What happens when the centralized...

shutup pussy

The same that has been happening in the last millennia: the emperor is killed by the people or by conspirators who are tired of his rule.
Emperor Augustus thrived for 40 years, Caligula was murdered not long after he started acting up.

Trump gets elected.

benis

"The authority is vested in the Reich, but the administration should be decentralised." - Hitler

This is what we're fighting against now. ZOG is fucking us and trying to destroy our people. Are you new? Perhaps a libertarian?

And what stops it from happening again?

And what's to stop Marxist revolutionaries from rising up in a libertarian utopia? No system of goverment is perfect because we live in an imperfect world, every system carries its risks. Also, Himmler was kept far away from German domestic policy by Hitler for a reason. Hitler actually made guns much easier to own for ethnic Germans. What is commonly described as Hitler's gun grab actually happened in 1928, under the democratic Weimar goverment. The People should always 100% resist disbarment , no matter the goverment.

you overthrow them. that's what's great about one ruler. if they go against the peoples interest, you can logically and morally overthrow them. democracy, people don't want to overthrow if their interest are not being met because the gov't can just say "hey goy how about you vote for someone who will". giving a false sense of you being able to fix the problem.

All modern nation-states have tended towards more centralization, not less. And there is no NatSoc exception since it was invented. What Hitler may of said (I'm not bothering to source it) and what actually happens are two different things.

...

fuck off Agent Goldberg

We won you faggot.

We won you know. When the death camps open will you still worry about pr?

...

He stated that Natsoc centralized which isn't true. What happens in the future is irrelevant in this matter.

PR is irrelevant in the federal slammer dummy, if you're gonna take potshots at local kikes keep your fucking mouth shut about it

...

...

How many people do you think will be hired by each camp? I wouldn't mind working one part time, really make things efficient I would.

The same as what happens to communists, or anybody else.
They are removed the hard way.

He hasn't made an argument. You have only hypothesized the current situation, it's not an arguement

For you

...

300 (((greeks))) make a movie and think, This is who I am and I am ok with this.

Meanwhile some Arcadians zerg rush the crypto masonic pigs and bastard army kikes for being part of the failed system and invoke the raw deal and judgment.

You leave the country because you obviously don't belong/

translation: i havent studied a single thing about natsoc but heres my opinion anyway

We'll be able to have civilized political reform or at the very least won't have brain dead regressives shouting muh racism to bog down any realistic debate about the situation.

oven yourselves tbh the state ovening you would be oppressive

You NatSoc types are so enamored by what Hitler accomplished that you blind yourselves to the most successful government, and largest colonizing force whites ever created. Cute.

You want best government? Base it off of the one created by pic related.

Or, to be more precise, base the government off of the one he created, and the nations moralistic values off of those traditionally associated with fascism - family, duty, country.

This.

you are talking about the Obongo regime, faggot OP.

What happens when your marxist paradise sends you to the gulag? What happens when your libertarian republic facilitates the extermination of your people by flooding your communities with niggers because the politicians want reliable voters?

ARMY OF THE PEOPLE

Yes, the most successful governments are one where the people follow these ideals and have a love for their country, which is what the US is lacking. I was thinking of the potential of a National Republic, but if you are able to have a well functioning society, you should be providing for your people - government is taking care of you, and vice versa, giving you an increased sediment in your country - so a NatSoc style government should be your final approach that would stem from a republic into NatSoc.

The fuck are you talking about nigger?

Actually, I'm a police officer in my town. So no worries.

It would in theory be a pseudo-fascist democracy. A democracy in which a very small group of people have suffrage, and which holds the tenants of fascism to the highest standards. The Catholic Church has used a similar system (nearly identical, to be honest) successfully for the last 1900 years - perhaps longer, but 1900 is verifiable history.

If you set up a government based off the way the church is run, and set the requirements for suffrage so that only those that would naturally find family, country, and duty to be the highest of ideals you could theoretically set up an interminable government, which would relentless pursue what is best for the country and its people.

The side benefit would be that since family, duty, and country are anathema to the jew, very few of them would end up in politics. The only thing you would need to do to insure a low-corruption government would be to set up laws restricting outside influence on politicians.

checked
WEW

communism

It was more an addendum to the other comments than a refutation. A "why not skip the killing your beloved leaders" idea. It was also a way of addressing the thread as a whole, since the majority here are NatSoc.

Or …. you know, you could just stop beating around the bush and not have any jews in your nation

If any country is to be successful then item 1 on the constitution needs to be "no jew, religious or genetic will ever set foot within our borders under any circumstances" Along with heavy penalties for anyone in the country dealing with jews on the outside - even if benign.

I always assume worst case scenario. Even the Nazis had jews in the government.

That statement leaves a lot to be desired. The nazis had some mischlings but never involved in high ranking influential positions as opposed to the Italian Fascists and the rest were mainly less than a quarter jewish.

Hitler talks says in table talk that the way the pope is chosen could be valid way of choosing the leader of a nation.

The point is that jews are mischievous creatures, and have ways of sneaking into even the most closed environment. Best way to prevent them from having any lasting effect on a country or government because I think that despite our best efforts, we will probably never be able to exterminate ALL of them - they're too much like roaches is to set up a system they will not willingly participate in, en masse.

Glad that someone agrees with me. Can you set me up with a source?

The election of the Chief must not take place in public, but in camera. On the occasion of the election of a pope, the people does not know what is happening behind the scenes. A case is reported in which the cardinals exchanged blows. Since then, the cardinals have been deprived of all contact with the outside world, for the duration of the conclave! This is a principle that is also to be observed for the election of the Fuehrer: all conversation between (? with) the electors will be forbidden throughout operations. pp 388 Hitler's table talk.

He talks about it somewhere else but im too lazy to find it now. He likes it because it has shown stability throughout history. He also likes how the Doge was chosen in the republic of venice.

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 […]. pp 534 Hitler's table talk.

It seems Hitler agreed with my reasoning. I've never read Hitlers Table Talks, but I think we would have agreed with each other from a political perspective.

Table talk contains a lot of good material. You should definitely read it.

I started reading Mein Kampf long before I ever came to Holla Forums, but didn't find it particularly interesting. Table Talks seems like something I would enjoy much more. Thanks for the information and suggestion.

How much did you read of MK? Vol 2 and the later part of vol1 is really good imo.

The church is bound by many nations and many walks of life. Yes the ideals, certainly should be implemented into an ideal society, but as to the church I view it as a philosophy. The church has been proven to scandalize the public many times over in selling indulgences for example since there is a systematic build of its leadership that has been corrupt at times, abandoning past ideologies. The philosophy should be implemented, I'm not sure about if the church should have a say in a government as they can start wars, and overthrow governments as became evident in Rome.

The current government is already trying to exterminate and replace us, so I'm gonna take that chance, you low energy faggot.

bump

Probably the first quarter of it, or thereabouts.

I'm not talking about the involving the church in the government. That would be suicide, I'm talking about the way the church is organized and run, and arguing that it's the superior form of government. It allows for a strong central ruler, like an autocracy, but also allows for that ruler to be deposed easily if they are not leading the country in a direction that is advantageous for it, unlike an actual autocracy which would require a civil uprising for such an event to occur. It also gives the civilian populace a way to enter into the power-class, without the possibility of the chaos of universal suffrage.

At the lowest level you have the congregation. They have no power to affect the outcome of the church except for leaving it. This would the the population of the nation.

Any of the congregation can choose to become a part of the papacy. They must undergo schooling and training and oaths. In the real world, this would be a requirement for the civilian population to hold office or vote. Most likely, this would be voluntary military service or something of the sort.

After training, education, and commitments to the church, the former congregationalist enters the papacy. This allows them a small say in the way the church is run, normally on a local level. This would be the veteran voting population who would also be able to serve as local politicians.

The next level is the bishops, archbishops and so forth. These are the people who have dedicated every facet of their lives to the church, and eventually form the ruling council who will select the next pope. In the theoretical government, this would be a senate elected from among the voting population. The main task of the senate would be electing a leader, who would control the country. Secondary would be making sure that the leader stays within their realm of power, never venturing into the realm of tyranny against the people - the problem that eventually befalls most autocracies.