National Socialist Economy

Gas the kikes who hate people that space their posts properly.

Your post is the ugliest one in this thread.

I thought plebbitors overdosed on spacing. Which is it?

In what way?

But outliers like them are the ones that do it, why the fuck would it trigger them?

Here's this wall of text with a White man's formatting:

See how easy it is to not be a nigger? Paragraphs are a thing that exists, you know.

Exactly. Different subjects require different paragraphs.

Read Richard Overys "The Nazi Economy"

Very detailed book of germany's economy from 1930-1939 filled with evidence to support it, the author isn't a muh 6gorillon nor a naziboo.

Is also a decent start

lrs.ed.uiuc.edu/students/fwalters/para.html
The original spacing error was deliberate, in case you didn't catch it. I would take the gap out between "like the porn industry or subverted journalism. There is a reason…". The rest is fine.

Basically a Reichmark was only paid out for a standardized unit of labour done or a unit of goods produced. A Reichmark would buy a movie ticket, or a pint of beer or an hour of manual labour. Secondly, the planning of mass public works built by mass employment of everyone with a fucking pulse paid in Reichmarks was used to circulate the new currency, and with the abolition of intrest on loans and banning of payday scam loans income taxes were able to be removed entirely on common goods and common luxuries and common foodstuffs.
Basically imagine everything found in a dollar store or supermarket not only made in country, but tax free. Only taxed items are expensive foriegn luxuries Kardashians would buy, as only they can afford them.
This answer your Query?

AFAIK they changed their economic policies a fair bit from what Feder preached.

A word on rationing. It started very early on, long before it was necessary. This was done for propaganda, conditioning and strategical reasons. It made people feel involved in the war effort, accustomed to "privation" (moderation and make-do) and to build up a cache of goods.

Since the rationing was made based on amounts and not quality of the goods, what this meant was that "rich" people could buy higher quality clothing, food and such, but in equivalent amounts. So they could have a bunch of money, but they were not able to buy out poorer people, everyone got their fair share. No sumptuous banquets while other people starved. It also meant a sort-of balanced diet by default (there was still too much starch in the diet).

I found out about this reading "Into The Darkness" by Lothrop Stoddard. Disregard the title. It's a very interesting account by a US [evil white racist] journalist before that country entered the war.

http:// www.resist.com/LothropStoddard/Stoddard-IntoTheDarkness-GermanyToday.pdf

http:// gutenberg.net.au/ebooks03/0300731.txt
http:// gutenberg.net.au/ebooks03/0300731.zip (zipped .txt)

https:// theendofzion.com/2015/03/21/into-the-darkness-nazi-germany-today-by-lothrop-stoddard-book-and-audiobook/ (TTS audiobook)

There is also this book, "Blood and Soil: Richard Walter Darre and Hitler’s Green Party", by Anna Bramwell

media.8ch.net/file_store/efc5f6eb678dba7dc2f26ecebb6d1ba647694edcb1fb4825451966a8f3d29415.pdf/Blood and Soil by Anna Bra….pdf

It's a biography of Richard Walter Darre, the Reichsminister of Food and Agriculture from 1933 to 1942, and one of the leading Nazi "blood and soil" (German: Blut und Boden) ideologists.

The Manifesto for the Abolition of Enslavement to Interest on Money
media.8ch.net/pdfs/src/1421139130259-0.pdf

Gottfried Feder The German State On A National And Socialist Foundation
archive.org/details/GottfriedFederTheGermanStateOnANationalAndSocialistFoundation

The Program Of The NSDAP The National Socialist Workers' Party And Its General Conceptions
archive.org/details/GottfriedFeder_TheProgramOfTheNSDAP

Emergency Economic Program Of the NSDAP
ia800307.us.archive.org/33/items/RodneyMartin-TheEconomicPlanOfTheNsdap/nsdap_1932_economic_program.pdf

1/?

There isn't any National Socialist economics. A National Socialist state in America with a large abundance of natural resources would be economically oriented differently than say Japan with very few natural resources.

Explain.

Random parts from Hitler's table talk

The inflation could have been overcome. The decisive thing was our home war-debt; in other words, the yearly payment of ten thousand millions in interest on a debt of a hundred and sixty-six thousand millions. By way of comparison, I remember that before the war the total cost of imports paid for by the German people was five thousand million. To pay the interest, the people was compelled to walk the plank with paper money—hence the depreciation of the currency. The just thing would have been: firstly, to suspend payment of interest on the debt; secondly, to put a very heavy tax on the scandalous war-profits. I'd have forced the war-profiteers to buy, with good, clinking coin of the realm, various securities which I would have frozen for a period of twenty, thirty or forty years. Weren't their dividends of 200 per cent and 300 per cent the reason why our war-debt had reached such a level? Inflation is not caused by increasing the fiduciary circulation. It begins on the day when the purchaser is obliged to pay, for the same goods, a higher sum than that asked the day before. At that point, one must intervene. Even to Schacht, I had to begin by explaining this elementary truth: that the essential cause of the stability of our currency was to be sought for in our concentration camps. The currency remains stable when the speculators are put under lock and key. I also had to make Schacht understand that excess profits must be removed from economic circulation. I do not entertain the illusion that I can pay for everything out of my available funds. Simply, I've read a lot, and I've known how to profit by the experience of events in the past. Frederick the Great, already, had gradually withdrawn his devaluated thalers from circulation, and had thus re-established the value of his currency. All these things are simple and natural. The only thing is, one mustn't let the Jew stick his nose in. The basis of Jewish commercial policy is to make matters incomprehensible for a normal brain. People go into ecstasies of confidence before the science of the great economists. Anyone who doesn't understand is taxed with ignorance! At bottom, the only object of all these notions is to throw everything into confusion. The very simple ideas that happen to be mine have nowadays penetrated into the flesh and blood of millions. Only the professors don't understand that the value of money depends on the goods behind that money. One day I received some workers in the great hall at Obersalzberg, to give them an informal lecture on money. The good chaps understood me very well, and rewarded me with a storm of applause. To give people money is solely a problem of making paper. The whole question is to know whether the workers are producing goods to match the paper that's made. If work does not increase, so that production remains at the same level, the extra money they get won't enable them to buy more things than they bought before with less money. bviously, that theory couldn't have provided the material for a learned dissertation. For a distinguished economist, the thing is, no matter what you're talking about, to pour out ideas in complicated meanderings and to use terms of Sibylline incomprehensibility.

2/?

The business world is made up everywhere of the same rogues. Cold-hearted money-grubbers. The business world gets idealistic only when the workers ask for higher wages. I fully realise that with us, too, the possibilities for people of that kind were greater before 1933. But let the business men weep—it's part of their trade. I've never met an industrialist without observing how he puts on a careworn expression. Yet it's not difficult to convince each one of them that he has regularly improved his position. One always sees them panting as if they were on the point of giving up their last gasp ! Despite all the taxes, there's a lot of money left. Even the average man doesn't succeed in spending what he earns. He spends more money on cinemas, theatres and concerts than he used to, and he saves money into the bargain. One can't deprive people of distractions ; they need them, and that's why I cannot reduce the activity of the theatres and studios. The best relaxation is that
provided by the theatre and the cinema. We have working days that far exceed eight hours, and we shan't be able to change that immediately after the war. A fault we must never again commit is to forget, once the war is over, the advantages of the autarkic economy. We practised it during the first World War, but with insufficient means, for lack of human potential. The working-capacity lost in the manufacture of unproductive goods must be made good. Instead of thinking of the home market, we hurled ourselves into the foreign markets : before the first World War, out of greed for profits, and, after it, to pay our debts. The fact that we were granted loans, to encourage us along the same path, only plunged us deeper in the mire. We'd already succeeded in the manufacture of synthetic rubber: as soon as the war was over, we went back to natural rubber. We imported petrol; yet the Bergius process had already proved itself! That's our most urgent task for the post-war period : to build up the autarkic economy. I shall retain rationing of meat and fats as long as I'm not certain that people's needs are largely covered. One realises that this stage has been reached when the rationing coupons are not all used. What the English were most afraid of, with the Four Year Plan, was an autarkic Germany that they could no longer have at their mercy. Such a policy on our part necessarily entailed for them a great reduction in the profits' of their colonies. Coffee and tea are all we shall have to import. Tobacco we shall get in Europe. It will also be necessary to produce the soya bean: that will provide oil and fodder for Denmark and Holland. Everybody will be able to participate, under one form or another, in this European economy. If it were only a question of conquering a colony, I'd not continue the war a day longer. For a colonial policy to have any sense, one must first dominate Europe. In any case, the only colony I'd like to have back would be our Cameroons—nothing else.
3/?

Best post ITT. I will only add The "Nazi-Sozi" Questions and Answers for National Socialists by Joseph Goebbels >>>/pdfs/567

If ww2 hadn't happened NatSoc economics would have fallen through its own ass around 1953 but the NatSoc larpers would have you believe that an infinite deficit spending economy would work forever. The best possible system for a scarcity society is ethnic nationalist minarchism.

That means no jews and no shitskins. Hell this could even work for shitskins if they could get their monkey brains to stop trying crony capitalism and banana republic corruption. Thats why brutal meritocratic dictatorships have always been the most successful societies of shitskin.

We committed the capital fault, immediately after the last war, of re-entering the orbit of world economy, instead of sticking to autarky. If at that time we had used within the framework of autarky the sixteen million men in Germany who were devoted to an unproductive activity, we'd not have had any unemployment. The success of my Four Year Plan is explained precisely by the fact that I set everybody to work, in an economy within a closed circle. It wasn't by means of rearmament that I solved the problem of unemployment, for I did practically nothing in that field during the first years. Vogler submitted to me right away a project for the production of synthejtic petrol, but it was impossible to get the project accepted by the Ministry of Economics. It was objected that, since the foreign market was offering petrol at nine pfennige, it was ridiculous to produce it at home for double that price. It was no use my replying that our unemployed were costing us thousands of millions, and that we would save on these thousands of millions by setting these unemployed to work; I was met with faulty arguments. It was discovered, or so I was told, that the processes of manufacture had not been worked out. As if our industrialists, with their well-known caution, would have rashly undertaken a method of manufacture without knowing its secrets! Later on, I could have kicked myself for not having thrown all that crew overboard. I broke with Feder, by the way, because he wasn't keen on this project. Then came Keppler's turn. He was duped by the charlatan of Düsseldorf. In this way we wasted nine months. All the scientists had asserted that something would come of it. This was the period when every charlatan had some project to put before me. I told the alchemists that I had no interest in gold— either natural or synthetic. At last, we began to build factories. How glad I'd have been in 1933 to find the possibility, in one way or another, of giving the workers jobs! Night and day I racked my brains to know how to set about it in order to bring the ponderous machine of the Economy back into motion. Whoever opened a new firm, I freed him from taxes. When business is going well, the money flows back into the State's coffers ! Our opponents have not yet understood our system. We can be easy in our minds on that subject; they'll have terrible crises once the war is over. During that time, we'll be building a solid State, proof against crises, and without an ounce of gold behind it. Anyone who sells above the set prices, let him be marched off into a concentration camp ! That's the bastion of money. There's no other way. The egoist doesn't care about the public interest. He fills his pockets, and sneaks off abroad with his foreign currency. One cannot establish a money's solidity on the good sense of the citizens. The Dutch live on their colonies. The Swiss have no other resources than their fraudulent manipulations. They're completely mad to transfer all their money to America. They won't see it again !
4/?

The only thing that could be economically universal among National Socialist states is identification key industries that are in national interests and taking measures to protect those industries.

For example no National Socialist state would outsource their military. That may sound like a given but the degeneration of most European countries have those countries relying on American military support.

I absolutely insist on protecting private property. It is natural and salutary that the individual should be inspired by the wish to devote a part of the income from his work to building up and expanding a family estate. Suppose the estate consists of a factory. I regard it as axiomatic, in the ordinary way, that this factory will be better run by one of the members of the family than it would be by a State functionaryproviding, of course, that the family remains healthy. In this sense, we must encourage private initiative. On the other hand, I'm distinctly opposed to property in the
form of anonymous participation in societies of shareholders. This sort of shareholder produces no other effort but that of investing his money, and thus he becomes the chief beneficiary of other people's effort : the workers' zest for their job, the ideas of an engineer of genius, the skill of an experienced administrator. It's enough for this capitalist to entrust his money to a few well-run firms, and he's betting on a certainty. The dividends he draws are so high that they can compensate for any loss that one of these firms might perhaps cause him. I have therefore always been opposed to incomes that are purely speculative and entail no effort on the part of those who live on them. Such gains belong by right to the nation, which alone can draw a legitimate profit from them. In this way, at least, those who create these profits—the engineers and workers—are entitled to be the beneficiaries. In my view, joint-stock companies should pass in their entirety under the control of the State. There's nothing to prevent the latter from replacing these shares that bring in a variable interest by debentures which it guarantees and which produce a fixed interest, in a manner useful to private people who wish to invest their savings. I see no better method of suppressing the immoral form of income, based only on speculation, of which England to-day provides the most perfect example. This attitude towards stocks and shares entails, by way of compensation on our part, the obligation to maintain the value of money, no matter what happens, and to prevent any boom in products of prime necessity. A man who, within the framework of such an organisation, consented to pay a thousand marks for a Persian rug that's worth only eight hundred, would prove that he's an imbecile, but there's no way of stopping him. In the same way, one can't stop a gambler from losing his money at gambling, or from taking his own life when he has lost his money. One might relevantly wonder whether the State, which is the main beneficiary of gambling, should not make itself responsible for the cost of the suicide's funeral ! We should bear in mind, in fact, that more than half of the profits of gambling—whether lotteries or games of chance played in the casinos—goes into the coffers of the State. In addition to the material profit the State derives from them, I think I can say that, from a purely philosophic point of view, lotteries have their good side. Tangible realities are not enough to ensure men's happiness. It's not a bad idea to keep alive in them the taste for illusions, and most of them live on hopes which to a great extent cannot become reality. It seems to me, therefore, that the best part of a lottery is not the list immediately proclaiming the winners. On the contrary, the results should be dragged out, for a year if possible—a year in which the gambler has leisure to nourish his illusions and forge his dreams of happiness. The Austrian State knew about this, and used the system very intelligently. This explains why, even in the most difficult times, there were always so many happy people in that country. The origin of the lottery goes back doubtless to the beginning of the eighteenth century, when an astute minister wondered why the profits of gambling should not go into the State's coffers instead of going to swell private purses. When the State uses the money it wins thus for some good purpose—to build hospitals, for example—the affair takes on a colouring of idealism. Gambling first of all sustains the gambler's hopes. When chance has given its verdict, and if the gambler is thereafter comparable to a man who has made an unlucky bet, he still has a consolation, that of having contributed to a good work. I studied the question of gambling, as regards Wiesbaden, with Gauleiter Wagner.

cont.
What gives the lottery its pleasant character is not to be found, unfortunately, in roulette and other games of chance played in the casinos. But if we'd withdrawn the authorisation for gambling at Wiesbaden, that would have done a considerable wrong to that thermal resort without any profit to the inveterate gamblers, whom this measure would obviously not have amended. They'd simply have gone and gambled somewhere else, on the other side of the frontier—to the profit, that's to say, of the French. Speaking of that, I enquired how much foreign currency the gambling at Wiesbaden might bring us in, and I told myself that even a hundred thousand marks in foreign money (it's not much, when one has it) is quite a sum when one is poor. I drew the conclusion from all this that gamblers can be useful to the State, by losing their money—and especially foreign gamblers, when they lose in their own currency. Experience proved that, in retaining gambling in a few casinos, we made a sound calculation. In addition to the foreign currencies we thus collected, it enabled us to retain resorts like Wiesbaden for the German community. It goes without saying that the institution of gambling, which produces great profits simply because it's a monopoly and because it entails no payment of labour in exchange, must go to enrich the State and not private people. ''Bormann commented that this principle should be equally true as
regards industrial power production. Hitler went on:'' It's obvious that the power monopoly must be vested in the State. That does not exclude the participation of private capital. The State would offer its securities for investment by the public, which would thus be interested in the exploitation of the monopoly, or, rather, in the favourable progress of State business. The fact is that, when State affairs are not prospering, the holders of certificates can put a cross through their unearned incomes—for the various affairs in which the State is interested cannot be dissociated. The advantage of our formula would be to enable everyone to feel closely linked with State affairs. To-day, unfortunately, most people are not clearsighted enough to realise the closeness of this link. What is true of the power industry is equally true of all the essential primary materials—that is to say, it applies also to petroleum, coal, steel and water-power. Capitalist interests will have to be excluded from this sort of business. We do not, of course, contemplate preventing a private person from using the energy of the tiny stream that powers his small works. Here's a typical fact, and one that proves the dishonesty of the commercial procedures to which the joint-stock companies resort. It's the case of the former Bavarian Minister Schweyer, who owed his Ministerial appointment only to his remarkable imbecility—and on that everyone was unanimous ! He received from Bavaria Electricity, of which he was chairman, a yearly pension of thirty-eight thousand marks. Despite all the legal obstacles, I managed to have this pension suppressed, since this man had not supplied any services to an equivalent value—far from it ! The present law allows the Chancellor of the Reich a pension of thirty-four thousand marks, and this comparison enables one to realise the scandalous enormity of privileges like Schweyer's.

cont.
The problem of monopolies handed over to capitalist interests interested me even in my boyhood. I'd been struck by the example of the Danube Shipping Company, which received an annual subsidy of four millions, a quarter of which was at once shared out amongst its twelve directors. Each of the big parties was represented in this august college by at least two of its members, each of them pocketing about eighty million kronen yearly! One may feel sure that these mandarins saw to it that the comrades voted punctually for the renewal of the subsidy! But the Socialists were acquiring more and more importance, and it happened that none of their lot was on the board. That's why the scandal broke. The Company was attacked in the Parliament and in the press. Threatened with being deprived of the subsidy, it replied by abolishing the passenger-service. And since the politicians on the board had already taken care that no railway should be built along the Danube, the riverside populations were the chief victims of these arbitrary measures. A solution of the conflict was found quite rapidly—and you can imagine which! Quite simply, the number of members of the board was increased to fourteen, and the two new seats were offered to two well-known Socialists—who hastened to accept them. What makes England so fragile is that her whole economic system is founded on similar practices. From the moment of our seizure of power, having my own set ideas on the subject, I took the precaution of forbidding every director of a company to be a member of the Reichstag. Since men who have interests in a private company cannot be objective on a great number of questions, I likewise forbade office-holders in the Party to take part in business of a capitalist complexion. The same prohibition applies, by the way, to all servants of the State. I therefore cannot allow an official, whether he belongs to the Army or to the civil administration, to invest his savings in industry, except in companies controlled by the State.

I guess i'll stop there. I think I got the point across.

I didnt even read the whole mein kampf but I went trough most of it and a few other texts written by a few other people about this, and basically Hitler and Himler said that his Germans were the chosen ones (tm), "children of the creator" and they possessed "the spirit" and the whole point of the state was to save the people, whole point of economy to be useful to the people. I didnt know what to think about the whole spiritualism thing, Nazi occult was a real.. I dont know, still dont know what to think of it. This is why Hitler, an artist, funded military technology so hard, it provided the greatest utility to the people, and so Germans finally did have missile weapons and jet engines altho for a very short time..

tl;dr
Competition is good and strength is a value as long as it doesnt harm the state. So basically all Germans should have small farms and small businesses. That's it. Small farms and small businesses.
Commie socialism is disgusting because it does not reward hard work, hard work is wasted, taken away from you, and capitalism is disgusting because hyper giant farms and hyper giant businesses, monopolies everywhere, has nothing to do with skill or merit or value, the banks (especially Jewish ones) will keep all of industry and economy enslaved and you will not compete but be a slave.

That's a myth, German military was practically non-existent when NSDAP took power. They did rebuild it, but it was never their intention to focus on it. In 1939, Polish military was actually better equipped than the German one, especially the SS started off with pretty shitty equipment.
Only after the WW2 had started they built up their military industry, which is completely normal, US for example, had a much bigger one. Only a fool would believe that NSDAP managed to pull Germany out of ruins and make it into a superpower in a few years by making a war machine.

lurk moar

this

thanks for the suggestion user I'll pick that up myself
OP, read more. And most importantly think things through rather than accepting anything you're told - be it orally or through text.

Context is critical in interpreting events and motives.

How much do you understand of the debt-based economy that we live in? That's a good place to start your search for info.

You read the (((redacted))) version, goy.
The super-race bullshit was/is a psyop to rally other nations against them.

I can't read this pretentious jumble of words. I made it through what should have been the first paragraph, but I couldn't keep going.

0/10, poorly formatted word salad with arrogant tone and insufferable delivery

opened up this thread to suggest this very book. Hitler's Revolution is a must read to understand the mechanics of national socialism, and its economy.

8/8 post.

I would ask you to keep going, but you have convinced me to read the whole book

YOU DON'T /THREAD YOURSELF NEWFAG

It has some good part and some brilliant part, but some part can be rather boring/irrelevant. But for the most part it's really good.

Tl;dr?

Read the pics in this post >>>>8377055

wtf happen there?

this is the same conclusions i've come to as well. i've always been staunchly conservative/libertarian and opposed to communism, but i slowly learned how both are just two heads of the same jewish beast. the truth is to reject these presented solutions and find a system (National Socialism) that actually works and rejects globalism.

Thank you based user.

...

I could add this also en.metapedia.org/wiki/1939_German_economic_policy

I am still astonished at how inept the average poster is at recognizing irony, even when its laid on so thick.

One topic I would like to discuss is forms of goverment. The obvious choice is (imo) a republic. But the problems are (that i can think of right now)
1. How do we elect the president?
Hitler suggests something like how the choose the pope or how they choose Doge in the republic of venice.
2. How long is the term?
Hitler says that the term should be fairly long but not for life.
3. How is the senate, assembly choosen and how much power does these have?
4. How much power does the president have relative to the senate/assembly and vice versa?
5. How is the legislative body choosen?

All this must lead up to how you make the state "waterproof" for the coming millennium.

Rosenberg wrote about this in his memoir (pic related) but i'm not convinced about his "way".

To quote Hitler
Setting the best man at the head of the State—that's the most difficult problem in the world to solve.

I'll be posting my feelings/thoughts about this subject tomorrow.

That's the thing though. The only people who would even fucking know what the average Reddit post looks like are people who frequent Reddit in the first place.

The autism over word spacing is understandable when anons separate sentences that are all part of the same subject or idea for no reason. This thread for instance, you usually start with a general, summary paragraph, then the next paragraph will be about paper currency or gold or some shit, then the next paragraph will be about taxes or whatever. But I've seen so many threads go to shit over what may or may not be "Reddit Spacing", which I wouldn't know about because I don't go to Reddit.

Seriously, how would anyone even know anything like that unless they've been through enough Reddit posts to just know at a glance what the average Reddit post even looks like?

can someone please explain the stuff in the images in a more simple fashion?

Autarky good
Directed economy good
Class cooperation good
Debt based currency bad

Not caveman level of simplicity. It needs substance.

(checked)
It's the only way to save ourselves at this point.

Just read the images. You'll get a lot more out of it than just reading a summary some user gives you. If you can't read it right now just save the images and read them later.

(Checked)
I've just reached this conclusion user. Every time I think I've hit the bottom of the rabbit hole I find out that it goes even deeper.

I've been trying to explain this to my semi-redpilled friends but now they think I'm crazy for thinking capitalism is an elaborate jewish pyramid scheme.

...

Hitler's Revolution by Richard Tedor is a must read

thanks, this is what I was looking for

It seems that I can't process information anymore if it doesn't come as a screencap

Hey thanks for the thread - and everyone talking about it here. I was looking for this research myself, and just had a great conversation about the labor treasury bond economic concept today. How fortuitous.

>defending >reddit spacing

READ A BOOK, NIGGER.

One of the most plagued questions we get when talking about Fascism is economics, normally brought up by people still stuck in a liberal mentality and limited scope of perception, where everything is defined in term of social and economic policies, rather than principles derived from the notion of a singular Truth and Order that dominates the world. The variety of historic economic plans and practices maintained by various champions of our Struggle likewise distorts any comprehensive answer to the question. All in all we've simply answered people that economics are secondary, they don't matter in such a way as to be a fundamental and defining element of Fascism. The answer didn't change, however there is now a way in which we can describe this attitude to economics, and it's actually a word we've used repeatedly in reference to Fascism anyway: Socialism.

Our Socialism, however, is not in of itself an economic system, it is not the Socialism of (((Marx))) and co and stands in direct opposition to both Communism and Capitalism. It would be more accurate to say that to Fascism, Socialism is the definitive social structure which is more comparable to the structures of Individualism and Collectivism, yet it stands in opposition to those two structures as well.

pastebin.com/PPsmxdiK

We are talking about NatSoc economics not fascist economics.

Labor Treasury Certificates is a hoax. Billions were supposedly printed, but try to find evidence; you won't… How did they even look like?

Germany was on a Silver Standard right up until the war. Then it was used for war production; silver is a valuable good.

Hitler even raised the purity of some coins. For evidence you can find thousands of Nazi-minted coins even today.

Setting the best man at the head of the State—that's the most difficult problem in the world to solve.
In a republic in which the whole people is called upon to elect the chief of the State, it's possible, with money and publicity, to bring the meagrest of puppets to power.
In a republic in which the reins of power are in the hands of a clique made up of a few families, the State takes on the aspect of a trust, in which the shareholders have an interest in electing a weakling as President, so that they may play an important part themselves.
A hereditary monarchy is a biological blunder, for a man of action regularly chooses a wife with essentially feminine qualities, and the son inherits his mother's mildness and passive disposition.
In a republic that sets at its head a chief elected for life, there's the risk that he will pursue a policy of personal selfinterest.
In a republic where the Chief of State changes every five or ten years, the stability of the government is never assured, and the execution of long-term plans, exceeding the duration of a lifetime, is thereby compromised.
If one sets at the head of the State an old man who has withdrawn from all worldly considerations, he is only a puppet, and inevitably it's other men who rule in his name.

Setting the best man at the head of the State—that's the most difficult problem in the world to solve.
In a republic in which the whole people is called upon to elect the chief of the State, it's possible, with money and publicity, to bring the meagrest of puppets to power.
In a republic in which the reins of power are in the hands of a clique made up of a few families, the State takes on the aspect of a trust, in which the shareholders have an interest in electing a weakling as President, so that they may play an important part themselves.
A hereditary monarchy is a biological blunder, for a man of action regularly chooses a wife with essentially feminine qualities, and the son inherits his mother's mildness and passive disposition.
In a republic that sets at its head a chief elected for life, there's the risk that he will pursue a policy of personal selfinterest.
In a republic where the Chief of State changes every five or ten years, the stability of the government is never assured, and the execution of long-term plans, exceeding the duration of a lifetime, is thereby compromised.
If one sets at the head of the State an old man who has withdrawn from all worldly considerations, he is only a puppet, and inevitably it's other men who rule in his name.

Jewish mod is bumplocking/deleting any threads that are not pro-trump!!
example

LOCKED THREAD ABOUT WHAT IS HAPPENING..

Board logs can be found here
8ch.net/log.php?page=1&board=pol

See related for full understanding

8ch. pl/pol/res/25508.htm

I WILL GET BANNED FOR SAYING THIS!!!!!!!!

Read The vampire economy by Günter Reimann
You will learn to understand why the Nazi economy would inevitably collapse, if ww2 never happened. That racial aspect of natsoc is pretty good. The economic aspect… not so much. Its called national SOCIALISM for a reason.

A Shekel for good goy

Have you ever considered the possibility that when you provide full power to an individual, that the same power might fall in the hands of someone you dont like?

Honestly though that pretty much sums up every democratic election I've ever witnessed, so I'll take my chances thanks.

Seeing how almost everyone here believes in national socialism, i dont think it was too far fetched that you would prefer a dictatorship. Especially since you will need more government power to go against a free market.

Seriously, are you guys just grammar Nazis who want to pretend that you're real Nazis or something?

No-one does, because it doesn't make any sense. Labor isn't fungible, and it is consumed. Unless there is a bank window where you can go and trade this currency for a certain amount of labor (does the government keep slaves for this purpose?) it is completely unworkable. It was just scrip. The people accepted it, and the government printed it to fund domestic operations. They settled international trade with gold like everyone else. When they ran out of gold, they turned the kikes into concentrated orange jews and took their gold, then started invading other countries to take their central bank gold. When they ran out of neighbors to steal from, they collapsed. Basically they did what the Roman Empire did, but at 100x the speed.

They still would have collapsed if there had been no war, and in about the same timeframe. They defeated themselves with their "third way" that was really just socialism.

It's sad that there was no other way it could have played out. Even if they had adopted pure capitalism, their industrial base was so wrecked from WWI and Weimar that they couldn't have rebuilt enough to defeat the Allies, who cried out for the bloody extermination of the German people like a bunch of fucking kikes.

This user gets it

Why should we read The Vampire Economy by Günter Reimann, born (((Steinicke)))???

Everybody who talks about this labour-backed receipt nonsense is a shill, especially the Web of Debt faction.

Find me some evidence, e.g. a picture of your "receipts" that were in circulation before the war broke out. Try it. Do some research for yourself. Don't simply read all the time.

Then, after you've given up as I'm expecting, you can check out this site:
nazicoins. net

Quote:
"With the resolution of the Enabling Act in 1933, Adolf Hitler became Chancellor of Germany. Starting in 1933, the country of Germany became known as the Third Reich, or Nazi Germany, and this totalitarian state began minting Nazi Coins. The Third Reich would exist from 1933 to 1945. In that 12 year period, Nazi Germany coins would be struck at seven various Mint facilities in Berlin, Wien (Vienna), München (Munich), Muldenhutten (near Dresden), Stuttgart, Karlsruhe, and Hamburg."

TL;DL: Silver.

I really don't see what you are talking about.

The material of your money has nothing to do with how you issue the money.

no we're >reddit spacing

The good old Adam Tooze meme.

How about one old man who has had the world and tires of it, and better stillspent his early years in secret studying the life and works of Adolf Hitler?

The text on that website is meaningless and most of it is post-war propaganda. The important part is that there is pictorial evidence of the Third Reich currency. Whereas there is no evidence that the so-called Mefo bills, etc. even existed. Paper money has no value except the paper material and ink. The dollar is valuable because the US can bomb every country away that stops using it. That's why Iraq and Libya got destroyed. Look up Islamic Mint.

Gold and silver coins have intrinsic value, you can think about them like energy storage. They store the energy of your work. They will always be valuable because they are rare and more importantly are immensly important in all kinds of high-tech technologies (e.g. warfare). Thus during the war they deviated from their ideal monetary system.

Our enemies control most of the gold on the planet, but they don't control all of the silver. They are rigging the market to make it look like they control it. It's their Achilles' heel. Silver is worth more than gold, because there is less silver on the market than gold. It's used for production.

Why do you think the latin word for Bank (Argentaria) means "silver-mine"?

This whole labour-backed currency nonsense is propagated for people to think that fiat money is okay as long as you operate like "supposedly" Hitler. It's the same problem with Bitcoins, this virtual stuff is useless. Google "silver in technology," it's used in satellites and kills bacteria for fucks sake. Not to mention the nanotechnology field with its future pespectives…

Wtf are you even on about?

Thanks for triggering reddit and derailing a shit thread.

GG.

If there is a question of choosing men to rule us, it must not be forgotten that war is also a manifestation of life, that it is even life's most potent and most characteristic expression. Consequently, I consider that the only men suited to become rulers are those who have valiantly proved themselves in a war. In my eyes, firmness of character is more precious than any other quality. A well-toughened character can be the characteristic of a man who, in other respects, is quite ignorant. In my view, the men who should be set at the head of an army are the toughest, bravest, boldest, and, above all, the most stubborn and hardest to wear down. The same men are also the best chosen for posts at the head of the State— otherwise the pen ends by rotting away what the sword has conquered.

How do you think other countries get their gold you fucking retard? Germany would get it the same way as everyone else. By your logic the USSR should have collapsed entirely during the 60s, all because of this retarded meme you have going on.

So, where does it fall on the market/mixed market/command scale? I've heard people say before it's mixed market where sum spending is incentivized over net spending or some shit to that effect.

In my classes today we had to pick one of three choices to solve an issue. A was clearly a capitalist/market approach, B was socialist, and C was obviously communistic. I couldn't bring myself to any one of them, so I typically picked a combination of A & B. Is that where National Socialism lies? although it may be too linear to graph it.

sorry for scatterbrained post

A National Socialist economy is not centrally planned, but centrally directed. Central planning involves taking demand for granted and then using the state to regulate supply. Central direction involves determining adequate supply and then using the state to limit demand. Hence a National Socialist economy should not be confused with a mixed-market economy, which is a fundamentally capitalist economy with state intervention in subservience to implicitly capitalist values. Hitler himself had no role in micromanaging the economy of National Socialist Germany, but rather was responsible for preventing the economy (and hence those who would seek to manipulate it by investments) from leading astray the state.

en.metapedia.org/wiki/1939_German_economic_policy

Fascinating. Thank you for your posts in this thread, articulate user.

A lot of food for thought here, both in the links and the replies in the thread. Since there's so many anchored shit off-topic threads above this one in the bump order, it seems a shame to let this thread die before them.

...

keyword is indigenous

meaning "native american" redskins

although yes our IQ is brought down quite a bit by niggers, just not all the way to 85 thankfully

ok

Ffs check out some of this "art:"
oaklandghostship.com

...

...

Get the two books (the manifesto has already been mentioned) here libgen.io/search.php?req=Gottfried Feder&column=author

...

I want to lay particular emphasis on one point—namely, that there is nothing more harmful to the organisation of a State than over-centralisation and limitation of local power. […] I can sum up my own views by saying that one should give to local authority the widest possible powers of self-government, but should at the same time ensure strict obedience to orders from above. Wherever superior authority intervenes, its orders must be regarded as final. Side by side with the integrated legislative body must stand the executive, as the firmly established instrument of the national will; and this executive, with the Wehrmacht at its head, then the police, the labour organisation, the youth education, etc., must be in the control of one single man. Together, these two—legislative body and executive form the cement that binds the State into a single corporate entity. The State which succeeds in achieving this has nothing to fear. The greatest danger occurs when the executive possesses at the same time supreme legislative powers—or aspires to them. This leads inevitably to those rivalries between component units of the Wehrmacht, between provinces and so on, which in the past have caused the downfall of a number of most healthy States. As regards the Head of the State, should anything happen to me, it would be as unsound to elect my successor by public vote as it would for, say, the Pope to be elected by suffrage among the faithful, or the Doge of Venice by the vote of the whole population of the city. If the mass of the people were invited to take part in such a vote, the whole thing would degenerate into a propaganda battle, and the propaganda for or against any candidate would tear the people asunder. If the choice is left to a small body a senate, for instance— and marked differences of opinion should arise in it, I don't think it would matter very much, provided that no hint of these differences was allowed to become public. But once the votes have been cast, then he who receives the majority becomes automatically and forthwith the supreme head of the state. If it is further arranged that the oath of allegiance to the new Head can be administered to the Wehrmacht, the Party and all the appropriate officials within three hours of the result of the election, then maintenance of public law and order can be regarded as assured. I have no illusions, however, that an absolutely outstanding personality will always emerge by this method of selection. But it does at least ensure that the man chosen will be one so much above the average that, as long as the machinery of government is in good order, the State will not be endangered in any way.

...

The only way to atone for your offensiveness is to offend us even more.

Then get banned, then change your IP number, then come back within five seconds and keep on offending us.

Only by sinking to our level can you be forgiven.

Corporatism, mah boi.

...

And on anonymous image boards, the authority of the state is embodied by profanity-laced imprecations to lurk moar.

Kek is the cancer killing Holla Forums

so many pleb tier comments ITT

map to buried truths as follows:

1. Find all of Hitler's actual speech transcripts - search for term "gold"

2. Download "Hitlers Table Talk" - search for "gold" "rothschild" "freemason" "Schacht"

3. Search this document - terms: gold, rothschild - archi ve.org/details/EzraPoundSpeaking-RadioSpeechesOfWorldWarIi

Read "Wages of Destruction" and "Vampire Economy"
The national socialist system couldn't have worked without continuous war due to their enormous spending

...

By that logic absolutely everyone would have to be at war all the time due to their own enormous unsustainable spending.

...

You realize that the deficit system is only within the globalized capitalism. They weren't planning on maintaining within the status quo.
Read:

And a system that's meant for continuous peace is any better? Peace leads to stagnation and decadence. War is a necessary teacher to revive us out of our numb state of being.

Holla Forums is dead

then fuck off and never come back

The nation is the organic union of a people to protect its life. To be national is to affirm this union in word and deed. To be national has nothing to do with a form of government or a symbol. It is an affirmation of things, not forms. Forms can change, their content remains. If form and content agree, then the nationalist affirms both. If they conflict, the nationalist fights for the content and against the form. One may not put the symbol above the content. If that happens, the battle is on the wrong field and one’s strength is lost in formalism. The real aim of nationalism, the nation, is lost.
Nationalism is more wide-reaching than internationalism. It sees things as they are. Only he who respects himself can respect others. If as a German nationalist I affirm Germany, how can I hold it against a French nationalist who affirms France? Only when these affirmations conflict in vital ways will there be a power-political struggle. Internationalism cannot undo this reality. Its attempts at proof fail completely. And even when the facts seem to have some validity, nature, blood, the will to life, and the struggle for existence on this hard earth prove the falsity of fine theories.
The sin of patriotism was to confound a certain economic form with the national. It connected two things that are entirely different. Forms of the economy, however firm they may seem, are changeable. The national is eternal. If I mix the eternal and the temporal, the eternal will necessarily collapse when the temporal collapses. This was the real cause for the collapse of liberal society. It was rooted not in the eternal, but in the temporal, and when the temporal declined it took the eternal down with it. Today it is only an excuse for a system that brings growing economic misery.
From this understanding, the young nationalism draws its absolute demand. The faith in the nation is a matter for everyone, never a group, a class or an economic clique. The eternal must be distinguished from the temporal.

Work is not mankind’s curse, but his blessing. A man becomes a man through labor. It elevates him, makes him great and aware, raises him above all other creatures. It is in the deepest sense creative, productive, and culture-producing. Without labor, no food. Without food, no life.
Anyone who creates value is a creator, that is, a worker. We refuse to distinguish kinds of work. Our only standard is whether the work serves the whole, or at least does not harm it, or if it is harmful. Work is service. If it works against the general welfare, then it is treason against the fatherland.
We do not want to make everyone the same. Nor do we want levels in the population, high and low, above and below. The aristocracy of the coming state will be determined not by possessions or money, but only on the quality of one’s accomplishments. One earns merit through service. Men are distinguished by the results of their labor. That is the sure sign of the character and value of a person. The value of labor will be determined by its value to the state, to the whole community. Labor means creating value, not haggling over things. The soldier is a worker when he bears the sword to protect the national economy. The statesman also is a worker when he gives the nation a form and a will that help it to produce what it needs for life and freedom. He who creates value works, and is a worker.

In terms of economy, the only economic problem is with monetization of debt and the irresponsible policy of money creation via banks, rather than direct money issue by the government.

Given that goods and services have to be valued and thus need currency to be moved around. Government's power to inject the needed money into the system is not sufficient if not done via public projects or through large scale government spending however, which is always seen as inefficient or unnecessary, as taxation has to be raised to compensate for the expense, otherwise the inflationary effect can destroy the money being printed and leave you no better off - the ideal is s stable minimal growth that keeps inflation low and thus money supply is maintained in line with the needs of growth.

Now in debt-oriented economies, money is generated without the government through bank operations or through monetization of debt and treasury bonds, but at the same time every dollar created in such a way is a debt to be paid off - the money supply is inherently self-restricted, but because of existence of interest, the money created becomes an effective net drain on the society - coupled with inflationary pressures, debt money creates growth spirals that always end business cycles and destroy wealth created.

Now, those who are in charge of money supply, if they carefully manage their assets, can benefit from collapses, as they end up harvesting the indebted assets and thus accumulate wealth before next cycle.

Money backed by labour is still government fiat, but because it rests on principle of government money and not debt money, it has social and economic value in preserving the growth created and being the conductor of value, as opposed to being an inherent debt obligation.

Yes.

Its the same thing the founding fathers did in the colonies. Each bill made must be produceed for a service. Google colonial scrip for a more American perspective on how this type of economy works

Most of you don't understand what money is. Thus you don't understand the barter system Germany practiced. You need to go back to the basics.

Germany's history is too hard for you to understand because you can't read German. So look at your own history. You need to understand what a DOLLAR is or rather what it was supposed to be, how it was defined.

For this, you need to read the US 1792 Coinage Act, especially Section 9.

After you know this, you need to look for what Schacht did in 1924 and what Hitler did in 1933 in regards to this.

Hint: Money is NOT a medium of exchange.

Money is and should be nothing other than a voucher for completed labor.

You speak of currency.

Moneta - meaning "to mint" - Money IS Metal. Money has an intrinsic value as a measure or weight of Gold, Silver or Copper. When you exchange Real Money for Goods of Equal Value, it is a Barter Exchange; Value for Value.

Some idiots may say "Well, you can't eat metal! See?!?!" This is right, but you can't produce mirrors out of your food, can you?

So, Hitler broke with Feder because Feder was no-exceptions on self-sufficiency and isolationism (from an economics perspective at least) because he wanted nothing to do with the international Jew markets, but Hitler was told (maybe bullshit?) by the capitalists at home that synthetic petrol production wasn't viable, was more expensive than just buying it on the market, etc?

I mean, with a mechanized era of military power, what else could they do if the synthetic petrol process didn't work out?

I'm surprised Feder was so stubborn on this one. It's almost as if he said "don't do business with the rest of the Jew-run internationalist world, even if it means our modern military and vehicle-running little German world will be fucked."

I think you need to re-read the text. I think you you got the complete opposite of what he was saying.

green energy for building jobs for white people and not letting sandniggers earn money from us.

I see now. I read too fast.

Might've been a better idea to take advantage of that cheap oil and stockpile it though, since they were shitting their pants trying to hold Russian oil fields. Hitler always knew war against the Jew's hordes of goy golems was coming.

He had a big focus on the romanian oil field just before the war and during the war. But in peace time you should try to become a self sufficient as possible and that is what he was aiming at. Hitler really took note of Germany's mistakes during ww1. And made everything in his power to stop it happening again.

Substitute "Jew" for "Chinese" or "Indian" or "Martian" and see if such a group would ever infiltrate a white country and work against it's race unnoticed.
Jews are much more than just greedy corrupt bastards.

bump

...

It's time to go

Daily reminder that Austrian economists are going to be liquidated.

bump

bamp

"The more decentralised the administration of the Reich becomes, the easier it will be to find efficient people for the key-posts of the central organisation, endowed with the ability to give the necessary broad instructions and the sense to know when their intervention is really necessary.
If we allow the bureaucrats to continue in their If we allow the bureaucrats to continue in their present ways, in a few years we shall find that the nation has lost all faith in the administration. Efficient men with both feet planted firmly on the ground will not tolerate that the work they have prepared as, say, mayors, during years of long and anxious endeavour should be rejected or destroyed by the decision of some miserable little jack-in-office in Berlin.
In any case, when the officials of the central administration do intervene in local affairs, they are very seldom in agreement with the local authorities, who have studied the problem in question on the spot and who know quite well what decision ought to be arrived at." - A.H

Politics is history in the making. History itself is the presentation of the course of a Folk's struggle for existence. I deliberately use the phrase struggle for existence here because, in truth, that struggle for daily bread, equally in peace and war, is an eternal battle against thousands upon thousands of resistances, just as life itself is an eternal struggle against death. For men know as little why they live as does any other creature of the world. Only life is filled with the longing to preserve itself. The most primitive creature knows only the instinct of the self preservation of its own, in creatures standing higher in the scale it is transferred to wife and child, and in those standing still higher to the entire species.

...

When his claims are so fundamentally wrong there isn't much else to do but to laugh at him.

The idea of Humanity in doctrines based on liberal and individualistic doctrines of natural Right is an ideal social construction of universal nature, encompassing all men on earth. . . . which will not be realized until any genuine possibility of combat is eliminated, making any grouping in terms of friends and enemies impossible. This universal society will no longer know nations. . . . The concept of Humanity is an ideological instrument particularly useful for imperialistic expansion, and in its ethical and humane form, it is specifically a vehicle of economic imperialism. . . . Such a sublime name entails certain consequences for one who carries it. Indeed, to speak in the name of Humanity, to invoke it, to monopolize it, displays a shocking pretense: to deny the humanity of the enemy, to declare him outside the law and outside of Humanity, and thus ultimately to push war to the extremes of inhumanity.

From what a historian friend told me, german economy was unsustainable and the reich HAD to go to war.
Don't know how much truth there is in that

Jewish nonsense. Keynesians claim that it was the German war machine that caused their economic miracle. Austrian economists claim that the Reichsmark would have suffered massive inflation eventually. Wikipedia just pretends that there was no economic miracle until after the war.

All nonsense of course, but there's obviously a pressing need to (((shut down))) any discussion of the topic.

Checked for truth, although my path was from the Left, as I used to be a Marxis (though I sympathized with the Axis in WWII and I never cared much for Jews or Israel), before I actually learned about (((Marxism))), due to my disgust for (((Capitalism))).
This means that I'm probably different than many others, but it also might make me useful as an infiltrator into Leftist organizations.

We committed the capital fault, immediately after the last war, of re-entering the orbit of world economy, instead of sticking to autarky. If at that time we had used within the framework of autarky the sixteen million men in Germany who were devoted to an unproductive activity, we'd not have had any unemployment. The success of my Four Year Plan is explained precisely by the fact that I set everybody to work, in an economy within a closed circle. It wasn't by means of rearmament that I solved the problem of unemployment, for I did practically nothing in that field during the first years.

I have posted so much good stuff in this thread so just read it and you will get a good understanding about NS in general.

I'm also d4fe68 btw

You posted some interesing stuff, especially Rosenberg's Political Testament. I would also recommend his book Myth of the 20th Century.

Could you explain what you meant by your above sentence? I think it's not a coincidence that every sovereign empire in the last 150 years was crushed or subverted to change to fiat paper money.

I would recommend this one instead. It's basically an abridged audiobook version. youtube.com/watch?v=X77dkiDpBoM&list=PL8N4Xw3MtJJzF1YzQJ-fq0r8qYqyLPQkv
What I mean by this is that you can give basically anything value as long as it's hard to counterfeit. I will post a longer and better explanation of my train of thought when I have a bit more time on my hands.

Great post. The only part I disagree with is the idea that there is no hierarchy among professions. It's true that every job in a NS economy is necessary, and maybe even equally important. But some jobs objectively require less skill and effort to do.

So if pay is the same (or very close) for every job, naturally people will gravitate towards the ones that require less effort and education. But not everyone can have those jobs, so there has to be some incentive for people to choose more difficult and stressful ones. Unless there's some financial or status-based incentive, it will lead people to want to go to have the easy janitor's job or whatever. And we can't assume that everyone will just accept their place in society regardless of pay or status. All right-wingers realize the importance of hierarchy. It will ALWAYS exist, and not even an Aryan National Socialist state will eliminate that.

I dont disagree with you in anyway and I dont think the post does either. It might be written a bit weird sometimes. Like my post above says "Money, to me, was simply a token of exchange for work done, and its value depends absolutly on the value of the work accomplished."
I'm not sure how this conflict with your views. What do you mean by "hierarchy among professions"?

Does anyone have a pdf of Alan Milward's book "The German Economy at War"?
David Irving recommended it to me when I emailed him about this topic but I've never been able to get hold of a copy.

Speaking of Irving, anyone have any info about his Himmler book?
Only thing I got is
I am in Scotland now, and have three more books to write: the Churchill biography, vol.3 (which takes the story to Potsdam and Hiroshima); my own memoirs, which I first drafted when I was still in the thick of it; and I am currently putting final touches to Himmler's War, which is finished, bar the final polish: Part I is subtitled, 'Always be decent and brave and kind', a quote from a letter to his daughter, little Gudrun Himmler in 1930." from
2016-11-26

Bump

Does anyone have a pdf of Alan Milward's book "The German Economy at War"?
David Irving recommended it to me when I emailed him about this topic but I've never been able to get hold of a copy.

Here are a few articles on 3rd way/4th way economics from one of my favorite sources:

katehon.com/article/distributism-economics-if-people-mattered

katehon.com/article/catholic-social-teaching-and-conventional-economics

katehon.com/article/middle-class-ideology-semantics-existentia

Before anyone spergs, I'm not a Catholic or Duginist. These are just good clear introductory articles.

Wtf is with that double post, the first one didn't display at all so I went to do some work to try later… wasn't there when I got back and then double-post outta nowhere. Sorry about that, tor can be weird.

It might be to do with the Lipstadt trial. He told me in the email that they confiscated his entire archive and only half was returned. Apparently it was around 1million carefully organised documents and they only returned 500k in a complete mess, said he'll never have the time to sort it out. Very sad news, especially if it affects his writing output (I think an additional volume to his Churchill series is also overdue).

That's true. All the "kek" posting kills discussion

All the people here who trash Duginism have never read him and don't understand him.

...

Well, I know because I used to use Reddit for a few very specific interests of mine that I have had a hard time finding forums or other places to discuss. For example, an old strategy board game that was released in the 80s,

As a whole, that site is a hotbed of liberals, faggotry, normies, and all other assorted degeneracy, but like any place on the internet, if you seek out the places that are frequented by STEM graduates and people with autistic/nerdy interests, it can be bearable.

such a great book

Why are you replying to yourself?

Anyway, the mediocre bourgeois lifestyle is the enemy of all nationalists. It is the volk/narod that should be the subject of political theory as Dugin rightly emphasizes. Narod and Tradition are the pillars of civilized society.

Such a brazen hypocrisy. Dugin's masters (Russian top political class) don't even represent his nation, they are a mixture of every post-Soviet ethnicity that wants to separate itself from «narod» as much as possible.

Putin is probably the best leader in the world right now, and certainly the best for Russia. You forget that during the 90s Russia was being absolutely plundered by Western (((NGOs))) and seven (((banking families))). He's not an ideal leader though and that is why Dugin wrote Putin vs Putin. Fr Matthew Raphael Johnson also has a good book on Putin and he is a redpilled expert on Russia.

Besides, was it hypocrisy for US white nationalists to be active in a nation governed by Obama?

...

bump

I don't believe this would work

It is saying that you need to reduce what you people want into a level that you can give them. It even has passages about depopulation as if it was something good to let your people go extinct. Basically Hoxa Albania or modern day North Korea, not very different to communism. This is no way to prosperity. The more prosperity you have, the more children you can afford and therefore maximum prosperity should be pursued as a national goal to make it possible for your people to have many children so your nation can bloom.

There is not a single country on this planet that became prosperous with autarky and isolation. People are different and different people have different skills. Same goes with countries, races and cultures. Italians produce the best clothing and have the tastiest food. Germans produce the best cars. Americans produce the best airplanes and so on. With autarky you are denying your people their access to those best products of the category.

To understand how a nation can come to richess, you need to study David Ricardo's theory of comparative advantages. A nation has to put its productive resources into those fields where they have the best comparative advantages. This means when you are the best tinman in your town, and if you can earn 40$ per hour because you are the best in your trade, it would be retarded for you to do a 10$/h burger flipper job at macdonalds just because you love hamburgers. You let your neighbour do this instead because your time is too precious to waste it on something like this. It is smarter to do the thing you can do best and then buy anything else with the money you earned.

Let's do an example on this one and assume Germany produces the best cars and Italy the best textiles:
If you can build the worlds best cars like Germany, it would be retarded for you to produce textiles instead. So you better concentrace on producing cars, sell them globally because good products are wanted everywhere on the world and then import textile products from those countries that produce the best clothing like Italy. The alternative would be that you cannot produce enough cars for export but your locally produced textiles do not meet the quality of Italian textiles. You are wasting production capacity for half baked goods that nobody really wants instead of the real deal. You can see this situation in Russia. Russia has its domestic car industry that is protected by import tolls on foreign cars but the local people would rather have western european cars. Government is using tax money for protecting bad companies who fail to deliver better quality to the consumers.

In the end prosperity always equates to your ability to produce high tech product. All the rich nations like USA, Great Britain, Germany, Switzerland, Japan and many more are linked to high tech products in some kind. If you want to get rich, you need a product that everyone wants but only you can produce. It is as simple as that. All the world wants German cars and the Chinese can copy it but nobody wants a fake. Current trends suggest that electronics, IT and biotechnology will be the next big drivers of technological advancement and for any natsoc society it would make sense to specialize into those fields.

Wtf is this kike logic? No one want a "modern day North Korea". You fail to see the bigger picture of NatSoc and indeed nature itself. Not to be rude but the way you put forward thing make you sound a bit like a newfag.

Also aryanism.net isnt the handbook of NatSoc. It's very plain and simple which makes it nice for imageboards.

part II

so they blew up all their savings to keep the people calm then when their gold ran out they just started invading their neighbours for gold
this is where the money as unit of labour fails. If your country only produces useless crap, your labour is useless in international trade.
If your labour currency is not accepted as valuable by your trade partners, then it is nothing worth in the international trade. The logical consequence is you liquidate everything you have and live from your substance until all money runs out.

It would also be unimportant what type of currency or currencies the nation uses, as long as nobody can force the people to use his currency. Examples can be gold, silver, bitcoin, privately issued money, foreign currency or bird feathers. Anything is possible as long as people accept it. This means you can become a total kike and scam your customers but only once and then you lose all your market share and trust to your competitors.

A strong currency is also one of the most important factors when you research about how a nation becomes affluent. Most rich countries like the USA, Britain, Japan, Germany or Switzerland have hard currencies. It means the stronger the currency is, the more goods your people can buy for this currency abroad. The products they produce are perceived as valuable and important, their countries are seen as stable and serious trade partners. The worth of the currency is not watered down by inflation and people see it as a reliable store of value. Weak currencies can help you be competitive on international trade but normally they are nothing more than a sign of dying industries and outdated technology and that your current business models have no future and no potential for creating more prosperity.

For example What Italy did in the 80s and 90s did not help them with their structural problems. Whenever they had economic problems they just watered down the lira, so their local industry suddenly became competitive again and they had work to do for foreign customers. However, there has been no prosperity creation since those times. People had jobs again but they did not get more affluent. They could not buy more foreign products with their devaluated liras. Michel who bought their products for 100 Deutschmark, only had to pay 80 Deutschmark for it because the lira got weaker. This means that the Italian also can only buy German Products worth 80DM for the amount of lira he charged for his work. Ferrero and Fiat were the great prosperity drivers of Italy but those times are long gone. Since they joined the Euro, they have become unable to perform these exchange rate tricks and ever since their Economy is stagnating. It would have much sooner but their tricks delayed it for a few decades. Italian companies now invest in Poland and Serbia instead.

Adam Tooze pls go

part 3

On the topic of interest rates I can say that I understand why you hate it but it is necessary. Why would you lend money to a random stranger for x years with no benefit? It does not make any sense. Why would you take a risk with no reason? Letting other people borrow money from you leaves you with a disadvantage because you cannot work with your capital during all this time and you have no guarantee to ever see this money again. You cannot even spontanously decide to take a nice summer vacation with your wife next summer because the money is not in your pocket. So to counter this problem you need something that will motivate you to lend out this money. You either become an investor into the project and get a dividend or you get a provision for your support as financer of the project. Interest on honestly earned money is nothing evil. Interest on money created out of thin air is evil and you can solve this with gas very easily.

This is a very important issue
those branches are very prone to beeing subverted by kikes and therefore you need to pay extra attention to those

regulating big companies is good because they tend to become astronomically cancerous as they grow. See google, microshit and apple for examples. They suddenly implement spying "features", omitt phone jacks to shill new headphones or fund and shill liberal politicians.

Did you even read my posting? Saudi Arabia cannot become a food producer in the short time frame.
Russia cannot become a producer for tropical fruits, cocoa and coffee beans in the short time frame.
If you abolish free trade, you take away from your people all the products they cannot produce domestically. Then you substitute it with shit quality products that cost more to produce and don't taste as well as the original.
Autarky is not the way to prosperity

Basically for an NS society I think it would be best if you have closed borders for people but free trade for products. Then within your country you should have the freest possible economy. Then as this free economy will always become unruly at some point you need a sort of ministry against degeneracy that will remove anything unwanted. F.E. you open an anti-white propaganda tv station or a college for gender studies, the MaD kills you. They should intervene whenever someone uses muh liberty to push degenerate behaviour, trends, products, services or policies. Whenever someone starts a business that harms the race living in the country he will get removed.

Here OP. Good luck.

Also, when someone comes along wanting to learn why do you morons keep being dicks? Teach and bring more people into the fold.

The German state did, and there isnt one because we live in a globalized interdependent jewish capitalist shitty world

When your country's focus is on making better quality products with the elimination of capitalism, your country can make better quality goods. Relying on other countries to make these goods for you is stupid. You can barter and import foreign resources, however your country should focus on creating domestic product, regardless if the Italians make good alfredo.

You should produce both texiles and cars regardless if your textiles are shittier than the Italians. Self sufficency is more important and is the most important thing your country can have especially in a National Socialist economy.

Any product that increases the purchasing power of the individual and that is wanted by the populace will benefit the currency and nation.

The only way high tech products are produced is through production and refinement of created goods. Quality cars in Germany are only there because the Germans have worked for several generations to refine their creations. Same goes with the Italians and their alfredo.

I see Holla Forums has already infiltrated this thread

top kek

I hope noone believes this

Holy fuck you just keep going, noone is going to spend the time to explain to you that you are just retarded, international capitalism is not the proving grounds of an economy, gold is not the reason for the invasion of poland, the german gold reserves decreased because the less dependant the german state became on international trade, the less gold they needed to back their currency, as it was circulated by the people's purchasing power

Yes. Stop being a fucking marxist. Life isn't about economics. You fail to see the grand scheme.

I think we have a happy little libertarian newfriend on our hands.

we can debate on this. My argument would be that they just lived off the gold savings they had. Hitler blew this money on infrastructure projects and gave people work. It was good for the people who lived then but this is not a long term solution to your economic problems. At some point your savings run out.

I agree to some point that relying on others for goods leaves you with counterparty risk but the benefits ultimately outweigh the negatives. you will see later.

so it is okay to import raw materials but not to import pre-products and end products? Wouldnt this be hypocritical?

working as a racer pays 100$ per hour. Working as a model pays 80$ per hour. You are a master in both professions.
Do you really want to tell me that it is smarter to do both of them fifty fifty than to concentrate on the one that pays better? This would mean you earn on average 10$ less per hour and those 10$/h can be exchanged for more goods and raw materials on the markets.

self sufficency is not possible in the short term because without oil not even your farmers can plough the land. Let alone denying your people to any product that cannot be produced at home as well.

what do you even mean by this sentence?
purchasing power comes from a strong currency and a strong currency comes from a trade surplus and a trade surplus comes from you are the best in your business and all the world wants your products and is ready to pay any price because they are the best products you can buy with money. To be the best in something you have to specialize.

so your populace wants high quality stylish Italian fashion but you deny them this because of muh autarky. Surely what the populace wants. Similar to when the communist party decides to only produce yellow umbrellas this year when in fact the people would have liked green sunglasses better.

OP, the money went from being a unit of debt, to a unit of value. That made all the difference. Money is just really an accounting system.

No, you idiot, money is a weight.

This sounds pretty good tbqh. How "free" was the German economy in National Socialist Germany. As a reference point, how did the openness of the domestic economy compare to fascist Italy? USA of today?

I read it, and while I don't disagree, the title of the book is all one really needs to hear. It really is just "get rid of interest / usury" and then a bunch of feels talk.

Not saying there's anything wrong with that, but there really isn't any complexity to it. If people can't understand that some people can live as parasites on the back of productive society by "growing money", then they deserve to live in banana republic shitholes like the US has become.

The other problem is that there is a reaction against nationalistic and socialistic ideals in the West today because we have so many other races among us from a century of diversity propaganda and immigration, their birth rates having been higher for so long while ethnic Euros having been barely at replacement rate.

Naturally one hears what Feder says or even early 20's NS economic theories, and while they think "sounds good for a nation that is 99% whites, yes, smash these capitalist asshole kikes", that sentiment isn't shared in somewhere like America today, where the reaction is "become like Donald Trump, make "BIYYONS", and escape the niggers."

In short, there's a very sharp distinction between economic worldviews here: one is to maximize your profit to "run from" the current demographic issues, which libertarian and capitalist right-wingers go for, and the other requires more work, which is more along Feder and NS principles, which is nationalism and socialism, which requires ethnic cleansing, because nobody wants to be socialistic in a land full of niggers and shitskins.

bump

Bump

bump

Why do they have Gew 98s, instead of K98s?
polite sage

Oy vey, guise, I just got here from Jewdwig von Mises.org and they fed me crap by a communist who ran off to England and made a war propaganda book. But I'm so new I haven't looked into the backgrounds of (((austrian economists))) and found out they were brought to America and bankrolled by the Rockefellers. Let me tell all you natzees all about economics.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Günter_Reimann

And the "da natzee economy wuz overheating, goy" thing that everyone repeats came from Britbong Marxist Timothy Mason. Who was such a faggot, he ran away from England because Margret Thatcher was "the harbinger of Fascism" and then an heroed himself.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Mason#The_.22Flight_into_war.22_theory
According to Mason, by 1939, the "overheating" of the German economy caused by rearmament, the failure of various rearmament plans produced by the shortages of skilled workers, industrial unrest caused by the breakdown of German social policies, and the sharp drop in living standards for the German working class forced Hitler into going to war at a time and place not of his choosing.[26] Mason contended that when faced with the deep socio-economic crisis the Nazi leadership had decided to embark upon a ruthless 'smash and grab' foreign policy of seizing territory in Eastern Europe which could be pitilessly plundered to support living standards in Germany.

Because replacing service rifles takes time and most countries don't just dump the old ones wherever immediately, they phase them out.

This book nearly brought me to tears.

...

Got anything on Adam Tooze? His extremely critical work on the Nazi economy (The Wages of Destruction) is taken as the gospel everywhere online

I mean just the fact that they try to make it seem like Germany needed the war for their economic reasons is enough for me.

I cannot use that to discredit the author

Didn't Wiemar Germany have K98 Ks already?

Well it shows that he's fucking clueless, who can't grasp the whole picture.
You can also just look at the sources. The only thing I can think of is Irving when I see them.

I rather read a book by a communist than a book that is based on Germany needing the war and its supposed dependency on the war.

Problem is that he backs up this argument with good evidence

lol

www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlHVin56U2w#t=26m28s

kikes will kike "evidence"
saying germany could not exist without a war in a national economy is pure kike
enough proof

He obviously don't. If he reaches a conclusion that we know isnt true, we can safely say that he is wrong.
Also just look at the sources, it's a complete shit fest.

The only thing wrong is they did not completly ban usury.

Feder wanted tho

...

Go watch mohammed and his group of friends gangfuck your sisters you pathetic britcuck.

Hitler largely dismissed Feder's ideas once he was in power as a result of the influence by industrial giants like Krupp, Heinkel. Additionally, Hjalmar Schacht threw his weight around quite a bit as a federal banker and after having been appointed to a high position in the new Reich's government (i'm forgetting the position at the moment) Feder's political career was largely ruined or overshadowed.

Wewies.

The economic policies of the National Socialists were surprisingly conventional. In practice they were not markedly different from those of the U.S.

It was the weakest plank of their platform. Hitler wasn't a businessman.

...