When did you realize that nazism is the only economic system that can ever work?

Also conservative family values and a powerful elite class?

The environmentalism was cool though

Because the bankers send useful idiots like you against us every time we try to do something good for the world. People like you don't necessarily have to die but we definitely have to kick you out of our countries if you're going to sperg out with your irrational fear and start shooting innocent people on the streets like you always do.

I'm white and straight.

fascism dindu nuffin did it

Why do all industries have to be in the hands of fascist party cronies?

Why did Hitler purge the Useful Idiot brothers?

s-t-r-assers (useful idiots) word filtered

It shouldn't require eugenics or racial extermination or any kind of racism or sexism at all

Because they could be trusted to put all of their profits towards job creation. Do you see any capitalists anywhere in the entire world doing the same today?

...

...

i have nothing against Not Socialism economically speaking.
however, ethno states, white supremacist, genocide …..make me sick.

you do realize that people wouldn't hate you so much if you kept your shit to yourselves, right ?
but nooo,

fucking stormfag belong in the Gulag

don't forget to SAVE

So why does it in almost all cases?

why couldn't these businesses be run as co-operatives?

No I don't see capitalists doing that, I am a communist for christ sake.

Go back to Holla Forums fag.

I don't buy into anything but their ideals and their economic policies. Quit straw manning.

Because nazism puts the bankers out of business. The bankers quite literally own the whole world and they'll do anything keep their powers. They'll send an army of subhuman useful idiots and nations against you if you even think about turning your back against the banks. That's why they made Churchill start world war 2

Why do you think the whole world are conditioned to go feral on everybody who dares to suggest these economic policies?

For as long as there's trade there will be an economy. You can't have communism unless it's worldwide

Because you need to put the profits towards job creation and business expansion. You can't have the workers walking away with huge salaries.

literally 98% of the people who fought Nazism were white europeans or white europeans who had immigrated to America a few generations back or Slavs….

this doesn't mean anything. There will always be an economy full stop.

not true, why do you say this?

co-operatives have an extremely good track record of doing this.

while co-operatives pay their workers well, they do not tend to do this.

When salaries are controlled democratically they tend to become what is good for everyone. More so than if they are in the hands of an individual, who is extremely fallible and has no democratic check and balance.

makes you think.

you better be saging this b8

Subhuman is a state of mind. Not a race

Not in the gift economy that communists suggests.

Because capitalists will always make business out of fucking your shit up

I'm interested in this. Can we talk about this instead? Can you give some examples?

If everybody are socially pressured to invest their earnings in the business then what's the difference between having the party run the business and having the workers do it? If the party does it then you can be sure that they'll hire the best employees and the party can also invest huge amounts of money if they want to do risky expansions and start some big amazing project with the company. This would never happen if the workers owned everything

Quit strawmanning. I'm beginning to think that you're an actual cuck

sorry fam will start now

the clue is in the name

If it hadn't been for the massive drain on resources that was fighting the Nazis the soviet union would have been the dominant force in Europe and very probably the world.

Similarly if anarchist experiments in Catalonia had not been crushed by larger Fascist nations they could have had a far greater influence.

>I'm interested in this. Can we talk about this instead? Can you give some examples?

sure, Mondragon is a good example of a competitive co-operative, although not without its own problems, its model clearly competes adequately with capitalist businesses.

So to do many others theguardian.com/social-enterprise-network/2012/jun/28/co-operatives-outperforming-competition

sorry for the Guardian. You can look around many other sources will confirm what it says. Its a hack article that steals from other sources anyway.

The direct control of the people who work in the business running it is more efficient. They have more knowledge of how the business needs to be run than people outside of the business. They also see the effects of their decisions first hand on the front line of production. In this sense there is a real tangible connection between workers and business. With a party control, there is a middle man who is less efficient by sheer logistical necessity.

As well as this, there is no social pressure, you can vote how you want. However, given that you know how the business functions, as I've said above, you are unlikely to vote in a way that would jeopardise your own earnings and employment, thus you will probably vote not only for your self but for the benefit of the business as a whole. This relationship is self enforcing.

Besides this, if you profit directly from the businesses performance, you are likely to work harder for it, rather than if you are paid a wage, where you earn the same no matter what.

Henry Ford, the noted fascist, understood this to some extent. He paid favoured workers a percentage of profits on top of their salary, while not co-operative enterprise, it was like a small piece of it. He is known for having one of the most successful business models ever. His workers were treated well, given many benefits and paid more than other workers.

A co-operative work place is like Henry fords, only this effect is true of all staff members.

You may also find it interesting that co-operative industry is a cornerstone of anarchist thought.

Many notable anarchists such as Proudhon and Bakunin were not favourable towards Jews.

Anarchism is the libertarian answer to the questions you ask.

It's not an economy because there's no trade going on. The idea is that people should give away stuff and expect nothing in return

The exploitation of the workers is not the only problem with capitalism. It's also the exploitation and the creation of stupid consumers.
It seems to me that this co-operative business is only driven for profits and not for the benefit of the people. So in terms of the cultural and mental damages that consumerism and unregulated capitalism causes, what is the difference between this and corporatism? What prevents these co-operatives from becoming just another pharmaceutical company like the ones we have now? It seems to me like your suggestion don't negate any of the byproducts of capitalism, unless you suggest having a fascist state that regulates stuff.

Also, what prevents people from investing their earnings in things that gives them way more profits like bonds and capital gains? Why would they invest in the company? People will always put their savings where they'll grow the most.

Henry Ford is based as fuck.

no the idea is that people give each other what they need and produce according to each others need.

'From each according to their ability, to each according to their need' is the maxim.

The mode of production creates the mode of consumption. The base creates the superstructure. Capitalism overproduces things that we do not need, we have almost no choice but to consume them. When industry is democratised and we produce what is needed, this problem fixes itself.

The fact that they are run by the people, for the people, not by a CEO or board of directors for their own personal profit. They are run for the profit of everyone.

These kinds of investments rely on a system based on interest. Interest is a form of private property, one of the most insidious. When the workers control the means of production democratically there is no private property and therefore no interest. These kinds of investments simply do not exist.

He was moderately based in my opinion. He did a lot of good things, but fell short in many others. I think he is an extremely interesting character.

I am interested in the cross over between the far left and right, he is a person who exemplifies this in some aspects.

Proudhon is another like I said.

As somebody who understands the cancer that is a debt and interest based economy, I would also suggest the book Debt: The First 5000 years by David Graeber. Its a history of money (which is a history of debt). It debunks the liberal myth of barter and shows how debt and interest have come to run our society. Also from an anarchist perspective.

Again, this are the libertarian answers to the questions you ask.

Mondragon is a famous cooperative.

Does >>>Holla Forums's wordfilters change Not Socialist to Not Socialist? What's up with that? Sure, the Nazis were porkie-enablers, but I still want to read exatly what people write (even if it is Nazis spewing their retarded shit).

Now I know
N\a\t\i\o\n\a\l \S\o\c\i\a\l\i\s\t
becomes
N\o\t \S\o\c\i\a\l\i\s\t

The way you see it is more like market socialism. The person you talked to is an anarchist, but supports the cooperative mode of production.

This is why a lot of communists support planned economies. Because they think that cooperatives still have the problems associated with being in a market environment. Note that the Soviet Union is not the only option a planned economy has. There is also decentralized planning: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralized_planning_(economics)

Check also for example what Allende was planning to do until the CIA fucked him over:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Cybersyn

You misunderstand how the whole world works. People will do anything to sell their shit. If nobody wants to buy their products then they'll make them want to buy them.

They're run for the benefit of the people who run the business. They don't give a single shit about anyone else in the world.
They'd probably sell heroin to child prostitutes if it was legal.
The whole point of nazism is to change capitalism so that the system works for the benefit of the nation rather than for a select few and against everybody else. So in nazism, businesses aren't run just for profits, they have to benefit the country somehow and benefits don't just come from taxes and increased stock value and nazis knows this.

Sounds to me like you want a labor-backed economy. Are you sure you aren't a Not Socialist?

i have another question if you don't mind. How are you going to make sure that the products that the cooperatives produces are good products and not just garbage products like the ones we get now that breaks early and have a planned obsoleteness so that we'll buy another version of the same product a few months later. Would you get rid of patent laws?

btw Henry Ford published the protocols of the learned elders of zion and wrote a book called The International Jew, and now this is what his hometown Dearborn, Michigan where had his factory looks like. Coincidence?

Sooo tell me this Nazis
How you will get coffee tea and Spices ??
Oh w8 the glorious white race don't need these things right ?

...

That is Nazism mate. Race ideology is a big part of it. If you only support the economic policies you could just as well be a social democrat.

No on all things you just said. Jesus christ. Go away.

HOURLY FUCKABLE PLUSHIE LOW-ENERGY SMUGFAG FROM POL THREAD

Yeah, look how great it worked

They developed the racial hierarchy myth just for fun I guess. :^)

If you remove the racial aspect of Nazism, don't you get just Fascism?

...

The huge industrial expansion obviously couldn't have worked forever, but the autobahn was not a scheme, that was a very very good investment. The whole point of all these big projects was to simply just create ways to issue out this new currency so that it could be put into circulation and then the people would use it to trade with each other and create jobs that way.

You can't invent a new currency and give out millions of coins for free. It would have no value. It wouldn't be backed by anything.

Is this some "My parricular, special snowflake brand of Nazism has never been tried" meme?

yes, stop bumping this shit thread FFS

This is what the bankers do. They create money out of nothing, out of debt, out of future labor