTIN YOU FUCKING SHILL!!!!!!!!

Welcome to Holla Forums you Holla Forums degenerate.
You had better be white.

National Socialism is very similar to the governing ancient germanic tribes had. There is a reason the event called, "The Night of the Long Knives", has happened many times before, as Britbongs here can tell you. Of course there is racial hierarchy but also there are smaller groups in the tribe who get resources from the leader based upon how well they fight for what they want through the leader with examples of their works.

So there is a struggle for the common good by the elites who rule the commoners but can be toppled by those below if they aren't good enough in their actions. There is no class struggle or internationalism either, there can't be because of racial hierarchy or the rejection of class itself.

Other countries is the Warsaw Pact got no American funds and collapsed after 40 years.

=You mean National Socialization==!!!!1

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Position

lel

bump

no