Reminder: Capitalism and Communism are 2 sides of the same coin

NatSoc libertarianism can be a thing

That's fucking retarded. That's no different from the Communist and Socialist Libertarians. Contradictory and stupid.

Huh, every society has centralized power unless you go back to foedalism. What we gon't want is that it's centralized on foreigners or traitors, and that the power is only on a nation size (not global)

I'm not even sure how that would work, and I consider libertarianism to not be so perfect either. I think there should be a middle ground, but where we end up left by going inbetween seems very much like what we have now anyways, but as an ethnostate. Which I think I'm ok with.

Really I think what I want is 1700s America. A union of mostly independent states that band together on external policy issues.

This. So many people fall for the age old jewish trick of d&c.

Almost noone even has the imagination to concieve of anything else but a capitalist world, a socialist world, or a mix of the two.

Fucking jews man.

Having a social safety net is fine as long as it doesn't go to shitskins or single mothers. After we've kicked out all the non-whites out of our countries, we should reform society in such a way that illegitimacy, single motherhood, fatherlessness and divorce are reduced as much as possible. Less single and divorced women = less need for a bloated welfare state.

We should also reform women's education so that it becomes more focused around community work, volunteering, work with children, the elderly, the homeless, etc. instead of expensive studies that leave women miserable and childless. Less women doing paid work also means higher wages for men, and thus making it much more affordable for men to have families.

Like this ultimate shabbos goy.

Yeah, well, so national socialism phylosophy applied to our era

TOP KEK, no it cannot. lolbergs are damn near the antithesis of national socialism. National lolbergs is almost as much of an oxymoron as anarcho-communism or anarcho-nationalism. National socialism puts your own people above you. It makes it so it's your duty to help your kind rise as much as possible. Lolbergs don't give a shit about that, all it cares about is having the government stay small so the lolberg can Jew the shit out of others. It's very capitalistic in nature.

...

Libertarianism is arguably even shittier than liberalism.

kill yourself

National socialism is also supposed to become an ETHNO state. So much people have trouble understanding that…..

>>>/liberty/

The only way to stop these things is to keep women, legally, beneath men. Otherwise they'll see no benefit in relying on a man and either remain barren, or become a single mother. These things were never an issue when women had less rights.

As for the second part of your comment, that too will only last so long. Eventually women will demand more. So either we actively suppress them, or give in. There's no middle ground. They will always want access to everything men have, and more, whether they seek to use it or not.

Then by all means, tell us how. Save for their inane belief in open borders, what's the problem?

Yep, which is why I highly doubt it being possible in America. Too many different ethnicities to be able to do it. Even if you manage to remove all non-whites, you'll still have a dozen different ethnicities remaining and a ton of different mongrel variations.

Oh look, more losers with no competitive spirit.

...

I don't like their live and let live attitude, it leads to societal breakdown. It's also entirely jewish created as an alternative to communism.

The key is national socialism with a social education on freedom and individuality. It means that free people and free families are joining together under one glorious flag and fight each other.
The power would not be centralized, borders would be closed, power would not be centralized, (the nation would be a federation). There would be not need to orwell style sorvelliance or censorship, because all fucking jews and subversive elements would be gassed.
To create this kind of society it would be necessary an authoritarian kind of national socialism at first, with a great leader like Hitler and then, it would be possible to switch to this new kind of society.
Freedom must be intended as a noble virtue: a man is free as long as he's strong, and he's strong as long as he is willing to fight along his brothers and for his borhter.
It's not something that is given from an higher autority, is something that it's taken.
Society will let only good men to advance. Good men means that they must me real men, good at being men, strong and brave, not sheeps.
A libertarian natsoc society can even have heavily armed police with great power, almost militarized. But it will be at the service of the people and education will have a fundamental role in it.
The cowards, the weaklings and the traitors simple won't manage to do much into this society.

This can only work if there aren't jews anymore, if the nation is composed only by the same people and there must be at least 30-years of a Germany-like Natsoc rule to make sure the new political class, the youth, will uphold good values and to destroy marxist/jewish programming form the last era. The issue with Hitler like natsoc is that when the great leader dies, we cannot be sure the successors will be good. This happened a lot of time in human history: a good, authoritarian leader loved by everyone followed by voltures. Look at the history of Rome

He is correct that Nat Soc is not right wing. He is just stupid to not want that kind of society.

They are better at it than us because they are "merchants" and that's their weapon against us and the rest of the world.

So if you want to be a kike, go ahead. White people have (at least used to have) stronbger values that shiny gold.

Gas yourself, kike.

Pic related. Libertarianism encourages people to become hedonistic degenerates.

You exist thanks to capitalism. Unfuck it from jews and it's yours to command.
But if you fail to unfuck capitalism, what makes you think you will unfuck a natsoc ideology when undesireables like jews infect it ? These are not the pure times of hitler and 1960s sweden.

That's true. But an ethno state does not have to be Mono-ethnic, it only has to forbid interracial Marriage or childs (just like in 3 rd reich)

He's saying Hitler is a liberal socialist, which is completely false. Vid related is the same guy btw, just to emphasize what an incredibely cucked shabbos goy he is.

David Marcus pls go

One nice question for anyone here to think is:
Yes, Communism.

That is exactly why i said it's arguably worse than liberalism.

The message of natsoc libertarianism is in the Gadsen flag: don't tread on me. Referred to parasites, enemies and tyrants, everyone who goes against the volk

Well, you either have freedom or oppression. You either allow people to make the choices they see fit, or you have a government decide what's best. I don't like government deciding. As we've seen over the last century, government has done nothing but destroy society with one failed policy after another.

Jews do their fair share of bad, but I can't take this LARPing be-all, end-all "Jews control and run everything" nonsense seriously. Jews are not fucking gods among us.

Oh yeah I know its Steven Crowder. He is a cuck to Israel. Standard christian conservative fellating jewish cock and jewish money lenders. Gotta have a weak government so the (((FINANCIAL INTERESTS))) are free to plunder the people and land. I just like making that point becasue a bunch of right wing christ cuck market cucks post here

The third Reich explicitly stated that you could only be considered a full citizen if you were of Germanic descent. If you were not of Germanic descent yet lived a life that wasn't harmful to Germany, you could stay as a guest. In the case where jobs were needed because native Germans became unemployed, you could be kicked out though. It was part of the 25 points.

I exist thank to capitalism? Are you retarded?

Also you don't understand a thing about National Socialism.

Removing the kikes( a foreign entity) is also a part of national socialism this there is the "national" word .

That has nothing to do with National Socialism. It's entirely related to American culture and politics.

They are not gods, but they certainly are the root of all modern evil. And while some of our modern ancestors were faulty of weakness, the jew holds the knife stained with blood.

Imagine being this much of a kike shill. We exist because of European achievement and excellence, not because of some retarded Jewish ideology.

Capitalism is what gave the common man access to enough wealth to live comfortably.

Freedom for my people yes, but with strongly imposed norms. Within this framework you can have all the freedom you'll need. Humans aren't made to exist in a void of social norms.

Just read this

Yeah of course, but in USA it would have to be changed. Doesn't mean the concept is bad.

For exemple, removing the gibs for any crime, or even less to the whole falimy could work for the niggers.

They are 'better' at it because they ethnically network with each other, which gives them a competitive advantage over the majority who cannot.

Unlike most white people, they also feel no compunction about swindling and exploiting the goyim at all (it's a religious duty).

Even if they are 'better', why would I support that if it's worse for my people?

Humans evolved and developed in a void.

Tell that to Germans who lived in the 30s. Capitalism made them whore out their wives and daughters just so they could buy a loaf of bread.

I'm not gonna bother answering to your retarded arguments anymore because you're obviously a capitalism shill.

What you need to understand is that a good government initially arises from a good populace. As National Socialists, we don't believe that in our current society we can jump straight into socialist policies and grant the government with a broad scope of power, because our countries are diseased and corrupted by jews and shitskins. Our first objective is to forcibly remove them from our societies. This will slowly remove the corruption and decadence in our countries. Once OUR people run OUR countries, and once we restore a sense of virtue and pride in our people, then we can build from the ground up into a true National Socialist state.

To quote a villain from vidya (who did nothing wrong)

"…The world is built from the bottom-up, not the other way around. Honor, courage, fidelity… we don't inherit these things from the world, Sam; we build the world from them."

I agree to you that moral limits should be set and some shit should be off limits.

I personally dislike any form of religion. Any form of enforcing "x is against God" is to me retarded.
It is a double edged sword to me. On one side you prevent degeneration of your people, on the other side it "locks" their view and they will be unable to see the truth (just watch brainwashed Europe)

Since gassing the kikes is a real long shot anyway, if such a momentous goal of National Socialism were to be achieved, how would one deal with the kikes? Subversion of their culture? It is a possibility that they are made to be so divided, that the lines between their Jewish culture and customs become so blurred that they themselves cannot be considered Jewish. Perhaps rounded up and sent to all places around the Earth, or one place, like Israel then puppeted and quarantined. I just don't see extermination as viable, necessary, or most of all, noble. It would be a blot on National Socialism. I see it as an evil, how could it not be?

Excellent post OP. I came to the same conclusion. Capitalism starts when central bankers get themselves the power to create money. From that point, a slow process is initiated where, inexorably, all stocks, debt and land will inevitably be owned by the private bank, and it ends with communism.

Communism is the freak occurrence where jews militarily conquered a people.

Holla Forumsacks should never feel the need to defend capitalism. Free/open markets and capitalism are NOT the same thing.

you realize jews make all their money by creating banking cartels and siphoning wealth off the hard workers with interest?

Capitalism will eventually destroy everything that is good and healthy as long as it is profitable. One of the main reasons white genocide is happening is because it is profitable. So is/was destroying the nuclear family and promoting all sorts of LGBT poz and sexual degeneracy.

Full extermination is what is needed. The kike problem has gone on for far too long and only complete global annihilation can prevent them from ever coming back and Jewing your people. One of the errors Hitler made was being too soft on them and not completely wipe them off the face of the earth.

Nope it didn't. Unless you think posting on kikebook, having your 14 y boy addicted to pornhub , and having girls get aborted to keep their job, regret it at 40 years and die alone with their cat. That's if you are lucky they are not transgender now.

I think only the kikes got more wealthy.

Every Holla Forumsack should read E. Michael Jones's works. He understands very well how Jews control and benefit from capitalism and how it related to usury.

Giving the jews power over money was our biggest mistake. This is allowing them to literally buy up the entire planet by bust cycles after which they buy up all they can for pennies on the dollar and start their game again until the next bust. It's no wonder so many people died or were the target of assassination attempts trying to fight this.

Exactly, EXACTLY this.

This. The only thing Hitler really did wrong was not undergo a mass extermination of the jews. Even if he still lost the war, at least he would have severely reduced their numbers.

The "less-jewish" 0,1% which are 10000% pro-white, like Bobby Fischer or Stanley Kubrick, mischlings et ceptera will be left alive
the other will be gassed, it's the only solution. I don't think it's noble too, but it's necessary. Hitler didn't do it, and look what happened

Consider this: If your morals are not derived from something divine, how are they any better than what another person comes up with?

You're mistaking capitalism for corporatism, as every anti-capitalist does.
I prefer a NatSoc society much like nazi-germany with very limited gun laws.
But corporatism and capitalism are not the same thing.
In an actual capitalistic society (which both america and UK are not and havent been for a long, long time) there would be no marriage of government and enterprises. The interference of government into businesses is what creates huge (((corporations))) and its the only way those entities can amass such size and influence. The interference of governments, and the overburdensome regulations placed on people make capitalism impossible.
The kikes didn't want anybody hearing about Ron Paul for a reason–because his system would totally uproot their ability to leech off of the American people. By removing the corporatist system, he renders the jews powerless.
America needs to enter a NatSoc system to save our culture, save our demographics, kick marxism out. Then we can transition into a white nationalist government of freedom for the people, the way the founding fathers intended, and they drafted an amazing form of government.
Every time people on here argue against capitalism, they are actually arguing against corporatism. The only legitimate argument against capitalism I ever see on here is "capitalism will just turn into corporatism"
Which is true when the government is allowed to expand without penalty, when businesses and governments are allowed to intermingle, BOTH of which were strewn in by (((leftists))) in America, and both of which are only possible after a campaign of subversion.
The same can be said about NatSoc, which I think is what America desperately needs. Someone could come into power and turn the rest into shit.
This problem is too complex to simply be "natsoc good capitalism bad" because both systems have the potential to bloom into an amazing success or get perverted into something bad.
What I'm saying is that if we had the system of government that the founding fathers intended, before marxists and communists ruined it, America would be the most powerful nation, much like if NatSoc germany hadn't been defeated, they would be the most powerful nation.
I get what you're getting at OP but the headline of capitalism and communism being two sides of the same coin is incorrect. Capitalism is bad only when communism/socialism infests it.

You can't be capitalist and National socialist.

Fuck you.

This is like the capitalist version of the "but it wasn't REAL communism" argument.

Mind going into a bit more detail on the difference between the two user? It seems to me like "corporatism" is the inevitable fate of any capitalistic society.

This is another thing that I've always wondered, how would we institute a NatSoc style government in America while still maintaining some of the basic tenants of our country's history such as gun rights? The user above is being extremely contradictory

Only in a society built around the values of globalism. You can have capitalism where pornography and smut is illegal. Much like the founding fathers intended, you can have a free market society with rules in place.

Ron Paul is a dumb goldbug lolberg. Laissez-faire capitalism is just as bad as socialism, it just takes a little longer for the effects to become visible, You can have a mostly free market in a NatSoc system, but not capitalism.

A good government lasts only as long as bad men lack the ambition to take it over. A good populace lasts only as long as the propaganda they revolve their lives around remains good. Neither are eternal. Eventually one generation will influence the next to benefit it, and the downward spiral will continue until we wind up right back here.
I want that. I want homogeneity. But don't think for a second I trust them to do all that much better. Not after seeing what I've seen from them. The only reason I want it is to remove internal competition in regards to births.

What you mean is Corporatism, which can be prevented with a few simple government policies in regards to lobbying, monopolies, protectionism etc.

If you're advocating that we do away with capitalism, then you're advocating for the removal of huge portions of our population (including whites), as no other system can support the now billions on this earth. No other system makes wealth as accessible to the average person. Without wealth you can't feed a family or buy a large house. We can't revert to how we used to live, with everyone having a vegetable garden in their backyard. We don't have the room. The hundreds of millions in urbanized areas across the West would need to cease to exist, because they'd have no function in a society without capitalism. What exactly would drive industry without capitalism? Without the freedom to compete, where is our advancement? You can't use National Socialist Germany as an example, as it was in direct competition with other European countries due to the expectations for war. There was no internal competition driving industry.

Do you retarded lolbergs not understand that capitalism direclty promotes globalism?

The only good Jews can be said to have been only after death. I don't give a shit if he's been "10000% pro-white" all his life, I wouldn't turn my back to him. Kike genes all have to go, that includes mischlings.

NO NIGGER I'M NOT MISTAKING CAPITALISM FOR CORPORATISM
CAPITALISM WHERE PROFIT IS THE HIGHEST VALUE IN THE LAND YOU GET ALL THE SAME PROBLEMS WE HAVE BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE ONLY GOING AFTER PROFIT AT THE EXPENSE OF EVERYTHING ELSE INCLUDING THEIR OWN NATIONS AND PEOPLE ==GAS YOURSELF==

This. When profit is more important than the good of your people, you know the system is shite.

"Subversion against other races" is not kike genetics.
Kike genetics is obsession, which is not always a bad thing

It's nothing like that, because real capitalism is achievable, and we used to have it. Unlike communism, which is not achievable. Not even for a short period of time.

So you claim that's the inherent nature in even our people–to put money before everything else. Well you just undermined the position that we'd be any better off without the Jews. Given your claim, we'll always end up like this. We'll always end up with the greedy controlling us, because, like you just claimed, we're all the same, and we all strive solely for wealth at the expense of everything else. You just called us all kikes. If we're all kikes, what the fuck is the point?

I know it's hard for burgers to swallow it, but founding fathers were already kike puppets.

This is a great source for PRIMARY DOCUMENTS on National Socialism natsocarchive.wordpress.com

Narcissism is almost a dead giveaway. Greed and lust for power also raises many red flags.

Many of them were also free masons.

Currency is not the only form of wealth. Wealth can come from accumulation of land, power, or anything else that puts you above others, and that exists in all forms of politics. If we're no better than kikes in this system, then we're no better in any other. Make up your damn minds.

Do termites eat away the foundations of our homes because of "obsession" or because it's what they're genetically programmed to do?

You sound like Grindr Greggy when he was defending Kike Eunuch's wife.

Are you going to ignore the ridiculous reparations germany had to pay after WW1, that led to the german financial situation, or just blame everything on capitalism ?
The only people who I hear shit on capitalism this bad are commies.

George Washington:

Benjamin Franklin:

In whatever country Jews have settled in any great number, they have lowered its moral tone; depreciated its commercial integrity; have segregated themselves and have not been assimilated; have sneered at and tried to undermine the Christian religion upon which that nation is founded, by objecting to its restrictions; have built up a state within the state; and when opposed have tried to strangle that country to death financially, as in the case of Spain and Portugal.

For over 1,700 years, the Jews have been bewailing their sad fate in that they have been exiled from their homeland, as they call Palestine. But gentlemen, did the world give it to them in fee simple, they would at once find some reason for not returning. Why? Because they are vampires, and vampires do not live on vampires. They cannot live only among themselves. They must subsist on Christians and other people not of their race.

If you do not exclude them from these United States, in their Constitution, in less than 200 years they will have swarmed here in such great numbers that they will dominate and devour the land and change our form of government, for which we Americans have shed our blood, given our lives our substance and jeopardized our liberty.

If you do not exclude them, in less than 200 years our descendants will be working in the fields to furnish them substance, while they will be in the counting houses rubbing their hands. I warn you, gentlemen, if you do not exclude Jews for all time, your children will curse you in your graves.

Jews, gentlemen, are Asiatics, let them be born where they will nor how many generations they are away from Asia, they will never be otherwise. Their ideas do not conform to an American's, and will not even thou they live among us ten generations. A leopard cannot change its spots. Jews are Asiatics, are a menace to this country if permitted entrance, and should be excluded by this Constitutional Convention.

Thomas Jefferson:

The free market is a self-correcting process, and the practice of capitalism will ensure that it is. The failures of a market come from corruption within the government to favor certain government.

The government involves itself to correct the failures of the markets - unprofitable but necessary public works (such as a lighthouse), defense against foreigners (a standing army), and the birth of monopolies. The main issue in the US government, while claiming to do the third, in most respects facilitates the opposite. The existence of patent law is the most obvious.

There's other issues as well: price controls set by the state, the ability of lobbies to have influence, etc. It is here that the problems arise, and not from the market itself. Just look at health insurance. At the turn of the previous century, health insurance was essentially doctors employed by fraternal organizations with a communal paycheck. Then the government stepped in and fucked that, like it always does.

National Socialism requires a very powerful government to function, and has good results. But it will face the same problem any governing system does - the inevitable decay and corruption once the founding members die. It's a common belief on Holla Forums that "if the jews are gone, then this corruption can't happen". But that's simply not true. If one group vanishes, another will take its place. There will always be some person or group of persons conspiring to further themselves at the cost of the people, and given time, they will cause a collapse.

This is why the strict limitation of central powers is essential. The US made itself powerful by adapting those policies, and had a thriving culture under them. The singular flaw which was exploited to bring its current condition was that the founders, in their humility, made a system that could be amended. And while some of these changes have been for the better, most have simply decayed the nation.

Trimming the fat is what is needed, not burning the steak.

Are you twelve?

damn i fucked up that greentexting

No you fucking retard. Capitalism is not inherent. No where did I say anything was inherent. Nor did I say we are all the same.
I'll say it again nice and slow for you.
In a Capitalist society, monetary profit is the highest value, people pursue said profit at the expense of everything else, including their own people and nation. Did you get all of that?
That is why we must fight capitalism as well as communism as Hitler did.

False equivalence. We know which genes are more present in kikes and their effects. There are no genes for "subversion of other races"

Yeah, stupid, I get what you're saying. You're saying we're just like kikes. Exactly the same. If we're capable of that mentality in this system, then we're capable of the same in any other. You're undermining your own stupid argument.

muh centrism shilling is getting real fucking old

Shills ITT are also pretty obvious because their english and spelling is atrocious.

Read Hoppe than.

And murka post-CY isn't 1930s europe

But that's a strawman definition of capitalism

and I forgot to sage

Have you at least read the basic arguments from Culture of Crtique?

You're equating apples and pineapples

fuck off with your stinking dialectics Holla Forums. The only point of your post is to make
also

National socialism is just prussian socialism with a republican dictatorship instead of a monarchy.
IT STILL HAS CAPITALISM AND NO COMMAND ECONOMY IN PEACETIME

I'm not a capitalist, I am NatSoc. But I have great respect for what the founding fathers put in place. I'm afraid America is too far gone for anybody to realistically dream of returning to what they built.

Well, limited to the point where people can't buy shit like RPGs or tanks. Maybe I'm wrong on that.

Not really, because real communism is unsustainable and impossible to achieve, so whatever "stage" the communist system is at is as real as its going to get. Not the same for capitalism.

Capitalism, in the sense that the founding fathers wanted it, in the sense that Ron Paul wanted it, not in some anarcho-capitalist pipe dream, requires extremely limited governmental intervention into the economy, and limited government in the first place, private property, freedom of the people and of the markets, etc. Communism is always the realization of a totalitarian nightmare devoid of free markets, individual liberties, with huge government intervention into the lives and enterprises of the citizens, special protections for the government, etc. Joseph Stalin and Thomas Jefferson are not two sides of the same coin, they are VERY far apart.
It's not inevitable. In order for it to occur, there must be a mass subversion of the values of the people to allow them to expand government to ever increasing heights, tax the people to ever increasing heights, and begin cutting special deals for certain corporations and spreading regulations across the board to crippling levels. This is only possible through a campaign of subversion. As with anything, the problem is globalism/jews

Yes, you can. A free market is good and always necessary because a government cannot last long on socialism alone. Again, I am NatSoc. I just think the idea of Capitalism and Communism being the on the same side of the coin is silly.

I'm not a lolberg, and no capitalism does not directly promote globalism. You can be capitalistic and nationalistic, like early America.

Yes, you are mistaking capitalism for corporatism.
Your argument is that people are inherently shitty. If that is so, then it is inherently true that under any type of system with a government, it will quickly be taken up by people devoid of morals and care for their fellow countrymen, and the jewish question doesn't matter. If you don't believe a country of whites could run under a capitalist system while putting their countrymen in their interests, then you don't believe that NatSoc will be sustainable because eventually you would get leadership that will tear the whole thing down.
Also, learn to redtext stupid nigger
(checked)
Jews/globalists don't want the founding fathers system in place ever again.

Exactly. Up until two decades ago, and probably still in some areas of the US, the "dream" was to succeed, yes, but as a means of having that nice house in a nice community with a nice yard, so you could have a family. Capitalism made that possible for the average person. Corporatism and Cultural Marxism are the things undermining that dream and making it harder to achieve. Capitalism itself isn't the problem here. Capitalism is the reason most of us have access to the technology we're using right now.

No nigger you cannot fucking read. That is the state of society under Capitalism. That is NOT the natural state of our people which is why society is so dysfunctional and why we must destroy capitalism

Except that IS the definition of Capitalism. Privately owned means of production where to goal is capital, profit, money. Often with but, not requiring a free market which means no regulations on the market.
Our people are the most precious possession we can have. Far more important to ensure than money and financial interests

Market cucks get out

Since money was the biggest motivator, as it is in capitalism, France and the UK decided to plunder Germany for the war, which lead to the conditions. Had the world not ran under the Jewish banking cartels, which lent the money for the war and rebuilding of France, hence putting the countries in debt, which got paid by exploiting Germans to the maximum extent possible, Germans wouldn't have had to pimp out their family for a meager loaf of bread. Yes capitalism and the banking system it comes with, did have a part in it.

That Washington quote is fake, and "The Franklin Prophecy" is questionable, but the jews resorted to lying in their attempts to debunk it. Pic related is the original printing, you'll notice the claim about it being archived at the Franklin Institute that they always focus on isn't present.

The Founding Fathers' system worked because America was white, not because it was pure capitalism. The colonies had state banks for example.

No, it can't. Well, unless you radically redefine libertarianism to mean something radically different from actual liberty.

That being said, individual liberty covers discrimination. In American we've forgotten this ever since the Civil Rights Act stripped us of our freedom to kick anyone off our property because das rayciss. Liberty is capable of defending traditional values and racial purity but only if it is allowed to actually exist in its true form, not this bastardized version we get today. That's why Hoppe is so popular these days. He understood that culture is important, and those who don't accept the culture that makes liberty possible will tear it down. Thus, they must be kicked out of the society.

I'm suspicious of anyone that says "[nation] can go full NatSoc!" for the same reason. The Third Reich was the unique product of a Germanic culture in the works for hundreds of years. The mechanisms by which the system worked do not exist everywhere. America, for example, would not function in this manner. We do not have a unified identity and culture. That much is clear in recent years if you look at how even mild appeals to American identity causes convulsive kvetching. America is a Frankenstein monster of cultures that must be separated if they are to be made whole. I think ethnostates are a much better solution, at least as an intermediate to a new social order.

I'm double suspicious of those who focus on NatSoc economics above identity and culture. Crypto-commies, the lot of them. It's a means to an end, not the bedrock holding it together.

Capitalism promotes open borders and free trade. If thats not promoting globalism I really don't know what is.

Stop making stuff up. America was never nationalistic and was globalist FROM DAY 1, America never was a 100% white country.

If they're focused on their community then they aren't capitalists. Everyone wants to make money but, only kikes and their golems value money and material wealth over their people and nation

Centralized =/= totalitarianism

I too have my own reservations on giving absolute power over my life to bureaucrats

If France and UK were communist countries they would have still wanted to plunder germany. It wouldn't have made a difference.

Oh, so under "capitalism" we're just like kikes. Then what's the fucking problem? If Capitalism morphs us into kikes, then when you say "kikes control everything," who do you mean? Your argument is fucking retarded.

Indeed. Capitalism and Communism are two sides of the same shekel

Retarded as fuck…

Wait. Being genetically ethnocetrist it's possible if your race exhist and you know it.
If you are told that your race is the white rave, guess for who you'll be ethnocentrist?

user, many great white nationalist/traditionalist thinkers have criticised capitalism. Don't be so defensive about it.

user, the free market thinks your children should become faggots/trannies because it's profitable. What are you gonna do about it?

No shit, Shylock. you're still using the same shekel. Both of them need to be rid of.

When did I say kikes control everything? Again you cannot fucking read. I never said anything like that. You are clearly a shill trying to put words in my mouth

I think it's more of UK and France hating Germans and Germans hating them too.

Its true because they value their people over their money. Therefore, not capitalists

That's partly my point. Capitalism can work in an all white society built on common values and respect for countrymen.

You can have economic capitalism with closed borders and nationalist ideals. I'm not making anything up. America was not globalist from day one.
National Socialism would only be economically sustainable because of free markets operating within. National Socialism is the best form of government, especially right now. I used to be thrown off by it before I was redpilled because it had the world "socialism" in it, and I assumed their economics were the same brand of retarded economics of people like bernie. Not so. Free enterprise can sustain the reich.
Can Holla Forums please get the fuck off of this board.

THIS

Of course it was you idiot. America had a huge negro and injun minority from day 1, thus NOT nationalist but globalist.

Nobody here is Holla Forums. The far right has always been as much against capitalism as communism.

That retarded accusation was bound to come eventually. Whenever someone has a difference of opinion with one of you Hitler worshiping Nazi LARPers, it always devolves into "ur a shill!!" Well the average American is a shill then, because the average American isn't going to accept your stupid fucking political systems geared specifically toward German society and culture in the '30s.

Capitalism teaches whites that throwing other whites under the bus is okay as long as it's profitable. Margaret Thatcher close a large number of coal mines in the UK because importing coal was cheaper, even if it meant that white working class communities across the country would be destroyed. The same goes for what happened to the manufacturing industry in the US.

That's true. Pic related is a jew, mudslime, spick and nigger loving commie.

If you can't read my posts and keep saying I said things which I clearly never said then you're either a shill or someone who doesn't deserve to post. Either way ==GAS YOURSELF==

Making profit is the legal obligation of companies in my country. If the company's actions indicate an unwillingness to do so, they can lose their legal status of company. In a lot of countries this is even in the law, but it's widely accepted in the entire western world.

Here's a nice little quote from from kike Milton Friedman:

Capitalism is a disgusting kike system that only cares about material wealth at the detriment of everyone and everything else.

You sure? Because I'm pretty certain that charities are still a thing. And leftists are definitely more concerned with agenda pushing than they are with profit. Just look at shit like the Ghostbusters remake.

Explain to me how capitalism changes the natural state of people.
Then explain to me how national socialism changes that state.

Then explain how national socialism is the natural state when derivations of the market are the most common system to occur.

You're a fucking collectivist shill.

Capitalism asserts that trade is good because it benefits both countries. It does not promote open borders unless you grossly misinterpret it.

Trade does benefit both countries. This is a simple economic fact. Now a globalist perspective would be to allow this without tariffs or anything of the sort. A nationalist perspective would recognize that a strong enough economy, like the US, has enough price setting power to put a tariff in place and fuck over smaller countries while making a greater profit for itself.

Now here's the trick with open borders. Immigration is strictly speaking the additional of more labor, which is a good thing in theory. In practice this is only the case when the labor provides more capital than the cost of that labor. So if immigration brings in more damages in crime than it does benefit, that immigration is bad. If it's high-skilled non-criminals, it's good. A globalist would say that it doesn't matter, because everything spreads about. A nationalist would say that it does matter, and closed borders need to exist.

Which touches upon the issue - globalism/nationalism is a perspective to apply to the system; it is not a result of the system.

Use simple logic to show that's wrong for my individual household.

If I have children who are normal and straight, they will have a base cost of "X" and output "Y" in terms of labor, combined to create "Z" which is their value. If they are faggots/trannies they have a higher chance of suicide, which does lower "X", but lowers "Y" more than it lowers "X", creating a net loss to "Z". Gays have a higher rate of STDs, AIDS, and other health issues, meaning higher medical bills, which causes "X" to rise and potentially lowers "Y", which makes "Z" lower. Trannies have severe costs for surgery and medical things - "X" goes up and "Z" goes down. Essentially, in all of these cases, there is an increased cost.

For my household, and the economy as a whole, having regular children is more profitable. Now, regarding the "X" - who is profiting from those medical bills? Somebody else, who is pushing the agenda. But why is it profitable to them? It's profitable to them because of patenting in the medical industry, allowing them to make a lot of money off of these situations. Patent law is grossly anti-capitalism. If we remove those laws, then suddenly this is no longer profitable for anybody, and the situation is resolved.

See?

...

Private ownership does not imply the goal is capital, profit, money, and certainly not " the highest value", "profit at the expense of everything else." That definition you could just call Jewry, but it says nothing about the underpinnings of capitalism.

I do not support fractional reserve banking, gov't manipulating markets, fake entities with more rights than human beans, etc. But without property and the ability to control it fully (buying, selling, renting, trading, etc.) there is only communism.

Please clarify, you've got keys sticking or something.

Anti-clapistan shilling has been blatant lately. Not sure why. Just a change in d&c tactics?

Since when is the government controlling a market synonymous with capitalism?

You can keep using a snowflake definition, it just means you're talking to yourself.

Capitalism would work just fine if all the kikes were gassed. Communism is inherently kosher and there's no conceivable way of redeeming it.

Again, currency isn't the only form of wealth. Before capitalism or any other modern political systems existed, greedy people worked for their singular benefit at the expense of others, whether it was through the accumulation of land, slaves, or any number of other things. The reason she was able to do that is because government is overstepping. Why? Corporatism. Christ, you people actually push me more and more toward capitalism with every post. I don't even identify as a capitalist, I identify as a White Nationalist, yet I can't help but align with them over you people.

Okay, then NatSoc germany was globalist because they had over 100,000 kikes in their Army fighting for the Reich and had many kikes in high positions. Bullshit argument. Also, the kikes brought the niggers into our country, you know this
Capitalism can have rules. Capitalism is not anarchism. Certain boundaries can be placed upon the free market. Voluntary exchanges of value fed the Reich. Capitalism is an economic system that can be used in a totalitarian or libertarian degree of governance.

I think you're putting the cart before the horse. If your society has a singular identity and volk, it creates an Uberorganism. It will define the organization structure (the state) to match its demands. If free-market capitalism meets this requirement, it will be incorporated and vice versa.

The issue with first world nations is that they lack this solidarity and turn to other sources to unite them. Consumerism is the religion of North America and Europe. Without purpose, we worship at the altar of consumer goods to unify us. Those that identify capitalism itself as the problem have missed the point.

I didn't say you said it specifically, I was responding to the usual Nazi LARPer stance, which is heavily represented in this very thread. You all say the same damn shit, so I respond to you all in the same way. Just like with Leftists. You're all similar in thought to those of your respective political ideologies, because your political ideologies don't allow for any variance. Thinking outside of the box is punished. You people are drones.

It's not necessarily shilling, they just don't understand. They just repeat the same talking points Holla Forums repeats

Yes, consumerism is the enemy and is a direct result of taking a way a persons national identity.

thank you
Neither does any capitalist who actually understands what capitalism is and does.

That's a lie. They had some people who were PARTLY kike. And they were very small in numbers compared to the massive minorities in the US.

Only right at the beginning. These boundaries always break down because of the inherent nature of capitalism, which other anons have summed up perfectly above.

You realize that many of us have spent years repeating the same shit to all kinds of ourtsiders, including you? At one point, it's simply easier to strawman the shit out of it and go with personal attacks instead of repeating for the millionth time why your ideology is shit and won't solve the mess we're currently in.

Yeah most of those charities including the church are actually money laundering schemes or guilt our people to giving to other people like the poor negroes. Clinton Foundation, Bill Gates and others.
Capitalism changes the natural state of people by focusing them on money and material wealth and nothing else. Its only natural for jews.
Nat Soc only changes the natural state of defective humans. It makes the whole nation work for the betterment of the whole nation. Defective people who's natural state is selfish and/or subversive to the health of the state whether conscious or unconscious is changed. Normal healthy people who don't want to destroy the environment, torture animals, destroy the natural order between the sexes, allow profit to rule the land are not changed.
Never did I say that private ownership is bad. Reminder that Nat Soc Germany maintained private ownership of the means of production. Holy fuck you shills or retards are so bad today trying to put words in my mouth. Better luck next time faggot

They understand it won't solve the mess. They have no interest in solving the mess because they don't see the mess the same way you do. The problem with the mess isn't that it exists, it's that they feel their management of it is being undermined.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heroic_capitalism

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercapitalism_(concept_in_Italian_Fascism)

Pro-white collectivism is how we will defeat the kikes and shitskin hordes who seek to destroy us. Preaching individualism, universalism and colour-blindness gets us nowhere.

Except that I'm the radical here. Except that I'm the one speaking truth to power. Except that I'm the one who had to break free of the capitalist and communist programming of society that you still cling to. Except that I'm the one who will get fired for saying what I believe in publicly. Unlike you shabbos goy. You are supporting the system. You are supporting the reasons why the world is so fucked up

Uh…that proves what I said.

Therefore, YOU are the drone not, I

This.

You don't say

This. I really wonder how the naive fools (assuming they're not shills) plan on beating the kikes, the oldest and most powerful mafia in history, while being all about muh individualism.

Fucking. Delusional.

Nevermind bro, my bad.

This

How do you even plan to introduce a national socialist ideology to a country like UK or France. Both with centuries of colony mentality. To the point where they would rather tolerate niggers than germans or slavs or poles or etc.

So suddenly you are perfectly okay with half kikes when that fact is brought up?
Capitalisms inherent nature isn't to break down boundaries placed on it. Without the subversion of culture and values, the boundaries never would be broken. (((People))) have to come in and overtake the minds of the citizenry before the boundaries which were respected by the populace can begin to be hated by the populace.

Center it on old stock citizen. NatSoc is not pan-Europeanism or about "white people", it's about one's ethnicity. I don't see why France should have Germans in it or why Britain should tolerate Poles in their country. You're bad at this.

I've got to get off. We will just have to agree to disagree for now. But this is always good discussion.

Maybe you should worry less about getting fired and live your values. I'm an ancap and I make as little money as possible to get by because I don't want to give money to niggers and single moms and state workers and jews, and have spent years just helping people I value I don't anymore, saving it for my family or people who prove themselves to me first because money is just a means to an end and I have other goals.

While you, the natsoc, are too scared of losing your job to even be honest about your political views. That's a real abstract kind of fucking radical.

sounds like projection to me

you know how the opposite of a thing is the same as the thing guys

Capitalism's inherent nature is to seek profit. It was very profitable for big finance to break down social barriers. They doubled the workforce over night and that comes with suppressing wages and lowering the value of labor by breaking down the social boundaries of the roles of Men and Women in society. They help break down social barriers on concepts of community and race to make us all atomized, individualized economic consumers as well as to make us more accepting of them flooding our labor market with shit skins. Capitalism is an inherent agent of degeneracy, globalism, race mixing, destruction of gender roles, destruction of everything as long as the top can make a profit from it. Thats what its all about.

But here's the question: Are they all?
And what about private acts of charity done by private citizens? The things you don't see being flaunted.

Capitalism does not change the natural state of people. It was specifically created to use the natural state of people to benefit others. And lo and behold, the United States is the wealthiest nation in the world, with a dramatically high standard of living when you consider just how many minorities live here. To put that into perspective - a capitalist system in an only mostly white country is so efficient that it puts that nation and its people over homogeneous cultures. Now imagine if the US was all white.

And you did state private ownership was bad. Stop trying to twist things around.

Collectivism is always bad because it sacrifices individuality. It's individuals who do great things, and lead other individuals to assist them. A collective of unexceptional people can accomplish nothing without a spark, and collectivism kills that spark.

You want to play the way the enemy does? That's fine by me. But I don't believe sacrificing a central tenant of our cultural for glorified pest control is worthwhile.

fuck off

>>>/gaschamber/

almost all progress has been by associating individuals collaborating

Capitalism is simply owning the products of your labor, and those that agree to work for you agree to earn the salary you give them for their labor. Corporations don't exist without the state. Cheap labor from 3rd world countries does not exist unless the state allows it. There's litchrichley nothing wrong with capitalism. All perceived problems come from the state- not saying the state can't make capitalism better.
t. National Socialist

I have been very public. You seem to only be an ANCAP as a reaction to living in our non nation economic zone sucking money from Whites to give to non Whites as many others are. I bet that if you lived in a healthy entho-state you would support Nat Soc principles as much of America did in the early 1900s. You're the one who called me a drone. It is you who are a drone. You offer no change to the system. I have actual solutions to the system. You do not.

Simply stated: Communism has state sanctioned monopolies while free market capitalism leads to private monopolies. Both pursue globalism to prevent price competition (of labor or goods). All monopolies prevent innovation and stagnate productivity.

Free markets and communism are both just simplistic ideologies. Neither work well in practice, the answer is somewhere in between. Protectionism can be good or bad. It's good to protect nascent industries from foreign subsidized industries. Domestic protectionism of monopolies are not good.

Morons like to pick an ideology out and hold onto it for dear life. Nationalists play the policy which give them the upper hand after playing out the scenarios.

the free market does not think anything, it is a controlled market by the globalists…. they are using crony capitolism

No you.

Nope, that's a strawman on your part.

Of course it is. The goal of Capitalism is profit, as big as possible, as quickly as possible. Guess what hinders said profit? Borders. Tradition. Religion. Protectionism. Those kinds of things. Hence why rules imposed on Capitalism always break down AND why Capitalism always is a liberal and globalist force.
Something as "Reactionary Capitalism" is really a complete oxymoron.

But this has all been explained countless times by people like Evola or de Benoist.

Fine with me. In fact, so do I. Have a good one.

You forgot the pursuit of profit. "Unless the state allows it" and THAT is why capitalists want no market controls. That is why capitalists want no social controls. They want a weak state so they are free to do anything to gain profit.

You seem more concerned with being different–in a place where the most outspoken people all think like you–and not concerned enough with anything else. You might just be the self-obsessed kike others like you constantly describe in this thread. Here's an idead, oh rebel. If you're so grand, get the hell off Holla Forums and go spark a political movement. Go start up groups and spread awareness. So long as you're just sitting here on Holla Forums, you're in absolutely no position to talk down to anyone. You haven't done shit to warrant your self-praise.

You are the one who is bad at this. You think Britain should be for the british(which I agree with),but while the british still think in terms of a colonial empire and find more in common with the colonies than closely related by DNA countries that will remain impossible.
Another issue is a popular belief among the pro immigration fags in both UK and USA, that is spreading to France and Germany. The belief that after a few generations the immigrant becomes lazy and refuses to work cheapass jobs, seeking something better and high paid. They believe that a few generations and those immigrants are exhausted and new ones have to be brought in.
This creates an endless cycle of letting more and more people into a country. You have to unfuck that sort of mentality to change those two countries. It was the same shit back around ww1 with france, now with the UK as well.
You are putting yourself against centuries of established beliefs. It's no wonder Germany accepted natsoc ideology, while britain and france vehemently opposed it, even when not looking at the power struggle that was going on. The groundwork for an immigration crisis was already being built for france and the UK, while none of that was happening with Germany, until the jews started demanding more arabs in the 60ties and now refugees.

In what way is NatSoc significantly different than Bernie Sandersism

Lurk for 2 years before posting. Go to natsocarchive.wordpress.com for primary documents on NatSoc written by NatSocs during the time of NatSoc. Even reading the damn wiki page on National Socialism is a good starter for fucks sake.

Way ahead of you faggot. I only brought the fact that I am the antithesis to this corrupt system because you called me a drone.

I'm in no way arguing for ancrapitalist state. I feel that a lot of people swallow the Marxist concept of capitalism=corporatism hook, line, and sinker.

You really need to stop posting and read some fucking threads. The newfaggotry in this thread is off the charts.

I have

I want to hear it from YOU, faggot. Tell me why natsoc would work.

Back during colonial days, they didn't import the subhumans from where they conquered, they imported the goods which were produced there and exported themselves to rule over the natives. It only became the thing to do after kikes infiltrated their governments, somewhere after WW2.

Lurk for 2 years or get the fuck out of the board, triple nigger.

No, Capitalism was created by jews so they could keep jewing people. America actually has a low material standard of living compared to the other industrialized nations. If you measure the non material standard of living then its even worse because of capitalism

You are a drone. You show absolutely no propensity for independent thought. You strictly adhere to another man's ideology and question nothing about it.

Then read the thread retard. Tell me what primary documents on Nat Soc have you read? I've spent quite a while explaining Nat Soc today to others and I already gave you a source for Nat Soc documents. Go educate yourself. I'm not here to serve you

You could argue that about britain but France was eager to do that even around ww1. I'm a bulgarian and my ancestors fought french niggers in ww1.
It was bound to become a crisis at some point.

You sound pretty new yourself bud. 2-3 years ago there was actual discussion on Holla Forums. Still waiting to see if any of you actually know what you're talking about

if you mean conservative, family and future oriented values, then I already do. If you mean doing some harsh shit out of necessity to unfuck society, I would. If you mean being economically illiterate, then no.

learn 2 ID
this is too stupid to even respond to

Are you living off of welfare? That would certainly colour your advocacy in a self-serving light.

Having a business that is zero growth is fine in capitalism. If you have a family business that produces the same amount every year and it raises successive generations of children, is that not a laudable goal as well?

you just keep using capitalist as a synonym for jew and think you are saying something useful.

Because I've spent years studying it and find it to be the truth. The ideology is sublime. The man himself was imperfect as with everyone else. Hitler made plenty of mistakes. And what are you? Some permanent skeptic faggot who is too wimpy to make a stand on something? I question everything. Including the nature of capitalism. Something you should do. We were all indoctrinated from birth on the benevolent wonders of capitalism. You are still a drone to that thinking.

Sad!

Is your issue with the actual concept of "capital" or is it with the unhinged ethics system where profit by any and all means is the goal of companies and corporations?

I'm not using jew as synonym for capitalist but, the pursuit of profit over everything else is jewish nature and they are definitely the best at it. I work, I just know how to hide my power level. I don't open conversations with "The good guys lost WW2" but, I always question people's preconceptions. I lead them on conversations that will make them come to the conclusion of Nat Soc principles without explicitly saying so until they are on board enough.

You sound like an unopinionated, self-obsessed drone to me. "I've studied for years." By that you mean you've been on Holla Forums for years. Politics to you sounds more like a dick measuring contest than a means to accomplish anything productive. All you're here to do is grandstand. Just like a Leftist, might I add. You're nothing but the flip side of a comrade LARPing Antifa faggot.

Wrong. Again I've read many many primary documents on Nat Soc. Quite often even Holla Forums gets things wrong about Nat Soc because they learn about it here rather than from primary documents. I've been a Nat Soc since before I came on Holla Forums. I even keep putting up the natsocarchive.wordpress.com so everyone else here can learn for themselves rather than taking my word for it.

The second. Nat Soc had private ownership of the means of production and of course used money and other things. They just made sure that the financial powers of the nation benefited the nation first rather than the financial interests over the nation

get off of Holla Forums

Yes there was, after blowing the fuck out of lolbergs and ancaps so many times they took their ball and fucked off to >>>/liberty/ Now with all the transplants from reddit and cuckchan we're stuck having to repeat ourselves? Fuck off faggot, the information you're asking for is easily found all around the site and I won't try to summarize Mein Kampf and the Manifesto for the abolition of interest slavery in a few paragraphs just to shut your Jewish mouth.

How much are they paying you to shitpost?

so you have NOT been very public about, so quit trying to come off as the most edgy kid on the block, we're all anonymous and no one cares.

If you are having success guiding people to a whiter future, keep it up. If you are trying to be anti-capitalism to normies, you best stick with anti-Fed or something or you're punching to the right

So your problem is not with private property, but solely with some people's goals.

/liberty/ seems to have always been left-libertarians and generally just lolbergs fucking with each other. But the right-wingers never left Holla Forums. You can claim btfo but the proofs have always been lacking.

Back to leftypol you fag.

The left would never allow the minorities not to get (((Equal))) job opportunities and so as we see today inforce minority quotas. So you would never have a meritocracy to begin with.

$275 every 200 posts. I manage 1000 per hour across 40 IPs. So you can imagine how much I'm making. I'm a third of the posts on Holla Forums myself. I'm half the lengthy conversations you see. I made about a fifth of the threads, and in those specific threads I account for 90% of the comments.

They really increased the pay, I still remember when we made poor kids cry and quit because they were paid a dime a post, that is when they got paid at all because they never managed to do anything. Kikes must be really scared to increase it more than tenfold.

wrong, capitalism is not our system our system is freedom and capitalism is a by-product of freedom.

Capitalism says that men own the fruits of their labour.
Communism says they don't.

The government isn't out stopping the big bad corporations from enslaving you fam; on the contrary they are directly aiding them.

Why do I need a license to distill and sell alcohol? Taxes theft and because it would upset the other companies if people could do it. Why do I have to have a license to practice medicine? Is it because muh safety? No, it's because a bunch of people who were already practicing got together and decided to form a monopoly and demand the government artifically back them up with the threat of violence.

Literally everything you're saying about capitalism being bad is only happening because of communistic/socialist laws.

National Socialism is a happy medium. It is very close to what we have now. Why isn't it working? Because niggers and kikes and muh melting pot.

The real redpill is realizing that without shitskins or kikes literally any system of government would work fine- even full blown anarchy

shit fam sign me up. I'm even half jewish:^)

Reminder: OP has never been to Berlin

I kind of like the way Vikings lived. Free men living under another who didn't directly dictate how they live. They adventured on a whim. Settled land wherever they damn well pleased. You can't maintain a civilization like that, but I'd love to live like that, honestly.

The hegelian dialectic was my first baby redpill

Freemasony didn't become Kike controlled until the 1800s. Prior to that they were just a mystery school.
There is a whole timeline of Kikes getting control one by one over secret societies and public and private institutions.
The Kikes didn't invent Freemasonry, they simply subverted it.
Which is also why Freemasons shouldn't be tolerated, as they are now in this day and age, ZOG puppets.

So instead yo explained absolutely nothing

Fuck you. You've provided nobody with anything of value. If you aren't willing to write a few paragraphs just fuck off and don't shit up the board.

"Capitalism" doesn't exist, as it was only ever a strawman invented by Mr Karl Marx so he could "solve the problem."

Only if one side of the coin is face down in dog shit and that side represents communism.

This is how you breed newfags. Don't need to know anything if you just keep parroting.

very true george washington warned about it

true and Jacobin before him

No it cannot. They are entirely separate, libertarianism focuses far too much on the individual over the whole.

This kind of thinking is just ridiculous to me. It's a literal proclamation of Jewish superiority. I came across a kike who prided himself on Holla Forums rhetoric and kept trying to force down my throat the same things you say for the sake of his frail ego. I believe Jews are inferior. I certainly don't give them credit for every event that ever takes place under the sun like you people do. That's merely an admission of your inferiority.

libertarianism is a little like Proudhonism absolute individualism at its core, that's probably why masses of people couldn't pick up on it because it had so little to do with a collective

"Bernie Sanderism" is Marxist socialism. He was fine with replacing the demographic of the nation, whereas National Socialism is not. Marxist Socialism goes like this: "Those that have, owe it to those that don't to give it all up". Contrast the message of National Socialism, "Do everything you can for your own people, and raise them up as well".

We have proven time and time again, no matter where in the world we go, that we are more capable of achieving prosperity than any other people on earth. Why should our focus be outward, when our efforts would be better spent inward? We don't owe it to shitskins and foreigners to give them welfare(Which would quickly dry up in the Marxist utopia of no work), land, etc.

Assuming you aren't just pretending to be retarded, is it really that difficult for you to tell the difference between helping your own "tribe" over helping others?

I'm just gonna assume you meant to reply to someone else.

No, I was responding to you. Although that also goes to anyone else who credits Jews with ownership of everything, and responsibility for every single event for centuries that they don't like. It's such a mindset of inferiority.

Doesn't matter what it says, the government is still going to take from you, whether you believe in the system or not. That implies there's choice in the matter, when there isn't. I agree with your stance on non-whites, but not with any form of Socialism. Nationalist or otherwise.

Jews don't own everything, but they do own a lot.
Being successful liars and conspirators is not a sign of "superiority". It just means they are very prolific parasites.
You can ignore the evidence all you want, but your notion of superiority/inferiority dualism is nonsense.
Jews own most of the world because people like you were too stupid to do anything about it.

There you go again. People like me. Well the majority must be like me, because you claim Jews own "most of the world." Therefore you're saying Jews are smarter than most people. So yeah, that's a proclamation of superiority. Are you a kike or just someone with an inferiority complex?

The problem is that due to all of the non-whites in white countries, the whites default to capitalism; they think: we can't have socialism because niggers and others would be equals.

That is the predominant "fear" that any staunch capitalist in America and elsewhere has, even to the point that they agree that enthonationalist socialism would be ideal, that capping the salaries of fatcats and giving living wages and/or welfare to whites would be fine if it was just an ethnically-homogenous state.

But it's not, and it never will be again, and there's nowhere left to go in the world. So they accept Jewish capitalism, they accept becoming Judaized and fucking over their fellow white, treating them like a piece of stock, replaceable, utilizing ruthless capitalist methods to "compete" with other businesses, which means fuck your white man wage, fuck your livelihood, fuck your dignity and standard of living, because you're a profit-generator first, and a "white" second, even to your white boss.

Or else he'll lose to those who do treat their workers that way, and the business will be gone.

Further adding on to what I've said.
Would you consider a virus superior to you because it managed to kill you?
Superiority/Inferiority only works in contexts of things being Juxtaposed.
For example you could compare two bodybuilders and objectively compare who is inferior and superior with their performance.
Do you know how the Rothschilds got control of the Bank of England? They tricked the British investor class into thinking that Napoleon was victorious at Waterloo for a brief time. In that time they all sold their shares which were promptly bought up by the Rothschilds in London at the time.
They had sent town criers into the financial district and warned everyone that Napoleon had defeated the British army.
The Rothschilds didn't get control because they were superior investors, but because they were liars and conspirators.
Now take your shit and stick it back where it came from, stop projecting moron, and work on your self esteem.

You don't even understand the concepts you are talking about.

So they were superior strategists?

...

That's like saying I'm better at Poker because I cheated by hiding cards in my sleeves.
Well you're just a kike lover then, I don't know what else to say.
You seem to offended of the idea of people pushing back against Kikes and want them to lord over the goyim.

On her way to work one morning
Down the path along side the lake
A tender hearted woman saw a poor half frozen snake
His pretty colored skin had been all frosted with the dew
"Poor thing," she cried, "I'll take you in and I'll take care of you"
"Take me in tender woman
Take me in, for heaven's sake
Take me in, tender woman," sighed the snake

She wrapped him up all cozy in a comforter of silk
And laid him by her fireside with some honey and some milk
She hurried home from work that night and soon as she arrived
She found that pretty snake she'd taken to had been revived
"Take me in, tender woman
Take me in, for heaven's sake
Take me in, tender woman," sighed the snake

She clutched him to her bosom, "You're so beautiful," she cried
"But if I hadn't brought you in by now you might have died"
She stroked his pretty skin again and kissed and held him tight
Instead of saying thanks, the snake gave her a vicious bite
"Take me in, tender woman
Take me in, for heaven's sake
Take me in, tender woman," sighed the snake
"I saved you," cried the woman
"And you've bitten me, but why?
You know your bite is poisonous and now I'm going to die"
"Oh shut up, silly woman," said the reptile with a grin
"You knew damn well I was a snake before you took me in
"Take me in, tender woman
Take me in, for heaven's sake
Take me in, tender woman," sighed the snake

If you win you win. How does the path there matter once you've gotten there? You're in control at that point. Are you saying that the only way you'd see our nations return to homogeneity is through absolutely honorable and moral means? What are you going to do, create a first world paradise in Africa and just ask the niggers to leave the US?

Nah, WASP's and Dutch built the capitalist system out ex nihilo and created an immensely complex and powerful economic system. Jewish atomization, corruption, and fifth-column degeneration of society beyond what was the ideal capitalism of Adam Smith and Thomas Paine, while functioning as a cohesive tribe and utilizing nepotistic practices, is what undermined the whites under capitalism.

I never said any of those things.
Removing shitskins from our lands is fair, it's war.
So if what Kikes do is fair, why do you complain about us pushing back?
I never said it was unfair by the way, I was simply demonstrating that your superior/inferior fixation was misplaced and entirely meaningless in the context of what you are saying.
If I were a kike I'd probably hate the goyim too because that would be in my nature, but I'm not a kike so it's in my best interest to fight back, it's not hard to figure out. You just seem to be a bit brainwashed.
What Africans do in Africa is their business.

Oyvey

Also, societies must be built from the ground up. Nations continue on what they are built upon, so if you build your nation on being mindlessly greedy then what fate you will have is already determined.
The journey is more important than the goal, because without the journey the goal is impossible, thinking the ends justify the means always inevitably fails as there is no basis to continue to retain the goal you fought for.

Go for it. I'm complaining about the incessant "duh jew control everything and brainwash everyone" rhetoric. It's annoying. It's self-deprecation and a blatant admission of inferiority. Superior and inferior are appropriate terms here. He who controls is superior. He who is controlled is inferior. How a person gains control is redundant, because their methods allowed them to gain control, and those methods were outside of the scope or ability of others. I don't believe this. You do. I believe Judaism is just a very successful supremacist ideology that aids Jews in creating a very successful social network, but that genetically Jews are inferior filth.

Because it's true, they are the MSM in most countries, they own financial institutions, they own most corporate entities>
We don't give a fuck if you are tired of it or not, go to your safe space if you don't want people to try to discern that which is true>
You can project all you want about inferiority, we don't give a shit how you think about it, and to think you spent 30 posts ITT reiterating the same tired shit no one cares about.
Only you think Jews are superior for being excellent at subversion and lying.
No one argues that they aren't excellent at what they do, but it doesn't make them superior in all respects because their field is actually quite limited.
You're asking for people to ignore facts so they wouldn't fulfill some weird notion you have about human relations.

Well you couldn't stop them. Clearly you're intellectually inferior by your own admission. Also if a person is susceptible to being "brainwashed," they too are intellectually inferior. Don't ignore facts, but don't go around treating Jews like gods among us who dictate all actions and control all aspects of humanity and life. It's pathetic.

In a healthy society, "The government" is you and yours, not some shadowy in-group of long nosed foreigners. The concept isn't, itself, the problem, but people today are so alienated from their own leaders(Even normies, who only consume kike propaganda, which should tell you something about the origin of this alienation) that it's difficult to imagine a government that isn't separated from its people. "Fuck everyone else, success only for me" isn't the answer to kike poison user, ethnonational unity is.

Basically this. You do know that when banks lend you money they don't actually give you anything? It's just a debt you've incurred, and when you "spend" that money you transfer the debt to another party, which then usually goes into another bank. Thus, no actual money is needed.

I'm a White Nationalist. I want homogeneity. I want unity. I still though do not and will never trust a government to not devolve into corruption. Go as far back as you want. All the way back to kinds and queens. Those at the top always abuse their power for their benefit. Government should be a tool, not a leader.

“The man of the future will be a mongrel. The Eurasian-Negroid race of the future, similar in its outward appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples with a diversity of individuals[…]Russian Bolshevism constitutes a decisive step towards this purpose where a small group of communist spiritual aristocrats govern the country and consciously break with the democratism which nowadays controls the rest of the world. The fight between Capitalism and Communism over the inheritance of the beseeched blood aristocracy is a fratricidal war of the victorious brain aristocracy[…]The general staff of both parties is recruited from Europe's spiritual leader race: the Jews. Capitalism and Communism are both rational, both mechanical, both abstract, both urbane.”
- Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, the Rockefeller/CIA-funded, Rothschild/Warburg-friendly, founding President of the original European Union

balder.org/judea/Richard-Coudenhove-Kalergi-Practical-Idealism-Vienna-1925.php

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Committee_on_United_Europe

Fascinating how this mental illness can take root in anyone.

Where did I admit that? Being shamelessly willing to lie doesn't mean you are intellectually superior.
Ridiculous strawman, Jews don't control all life, otherwise we wouldn't be having this conversation, they are simply extremely active in trying to influence the world and the societies they inhabit which makes them a problem.
You're just a fucking tool, you're telling me not to ignore facts, but me pointing out fact somehow means I'm venerating them as gods, which I haven't done, I explained how they work, and they are not omnipotent.
If I thought I had the chance to oppose them, that defeats the notion I thought of them as gods. You're just ridiculous and desperately want to make a point that isn't there.

A homogeneous nation that takes pride in it's race is necessary for National Socialism.

National Socialism is not necessary for homogeneity and pride though.

I have to admit this is getting funny now. I'm reading through and laughing. I stand by my original point, but I concede you have some points. I'm mostly just bored and talking now…

(34)
Do you even know what National Socialism entails? You can't have homogeneity without an ethnostate, and National Socialism is the only working doctrine for one.
The United States citizenry was originally very ethnically white, but they didn't make any provisions to keep it that way, so it failed in so being an ethnostate.

Socialism is retarded. A large state bureaucracy that controls every aspect of your life is only something that pathetic and submissive people want. They feel like if the state controls every aspect of their lives they will become better people as they lack the mental fortitude and strength to do it by themselves.

The worst do seem always get on top. tbh I just hate being told what to do, hate authority, hate the government. It's impossible for me, presently, to conceive of liking to be led, to be ruled over.
EthnoNationalist liberalism seems possible: minimum government and maximum freedom for us, kick out or kill everyone else. Welfare for the disabled and elderly, courts for those who exploit ignorance etc.

Total strawman. With no kikes around why the fuck would your child be learning about gay sex? Your daughter turned into a whore? Again, this is pure kikery and in a white ehtnostate with traditional European values, with appreciation for our shared heritage, it would not happen.

No shit

National Socialism is not Socialism, it has literally to do with Society rather than economics as left-wing socialism is concerned with.
Also you're making the false conflation that preventing certain things from arriving onto the scene means you are "controlling all aspects of life". Which is untrue, you were arguably more free than Nazi Germany then you would have been it's contemporary United States.
Nazi Germany is more free than 90% of the countries that exist today.
Government intervention is a tool to prevent the destruction of the society it is supposed to protect.
Libertarian/Ancap does not work because it creates a power vacuum, and nature abhors a vacuum.
If you allow anything to take place in your society than anyone willing to do harm can and will take advantage of that fact.

No you weren't.

You are contradicting yourself with:

It is totalitarian and your local bureaucrat runs your life.

Hi anarchist

Don't strawman me. Not wanting totalitarianism and some bean counting bureaucrat running your life does not make you an anarchist.

Wait, did you really just ask not to be "strawmanned" when in your previous post you sincerely tried to play off these two lines:
as contradictory? I'm sure that user is coming up with a much cleaner reply, but you should know by now this audience doesn't buy your shit Holla Forums.

Answer me this user, without ad hominems, would you rather be a serf or a free man?

Sure thing retard. Also I didn't contradict myself, the third quote you posted reinforced the second. I don't see how I could make it clearer.

nah, you're a nigger

not an argument, but you are a submissive cuck

You haven't presented a single argument in this entire thread, fuck off lol

Are you saying the FDR administration wasn't a bureaucracy?
Can you define a bureaucracy?

Astroturfing plebbit user detected

I am not defending FDR. What I am saying is that under the NatSoc system your local party leader had a final say in whether or not you live or die. Do you deny that NatSoc germany was totalitarian?

Also what differentiates a bureaucracy from a regular government?

A bureaucracy is just a group of non-elected government officials/employees.

You sure got me good, agen-I mean, user! Man how dare I not take your constant attacks on a white ethnostate seriously, it's almost like you're not worth more than a shitpost

Source?
Germany was very much Totalitarian which I am fine with but your charge was that it was Bureaucracy. Which you have yet to define.

I know what it is, but if that's the case, Hitler was democratically elected. That other user is just a retard.

Fair enough, but all governments have layers of unelected officials with varying levels of power which may or may not represent their people well. If the government controls >~50% of the wealth of a nation the people can't be said to have economic freedom. I think that economic freedom is necessary for other types of freedom to exist. Like another comment of mine here implies I do think it is possible to combine European ethnic nationalism with elements of liberalism. Perhaps that thought will change soon.

National Socialism is a philosophy.
We also don't use identity politics here, as a heads up for you and the other mouth-breathing retards who have infested this board.

I don't mind paying taxes if it means more beautiful white women giving birth from their beautiful pink pussies.

Right now, taxes/welfare only serve to boost shitskin population.

Economic freedom is good because it promotes growth and nothing is better than the free market for determining the needs of the everyday person.
National Socialism embraced the good of a free market, but however a truly free market can be exploited against the interests of your own people.
For example if I bought large tracts of land that happened to have most of my countries oil reserves accessible to it, if I were to decided to give that access away to a foreign power it would serve to ultimately undermine our nation as a whole as we'd be depriving ourselves of important natural resources simply because one person was intent on serving the interests of a foreign power over our own.
Not really disagreeing with what you said, I'm just iterating what NS entails. There's a reason that NS Germany became extremely productive after they took the power back from the globalists.
An interesting thing to note is that they were actually heavily inspired by the early United States, and the economic system they used, Public Fiat (Government Control of Currency backed by productivity) was the system Benjamin Franklin had advocated for in the United States.

I think it's past OP's bedtime. Go be dumb somewhere else you simpleton.

Our current system. Allows globalist kikes to run wild, using money to both undermine and control the government, institute social engineering programs and agendas, influence the education system, run wild in the media spinning any narrative that suits them best. Lax border control, weak cultural identity, complete erosion of traditions and values in the name of a nebulous ideal of "freedom" (which is actually just degeneracy). Public servant who see themselves as the ruling class or modern nobility, rather than being the best and brightest putting their skills to work for their country. Worst of all, using the average citizen as a bank account to pay for a vast number of social safety net programs which are tuned in a way to make it so the average citizen cannot use them, but illegal immigrants and people who aren't paying taxes, aren't educated, and who hate the country can claim a substantial amount of free shit. Not to mention excessively wasteful spending on globalist charity and

We are living in Hitler's nightmare. Everything he wanted to stop and prevent is what we're doing right now.

What a gay thread.

Capitalism and Communism are essentially the same system. And in-so-far as Socialism is a means to bring about Communism, Capitalism is a means to bring about this form of Super-Capitalism we have today. Different lies, the same master, the same result. All power is consolidated into jewish hands. You hit the nail on the head there.

National Socialism gives a third option not many are aware of. Most people see a monochromatic view of politics. The right, and the left. When in reality both of those wings are wings of the same bird. National Socialism often gets characterized as "far-right" when it would better be described as the far center. It isn't so much an economic theory – unlike Fascism, as it is a philosophy. It's a worldview, a mindset and an obligation first and foremost.

It extends beyond policies and laws, no two National Socialist countries will be the same. It recognizes that people are different. Americans have different values, problems and economic challenges than the Dutch, or Greeks. Thus, in recognizing this fact of nature and life (unlike Communists, who in their lies deny the diversity of the human race, believe one system will work everywhere equally.) the ideology will be fused into the soul and nature of the people, and at the same time will be a reflection of those values and natural tendencies which characterize a people.

The hallmark of a good Roman emperor is balance. I feel National Socialism, in that sense is the most balanced and virtuous message and system of thought to exist. When I say balance I don't mean watering down your message or being less extreme, but a balance in governance. A median between freedom and order, between purity and degeneracy, I think that's really where this shines. The race stuff really isn't extreme. It's a natural way of thought that has existed for thousands of years. Only in these last hundred or so years has our view been skewed so much that acknowledging race is extreme.

Also, NS is pretty ebin metaphysically.

Well, there's already NazBol, why the fuck not NatLolb?

Does this have a meaning I don't know? I thought we were trying to wake up and mobilise the white man for the survival of our people. 14 words and so forth

lolbergs who don't want to get called racist say the same thing, 'we're not left OR right.' The part of natsoc focused on natural order is very right wing. The people who want to make it about welfare and nationalising industries and outlawing interest are left wing. If you want to differentiate the worldview from the policies, then I imagine there is very little any of us would disagree with.

But National Socialism is neither left nor right you nitwit. Left/right is a false political dichotomy.

No. Reread my post.
Natural order is just that. Natural. It doesn't have anything to do with the right or left wing. Commies just deny it exists.

I never said any of that.

Lol ok. Not that I don't love a good talk on that subject, but we're pretty much all in agreement on it.

Innit though? :^)

Doublethinking at its finest.
WAR IS PEACE
PEACE IS WAR
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
SLAVERY IS FREEDOM

Holla Forums rejects both Communists and Capitalists.
You probably don't know Capitalism's true meaning and must have some cuckservative/libertard idea of what it is.

You mean decentralized socialism

source
No, Marxist Socialism goes like "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need"

Absolutely filtered

And out of chaos came order, not more chaos.

polite sage

...

...

I thought he was a jew. Looks it.

...

“What each of us receives must first have been produced by another; no one can receive more than the others have produced. Thus the problem of currency is no artificial one, but merely a question of production, a question of the organization of work and of the distribution of the results of work.” – Adolf Hitler

This is not identity politics, because it wants a homogenous society devoid of different groups, whereas Identity Politics wants a multi-cultural society with no goal for unification, be either race, culture or whatever, because it focus only on the individual as opposed to us.
National Socialism can be applied to every kind of people there, even Black Islamists - each people must have their land, when they live amongst their equals and practices their ways, without the interference of special-need groups living in an infiltrated parasitic manner.

Also
Filtered.

The only reason I'm tripfagging is so people know who I am, I got "doxed" on these threads

...

...

That's no excuse to be an attention whore.

Pseudo intellectual bullshit with no basis in reality let alone economics.. aka straight outta leftypol.

Lame ass bait post like this gets at least a 3/10 though for the replies.

Can you support and elucidate your own position? Or are you just emotionally reacting and don't want to actually add to the discussion like some cuckchan refugee?

I encourage all anons to annotate the communist manifesto to get a real grasp on not only communism, but capitalism too.

What makes the communist manifesto so dangerous are Marx's (for the most part) legitimate criticisms of capitalism's negative effects on culture, the natural order, and the working class.

The greatest redpill of all comes when you realize that communism is just an advanced form of capitalism, the bourgeois replaced by an even smaller class, the bureaucratic class, and the ultimate corporation, the state, using workers as slaves, much like the many bourgeois corporations subjugating the working class before the revolution. Of course Marx goes on and on about how all capital will be redistributed from the bourgeois to the proles(It is just redistributed to the bureaucratic class, the proles often worse off than they were under capitalism) , and all property relations will be abolished in favor of a single class that will be totally equal and blah blah blah, none of the Major points of marx's theory hold true in reality, it always ends up like this

you can make assertions all you want, but you never backed it up.

I didn't say you did, those are just common left-wing policies espoused in these threads. I was using them and 'natural order' to point out what is commonly meant by "left" and "right."

I don't even know what you mean there.

but muh horseshoe

Of course this is all relative to the stated goals of marx and how the reality of it affects the working class, I am quite ignorant of economic, but i attempt to increase my knowledge daily.

It's true, we need something between state capitalism and national socialism or maybe voluntarism/tribalism if living in small, all white community.

Another point, capitalism isn't inherently evil, but when the Jews are in positions of power in any political or economic system, It's bound to turn out badly. The cat that this has been the case for most modern economic/political systems will of course leave us with a strong bias.

*fact not cat

I'm tired

Yes, but trying to formulate political and economic systems for our ethnostate is futile while the TRIBE is in power, anywhere.

Actually NatSoc and communism are the 2 sides of the same (socialist) medal.
I dont want to live in either, both systems are big brother states and this sucks.

marx was out to destroy culture and natural order, his criticisms were just background jew noises.

now that is some serious heresy
reported

Jesus you could atleast pretend you're one of us.
You guys have the same posting style and make the same non-arguments over and over without explaining your reasoning.

My point. His criticisms are at the beginning of the manifesto, they are meant to be disarming. Marx knew damn well what he was doing when he write this shit.

He presents a valid problem, deflects criticism away from Jews, and presents a system that sounds nice on paper, but only serves to empower Jews to the extreme.

*wrote

also

*reader

it's not extreme capitalism though, unless your definition of capitalism is just jews trying to enslave the goyim

I do not think he does. He basically says everything is class struggles and blames the bourgeoisie. Saying 'there are problems and here is the enemy' is not actually presenting a valid problem.

Perhaps I could have worded that better. What I meant by that was more along the lines of capitalism's final form, the amalgamation off all corporations and the bourgeois into the state and bureaucratic class. Rather than extreme in the sense that all market restrictions are done away with.

Capitalism is used as a vessel for this

Capitalism's destruction of humans down to their most base animal instincts of pleasure seeking and pure self interest, the slavery of the working class, and the annihilation of individuality through the destruction of all cultures into a single cosmopolitan goop seems like a valid problem to me.

To an extent, but the first few pages are dedicated to quite valid criticisms of capitalism, like I stated here
He presents the valid problem of (((bourgeois))) run capitalism,and it's oppression of proles(goys), then presents his "solution" (capitalism's final form)

Like I said, he is deflecting blame from jews.

this
this as well

and say we did go back to a 1791 government.
Whats preventing it from being infiltrated and subverted again? Even if we gas every single jew on the planet, whats to stop just a bunch of greedy fucks from conspiring to take it down? The federalist government is one to admire for sure, but not one that can lead us to the stars. Nascent colonies on other solar systems can use it to govern themselves untill we figure out FTL, but until then aryan blood must be the foundation of govenment, not ideals that are tossed to the wind when people are hungry enough, or too fat and lazy to care.

i mostly agree, the perfect society would be made up of people that are going to create the best society. anybody else whether jew kik or shitlib should die even if they are of clean ethnicity. you see the problem with all leaders even Hitler is they foster a society of the weak, because leaders lead those who cannot lead themselves. it should be as you said free people joining together where every man leads himself but they work together because they all want what is best for society. when the revolution comes there will need to be anarchy (and i mean true anarchy) because the leeches of society will not be able to survive but we will and eventually we will pull ourselves out from the mess because we are the ones that have always built the great parts of societies but then let other people ruin it.

okay, that I can agree with, we're most of the way there in the west right now. The difference is I wouldn't call that capitalism.

but that's all bullshit. None of those things happened in the time period he was referencing. He had NO good criticism, he was just appealing to people that their problems weren't their fault but this other class, using invented science and history. I'm sure it's throughout, but the fuckery starts from the beginning.

wasn't that guy planted to discredit someone? Besides, none of the libertarians here are the cultural marxist leftist types.
and that's one reason I consider my oath to defend the constitution broken

ITT: Holla Forums does another excursion to Holla Forums under the guise of natzuuulsouc, propagates their cancerous marxism and anti-capitalism. Gets BTFO'D once again.

Nobody cares for your slave mentality and nanny government. Capitalism is an expression of individualism and natural selection. It got corrupted by the same kikes that created communism and it's central planning as a hegelian reaction so they can push the overton window.

Marxists want complete governmental control over their lives becouse they're lazy, stupid and generally too incompetent to live them by themselves. And then they just project their incompetency onto others as many other sociopaths do.

You should go back to your Holla Forums playpen and off yourself so other lefties get an inspiration.

That's why cuckservatives and lolbergs always fiercely defend capitalism in all its forms, because if they don't, they might be called a communist. The jews really succeeded in their d&c here.

So? You're boxing a phantom. You aren't talking to conservative Republicans shouting, "MUH REAGANOMICS!" You're talking to what appears to be ancap libertarians who use the term Capitalism in a completely different way. There's an entire field of philosophy dedicated to this. One of the primary underlying assumptions is that centralization of power is bad and is inevitably utilized for corruption, whereas decentralization of power is good and makes corruption more realistically manageable. Here's some reading on this if you're interested.
mises.org/library/what-we-mean-decentralization

>If fifty people decided voluntarily to set up an organization for common services or self-defense of their persons and properties in a certain geographical area, then the boundaries of that association, based on the just property rights of the members, will also be just.
Murray Rothbard, mises.org/blog/just-boundaries-and-national-self-determination

If you really think about it for a minute, I think you'll find that ancaps are arriving at basically the same place as Nationalists, or at least at a highly compatible place, when it comes to defending whites against the Jews and their useful goyim. The fundamental difference appears to be largely teleological in nature.

If you follow Rothbard's logic regarding property rights and justified borders to its natural conclusions in the face of invading forces, you amusingly end up back at what is essentially… A traditional monarchy, or possibly some form of feudalism. That said, the Jews hated both monarchs and the Nazis fairly equally… It would appear to me that both Hitler and Hindenburg were only following through with their Emperor's final royal sentiments.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_II,_German_Emperor#Antisemitism

One thing I'd like to point out about decentralization of power… There's some merit to this concept. It took the kikes a long fucking time to eradicate real monarchs and lords from Europe. They only got away with it because people weren't wise to their tactics yet and communication was still slow. In light of this evidence, I'd suggest that the system is rather resilient. Individual lords may rise and fall, but Europeans always just regroup. It's literally in our blood to do so.

No it doesn't. Jews think other people's children should do things. Markets aren't people anymore than corporations are, don't personify them. Just remove kebab and his nosy neighbor when they chimp out, because then you'll be within your full legal rights to do so as you'll be acting in self-defense. That's how the Non-Aggression Principle works: If I have a right to use force to protect myself, I can then empower another to act on my behalf to do the same.

As for the Julius quotes… First image is misleading. Literally everybody knows the corporate system we're under is a nightmare. We all hate it. However both NatSocs and leftypol refuse to even entertain the notion that corporations, as they exist today, have nothing to do with capitalism. They exist as a matter of law only, and for the purpose of granting special privileges which individual business owners would not have. Place the blame where it's due.

The second image you posted… Why did the user start by regurgitating Marx, but then switch to NatSoc at the end?

I'm trying to come up with the simplest introduction to this I can without being geared towards plebs. Any ideas?

People defend it becouse it works in pulling capable people out of poverty and with them the rest of society.
It's the system that the European race practiced since the stone age due to the characteristic of the climate and the need for pooling resources under intelligent and capable leadership to survive. West was built on capitalism and individualism as it's ingrained into the soul of the European man. Capitalism is basically natural selection gone official economic system.

Collectivism, communism, cleptocracy, command economy are a characteristics of stupid, emotional Middle Eastern, African, Asian and other mongrel races and brainwashed women. Their desire is in maintaining the status quo, as they have until 19. century, where intelligent no name individuals get axed and retards reproduce. They praise herd mentality so they feel safe among other stupid people while in secret the chosen elite they maintains a ruling caste that no one can ever topple since the system is constructed with many safeguards. If you're for this system you're a slave and you should either redpill yourself or off yourself.

The old American School of Economics
IS NOT CAPITALISM!

Capitalism is inherently internationalist and jewish.

Like a friend of mine references to the liberals and conservatives leading our country as right-wing communists.
Essentially it is corporatism and statism creating a false equivalence while the white worker is frauded into slavery.

Then what is it, you goal post moving, straw man hoisting retard of a gassable lefykike?

Hoppe digits confirm

Use of the word Capitalism

books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=capitalism&year_start=1600&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1;,capitalism;,c0

Use of the word Judeo-Christian

books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=judeo-christian&year_start=1600&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1;,judeo - christian;,c0

Use of the phrase melting pot

books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=melting pot&year_start=1600&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1;,melting pot;,c0

ALL OF THESE
are all following the same trend. They are all subversive, and have nothing to do with what America used as an economic system as founded. This is why capitalism itself is internationalist.

I have no problem with going back to the systems in place at the beginning. But capitalism will die.

WRONG AND I KNOW HOW TO REDTEXT FAGGOT SOMETIMES IT JUST DOESN'T WORK

I'm not using a snowflake definition. I'm using the only accepted definition there is

holy shit keep straw manning me faggot and learn to read. All these market cucks must be leftover election cancer and halfchan refugees ==YOU HAVE TO GO BACK==

lurk for 2 years before posting

So we /ancap/ now?

Reminder that Hitler was pro private property. Every time some self proclaimed National Socialist on Holla Forums focuses entirely on critiques of capitalism and especially when he uses (((marxist))) concepts and ideas you are dealing with a tankie lefty/pol/ "muh based stalin" shill. Careful not to fall for it (((marxism))) and National Socialism are polar opposittes.

Did you even read the communist manifesto? Marx criticised the jews nature and how they relate to the workers under captialism. Ultimately he played into jewish hands with his retarded ideology of defying nature, but he still made valid criticisms of them.

Lefty/pol/ tankie kike shill detected. Marx was a literal kike.

Karl Marx was Jewish.

And just as surely as most Jews are snakes, there are a few that are introspective of their nature as nation wreckers. Otto Weininger
is a good example of the rare introspective jew

Yeah no, gas yourself kike.

>>>/oven/

How was Marx introspective of his jewery if he made the jewiest idea some usury?

Nice one pulling that out of your ass.

Agree, Weininger is very insightful.

This translates to the same thing, ideology aside. It's a system that discourages excellence. As for whites only, I don't know how whites would behave under such a system (which judging by this thread, isn't even a definite system), but I know that profit is often the sole motivator for scientific research and other things.

Obviously. I thought that much was obvious.

Do YOU not understand the difference between helping because you want to and helping because you will get arrested if you don't?

This sounds retarded, what I meant is that I thought that an all white nation was universally accepted here

capitalism does work but the current economic systems are plutocracies clinging on the "its capitalism!" meme.

you fell for cold war bullshit.

Holy fucking shit, Holla Forums you're certainly not sending your best.

Sure thing, shlomo. You're hating it for the edginess and the tendies you never got becouse of you NEET disability.
Now fuck off back to Holla Forums and brag how you pwned us.

monopolies do not arise in a free market, a state is required for that.

In American Capitalism, there's at least an avenue to becoming a noble.
It's rough, it's unfair and it's not supported by anything or anyone other than your own grit and determination.

In monarchy (Stalinism, Divine Right, etc.), there is NO CHANCE to become a noble.
You're born into your caste and there's no way out, other than going into exile, founding your own city and then getting DESTROYED by the stronger nations around you.

I prefer what we have, then what we had in the past.
Socialism is just a pyramid scheme to scam more money from the working class.

Apparently you don't, if you don't know why that redtext didn't work. It's one thing to make a mistake, another to be ignorant and deny it.

You are confusing the goal with the mechanism. Apparently you can't redtext either, perhaps you need to do the lurking

the capable always have a chance of getting out, people became nobles in the first place by killing and being effective leaders or by successfully owning land and defending it long enough to get recognized. There is no system that is fair. But fair is an impossibility.

fug, meant to reply to this
Capitalism is an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market.
and that is from merriam-webster, the most SJWed mainstream dictionary I know of.

But ideology is not aside. It's the point. NS Germany always encouraged people to be better people. Yes, they had healthcare, but they also admonished people for degenerate behavior precisely because that behavior costs the taxpayer more money. People actually shaped up in response to that. So no, it doesn't discourage excellence in any way.

This much is true. Even in Germany Hitler always encouraged personal initiative. He also created several opposing state organizations, and simply allowed the opposing sides to eventually come to a solution.

No, I'm telling you mercantilism, free markets, and capitalism aren't synonyms. Capitalism came later, as the timeline of the use of words clearly shows.

Look, libertarians started using that word because the previous word they used was usurped. Even if it was capitalism before, the word is directly referring to the system in place today. Defending capitalism just makes you sound like a normie cuckervative that, yes, fell for cold war bullshit.

Even the existence of state healthcare is an example of this, by the way. It wasn't some core feature of National Socialism.

Hitler was right. But he really should have had a holocaust

And that is why we still have common ground here, at least I wouln't worry about it short-term since we have bigger fish to fry. But we would have to destroy the gibs culture first, we would have to rally people into thinking of 'their people' being wider-spread than local communities or germans, anglos, irish, etc. which is the natural without considering non-white burgers their people. We're just too different from germans of that era to make it practical I think.

In the long run it does. That's how incentives work. It would have a long term dysgenic effect. Eugenic programs can combat it somewhat, but Darwin is the simple solution.

then why does every thread have natsocs considering it a central feature of what they think the state should do

Jesus Christ Holla Forums, falling for a shill thread?

That's retarded user. Pray tell, how will you preserve the Nat part without a strong central gov't to defend the borders, laws, etc?

Well this really depends on if balkanization happened or not. If it did, then I have no doubt there could easily be a midwestern reich that's mostly German anyway and they could do this all day long.
I'm actually a Southern Nationalist, and don't have any preferred ideology. I will simply use what helps my people.
A good example is actually the Austrian Anschluss, there were only two options on the ballot. Come under Hitler's rule, or continue with the current dictator's government. There wasn't a third utopian ancapistani option on the ballot, or anything else. Pragmatism matters.
I just think it's important to understand Nat Socs, because I don't like the division trying to combat it creates.

Well we don't have long term actual data for that obviously. What I read about the Adolf Hitler Schools and plenty of other things in terms of education and pushing individuals to be the best they can be was very encouraging, however. They spent more time on the best students, and inculcated in them a want to help all of their people.
We currently, on the other hand, spend no time on those born with intelligence and instead spend all of it in a fruitless attempt to bring the lowest of the low up to average. In terms of Darwin, we are crippling our best people to failure because they have no inspiration, they get drugged with ritalin, and have no reason to care about anything. This itself is dysgenic as all hell.

All that aside, I generally think a fascist system would only last a generation or two, it really seems to be an ideology of racial triage and repair. You simply don't need it after that.

I don't know. Maybe because they know it did ultimately exist. Personally I would let the same battles happen again, because we have different standards today in terms of worker safety and so on than they did then. Perhaps whoever would be in Dr. Ley's place wouldn't be so successful in getting his way so often. So it would be stupid to decide that those outcomes are the best possible ones for a different time.

This is precisely what I was talking about when I said it depends on if balkanization happens. The State was always the unit of government that mattered in American history. They are in essence their own self-contained countries. They just entered into a treaty system that became permanent. If we were back to that, then National Socialism could easily manifest in each State differently, because the people of each State are different. I think if anyone tried to treat America and all white Americans as the same thing, it would fail for the same reason you couldn't have the same NS government ruling both the UK and France.
Californians and Texans?
Nebraskans and Georgians?
No, not gonna work. At a minimum we would need to be back to where we combine on questions of external policy and defense, but otherwise behave independently. That part is ultimately what I want in general, National Socialism or no.

sometimes you just got to get it out like religion threads but this should have been bumplocked from the beginning. Maybe they don't want to give the shills more ammunition.

if balkanization happens it would be less of an issue, but half the midwest is non-german, and after 150 years there is surprisingly little interbreeding, at least in my neck of the woods. And unsurprisingly the germans tend to be more interested in the state controlling many things then the british, though no where near the level of later german immigrants.

You don't need long term data, you just need to apply logic to it.

absolutely

and while I wouldn't like it, I would probably support that. But people who have no clue about economics would fail miserably and continue crippling the best and brightest. That's why I stick to arguing about this stuff in threads like this. And it distracts the newfags from shitting up other threads

To add, this is why I have no issues with the Traditionalist Workers Party. Heimbach used to be in the SCV, so we have no worries there.

Really? That wasn't the image I had.
I wonder if you've got a Confederate ancestor, I know some went out that way.

That is completely unsurprising. That's why my core is Southern Nationalism. We're basically entirely colonial-era British stock, so we don't have that much of a clash.

The problem is that every argument I see against it essentially is just the same as the one against the Marxian version. As if there is no difference. None of the ideology, philosophy, worldview, or anything else of the surrounding Nat Soc system are ever taken into account.
It always just boils down to
I don't think it's that simple.

Stopping things like that is why I would ultimately go with it, if I thought enough Southerners would be on board.

I think you should keep in mind that if it happened, there would be people like us in it, who bend more toward the freedom side. For that reason I don't fear it. On that Thistle and the Brier podcast, the host was saying that he never wanted it to happen because
I think that's entirely bullshit. It would end, because its work is completed. Caring about the volk (whichever volk that is) is so built into everything about it that it could never be twisted in that way.
People sometimes seem to see it as just jackboots and nothing else, which comes off to me like it's entirely just old pro-soviet wartime propaganda. When that's the level of argument that is used, it makes anyone who has been considering it just double down.

Southerners have argued for both protectionism and for free trade at different times, when circumstances would make the effect of each policy help the Southern people more than the other. On questions like that, I don't believe there is such a thing as a best answer always, precisely because it was already different at different times in the past.

a free market system that has been hijacked by (((them))) is not a free market.

LONG LIVE CAPITALISM

"Capitalism" doesn't mean shit.

You have corporations(mostly manufacturing and resource extraction) which rely on the local populous since shitskins are utterly incompetent and they cannot move their operation. And most of them are run by racist whites, I know I've worked with and for them over the years.

I think that tying yourself down to natsoc as expressed by Germany is needlessly specific, and is putting system designed for a specific place and time on a pedestal. What you want is the feudalistic structure of the elites being tied to the land and their people. There are numerous ways to achieve this.

Also I'll point out that Nazi Germany didn't start the welfare state in Germany. That was Imperial German policy. They had a national pension and disability scheme. They also had close ties with firms like Krupp which made them accessories of the state while still being functionally independent with regards to what they produced and how they ran the business. The only rules was "Germany first". They also had a Prussian culture of individual subservience to the nation identical to that of Natsoc. Natsoc in Germany was just Imperial Germany come again but this time without any tolerance for bullshit, basically "no more mr. nice guy."

Simple protectionism, mercantilism, and extreme nationalism of any form will get similar results but you need to tailor it to the people. Natsoc as typified with Germany will be met with extreme resistance in the US for example because the whites we are dealing with(liberal whites should be exterminated) are clannish, insular, and taciturn. They don't want anything to do with a welfare state, I know a guy who is our machine tool operator who lived in tent for months rather than take a cent of welfare. These people are stubborn, hateful, and proud. That has some advantages. Germans would have balked at the idea of killing every single fucking kikes, nigger, and saracen in the world. Germans wouldn't nuke the Levant to glass. Americans will yip and holler at the opportunity. We have 3 million men in militia groups which are all functionally white nationalists already.

For any ideology you'd like to push I'd suggest a few things to appeal to America.

1) Racialism, self explanatory given what we all know.

2) Isolationism, white conservatives desire a withdrawal into a 19th century America or even colonial America which has a powerful army but which has no real alliances or interests outside of itself. Now this does conflict with the initial plans for the solution to the mudman question but I'd suggest this be part of the rhetoric, that after we kill all the shitskins we will simply withdraw into our own borders and leave Europe/Russian/Japan to their own devices. Taking all of the Americas and exterminating the spics should be sufficient.

3) For Christ's sake do not use the word socialism or appeal to welfarism, that is interpreted in exactly two ways. You are either seen as pandering to the weak, who in the eyes of rural America deserve to die if they cannot get their blood, community, or church to help them. Or it is seen as an insult, a stranger offering help is immediately viewed with extreme suspicion. Couch any policies you may wish to put forward in the rhetoric of national interests. Remember that liberals stopped breeding more than 70 years ago, the white population of America is far more conservative than it was in the 40s, with all that such a change implies. The welfare interests of America in the early 20th century were driven by a population which was by the standards of the time more liberal than our white population is today. With a liberal purge pushing for welfarism as a main pillar will backfire hard. White rural conservatives already have a great deal of disposable income vs urbanites despite their lower gross income due to the low cost of living. Cutting the cost of living is really where you can win them over, gut the useless portions of the building and zoning codes so they can build their houses and start families more easily. That will be seen as something which costs them nothing while welfare will be perceived as taking food out of their mouths and giving it to scum who deserve to starve. Cutting taxes for those who have children would also be preferable to giving a stipend. Basically if you are having white children you don't pay taxes for the first 2 years, that will encourage them to keep popping out kids.

4) Use colonial symbolism rather than foreign of any sort, this is also self explanatory.

So much this.
I arrived at NatSoc ideology from the Left, unlike most who come from the Right (Lolbertarians, etc.)

I was a hardcore Marxist, so I understand the actual 'evils of capitalism' more than most do.
It felt really powerful to call your enemies 'Capitalist' and 'Fascist' as if they were the same thing.
However, I eventually realised several things:
1. Marxism is an empty ideology
2. 'Fascism' is NOT Capitalism; upon studying it, it's not even all that terrible!
3. Hitler didn't do anything wrong–in fact, he cared about a lot of the things I care about (like economic fairness and the environment).
4. The only effective way to curb Capitalist excesses is actually through Fascism, because it instills a love for one's 'folk' and nation.
5. Marxism/Communism is synonymous with Judaism (and I never cared much for Jews!)
I had begun to say to myself that
CAPITALISM AND COMMUNISM ARE TWO SIDES OF THE SAME SHEKEL
once I analysed those involved:
(((Mises))), (((Rand))), (((Friedman))), and (((Rothbard))) as well as (((Marx))), (((Trotsky))), and (((Lenin))).
After I realised that this was said by Adolf Hitler, everything finally became clear, and I finally understood that I had been lied to my entire life. The 'villains' in history were pretty much all actually the greatest heroes!
I felt angry, but also motivated.
I had finally found my 'third position.
I realised why the 'Communists' that I respected, like Muammar Qaddafi, were all really Nationalists, and that the people of a country are much more important than its economics.

No, it can't, and as a former Leftist, I probably understand why it can't better than most.
However, we'll let you, like Christopher Cantwell, call yourself an 'Anarcho-Capitalist' as much as you want, as long as you stay out of the way of the new Reich.

This. Back in my Marxist days, I found Das Kapital very insightful and inspiring, and the Communist Manifesto was pretty much my bible. However, when I read the Manifesto again recently, I thought, "what the hell was I thinking? This is advocating to tear children away from the 'oppression' of their parents and make them all wards of the state!"
I will have to take a look at your insights and think long and hard about them. What you're saying basically boils down to saying that even though Ayn Rand and Vladimir Lenin would have hated each other outwardly, they were both aiming to put in place the same agenda.
It's something that I've suspected for awhile, but found difficult to prove.
The main thought I've had that correlates with this idea is that
MATERIALISM IS STILL MATERIALISM
whether or not it is the 'Marxist' kind or the 'Objectivist' kind–it makes man into nothing more than an automaton, a machine, devaluing the spiritual element, marriage, the family, one's race, nation, culture, and even one's gender as nothing more than 'Social Constructs'.
On the other hand, Objectivism/Libertarianism/Anarcho-Capitalism does the same thing in different ways–a great example is (((Stefan Molyjew))) and his 'Defooing'.
It is my opinion that Socialists make the best National Socialists, since they can understand the Leftist tactics the best.
Remember that Mussolini was once a Socialist.
The moral of the story is not to give up on your family, friends and colleagues, even if they're filthy leftists.

I'm sorry to inform you that Kikes created Capitalism, too. Just as it was disheartening for me to learn the truth about (((Communism))), this pill might be difficult for you to swallow, but it's still true.
Capitalism wouldn't be possible without moneylenders, usury, etc. Whether Celts, Druids, Vikings, or Catholics, I can assure you that the traditional Europeans were NOT Capitalists.

Nice try, Shlomo.

And then snek gets stepped on and becomes a natsoc.

It's like how cultural enrichment first hand is the best redpill on race. Dumbfucks live in a bubble until shit gets real and they realize their little fantasy doesn't work in the real world.

Which is why I don't think Southerners in particular would go with that version. They won't take faceless help from a State organization. It needs to have a face, be it a Church charity or something else before they would be willing to accept it.

The Golden Circle rises!

Bump

(checked)
THE GOLDEN CIRCLE RISES

...

fuck off back to Holla Forums you shitty kike

Laissez-faire capitalism also has a long-term dysgenic effect. A pretty big one. Just ask anyone who works in the software industry.

Microsoft maintains a research division where people build cutting-edge operating systems and other technologies. It then patents these technologies and sticks them in a vault, never to see the light of day. It does this so these things don't become a threat to its business. It's literally a roach motel for smart people. The shitty designs of Microsoft's products have caused millions of man-years to be wasted and they have taken as long as possible to fix their problems because they make more money that way.

And then look at the F-35 project. Some executive at a defense contractor has been quoted as saying "We design for profit, not for performance." If the military can be bribed to buy a shitty product, why not? That's the kind of capitalism that collapses nations.

Total laissez-faire and an absolute command economy are not the only alternatives.

Actually the F-35 fuckup was more a combination of unlimited funds, unlimited developement time due to delays which removed any impetus to push out a working product, far too many cooks in the kitchen demanding all sorts of ridiculous shit, and trying to innovate in avionics, airframe, and the pilot interface at the same time. These should have been seperate projects which each exist for their own sake and have a frugal budget. Add in graft and it wasted a good 30% of all the money spent on it, that is waste which didn't go into developing technology which can ultimately be used for somebody else.

Also that isn't laissez-faire that's the government colluding with the manufacturers and developers.

(Checked)
THE GOLDEN CIRCLE RISES

...

You have to remember that inherently capitalism is deathly afraid of tribalism because it wants to severe bonds between people in order to create a society of mindless consumers for sake of profit and production. Capitalists are opposed to the system of the guild, which arises directly from the Germanic tribal idea of Frith. The guild ensures fixed prices and good quality for the consumer and the opportunity of learning, a guaranteed income and brothership for the producer. Guilds are also based on craft, something which died out with the advent of capitalism since the production line was cheaper. If you ever want to have a society focused on quality instead of the quantity of democratic mass you CANNOT have capitalism

probably a blogpost

midwest is vague, I'm sure there are places with a lot more germans, but except for occasional towns where immigrants all showed up together, most of the places I have known have been split. The interbreeding being rare is something I can only say locally because it's the only place I know well enough. A good resource for british names at least is forebears.io and do a surname search. It will show counties (not as accurate as it looks but generally good) and should have old census data as well, if it doesn't say where a name comes from, you can get ideas from density. And looking at my families names the density in the US match very well with the places my family lived as they moved west.

only one who even could have been, the rest were in penn and ohio back then

Not an argument on my part, but I've always found that the more people are like myself the more I fight 'em.

If people want to make a practical argument for them in the short term or talk strategy, that's fine. If we need to subsidise the toolmakers so we can crank out tanks 5 years, okay. But instead I hear it's good, we need to, the nsdap did x, it's moral, etc. If there is a subsidy for white children being born, I agree that it could be a very good thing. Maybe there is an argument for healthcare where it helps whites more than it hurts us, but I haven't heard it yet. But both in the long term are will create weaker, stupid, and less capable people than not doing it. If you take your strongest bulls and hitch them to the plow and help the weaker ones breed, 20 generations down the line we don't need more data to know the bulls will be weaker though the herd would have more genetic variability which could be useful somehow

These are the people I grew up around. I moved to a much nicer place and even in some ways freer, but almost everyone took welfare part of the year. I understood the reasoning, but even though I qualified was too disgusted to ever take it. Packed my shit and left. My employer even used some dodge to try to screw me out of unemployment money, joke's on him I've never taken it and don't even know how :^)

I'd rather have one hardass who suffers for his values on my side than 100 who wouldn't. (not that you can't have values if you don't live the same way)

stahp

How's it feel to be outclassed by a fucking kike?
kek

we all know how this ends

it's already been said that capitalism does not mean mindless consumerism
only if you act like niggers if someone breaks your cartel. If it isn't profitable enough or people don't find it socially valuable to do so, then go forth and guild.

I know some guys who handmake shit for antiques, stuff you can't get from the factories anymore. I would be hard-pressed to find something these guys can't do in their craft.

They also hate the fucking unions. So let's say there's some guild. What are you gonna do about when I pay them at something other than your fixed price?

sounds like cheerleading for artificial scarcity for personal gain to me. enjoy your brothership where you don't get enough work for a decade because you're still the new guy, and then some wild man shows up and no one has much sympathy for your over-priced Sekrit and Sacred Society of Horseshoers anymore.

Because they have government contracts? They'd get on just fine with just the business world. What business is "capitalist" enough to be an example for the system's failure? Consumer products have nosedived in quality over the last 30 years due to planned obsolescence and Made in China. Sell a waffle iron that breaks in 2 years and you can sell more waffle irons. I have a waffle iron made in the 60s that still works perfectly. You can't buy something of that quality new at any price today.

Capitalism does not optimize for "the best." It optimizes for "the most profitable." In the short term, the quickest way to convince people to buy something is "mine is better than that guy's." But once the advertising industry and (((financiers))) became involved, it quickly became apparent that it's more lucrative to sell a shitty product to a market you've monopolized.

And the day after you froze to death Shaniqua cashed her welfare check and popped out a new addition to her brood. Bravo.

Being protected from absolute failure makes some people lazy and weak. It makes other people more daring and willing to take risks. Constantly being in survival-mode doesn't make you more creative, it does the exact opposite. I've been in places where multiple generations of people have lived in a struggle for survival, and there is no original thinking there. Not a bit. Often they'll miss out on simple things they could do to improve their conditions because they're stuck in a mindset of "if it worked all right yesterday, better not change it today because it's too risky to try something different."

HAHAHAHAHA GERMANY IS SO CUCKED LOL GERMANS R DUMB AND FAGETS GERMANY YES

You idiotic newfags and cuckchaners should really lurk for half a year before posting.

Alright HISTORY LESSON you dense newfag motherfucker.
Back in cuckchan days Holla Forums didn't use to be a natsoc board - it was more of a truthseeking board. We had commies and libertarians and every autistic flavour of anarchist. The lefties and libertarians were CONSTANTLY butthurt because the truth kept leading to Natsoc. The second we moved to fullchan and they were able to create their own boards, the faggots who chose cognitive dissonance over the truth went to Holla Forums, /liberty/ and a dozen other now dead boards. The only people left on Holla Forums were the original natsocs and the converts, with a few exceptions (paleos knew they didn't have the numbers for their own board, for example). We don't have to prove anything to you, faggot - we lived it. We BTFO cucks every day. That's what Holla Forums was, and the very fact that Holla Forums even exists at all is proof of their inability to handle the facts.
Now fuck off back to /r/4chan and go study some chan history, fuck.

1) im not a britbong

2) the britbongs and french let hitler rise to power and amass an army because they needed someone to fight the red menace but didnt want to waste their own resources.
so they planned on stabbing germany in the back while its troops defeated the red army.
but molotov-ribbentrop was signed and the retards lost their shit, declared war.
poland was never important.
thats also why today you have everyone calling out the soviets for signing that pact, evenough the britbongs and french have been doing it since the 30s.

3) germans are cucked yes if the wrong parties win (again) in the elections

Except we didn't fuck off to /liberty/ and if you had read this thread it would be obvious. Claim btfo all you want like a nigger, it signifies nothing. If you're talking about the ron paul-tier lolbergs, yeah they mostly fucked off because no one can stay at that level of cuckoldry and survive this place.

The oppression is there, the people are slaves of an elite but the answer to eradicating that is not through communism or its spawn cultural marxism. The answer lies in once and for all people understanding the truth and removing the chains of Jewish deception, and divide and conquer strategies that have thus far worked. If and when the masses finally understand that both communism and super capitalism are one and the same, then maybe they will also see that immigration and enforced multiculturalism, and the destruction of Western culture, are just new methods of achieving the same goal of jewish led globalisation and centralised globalised power through high finance and through anti nation ideologies such as communism. The biggest threat to the globalists are nationalists, and through communism in its modern day cultural marxist form they supress nationalist opposition to Jewish globalism and mass immigration. Its actually a very clever divide and conquer strategy, the 'rich' and 'powerful' creating an ideology and backing it fully to oppose the 'rich' and 'powerful' in order to weaken further a more perceived dangerous opposition, and to advance a group strategy. The difference being that today, it is not a communist revolution with the finger on the trigger based on oppressive economic arguments, but a revolution against the culture, the homogeneity and the morals and traditions of the West. The goal remains the same whilst the methods have changed, and that is why communism based on oppressive economic theory, has now been replaced by communism based on supposed oppressive cultural theory. The reason being that communist economic theory was a staggering failure, so how to continue with the same plan? Move the goal posts and reinvigorate a failed theory with another.

Pick one.

Capitalism isn't dysgenic, through the demands of harsh competition it is Eugenic as the strong and hard-working succeed while the dumb and lazy do not. Socialism is dysgenic as it allows the dumb, the lazy, the niggers and immigrants to thrive and prosper from free gibs taken from white men.

muh monopopolies

This all makes perfect sense if you look at it solely as an attempt to shift us from our explicitly right-wing positions.

wtf I'm a centrist now

Or to put it another way:
How can you be more right-wing than National Socialism? That would be a good alternative to the two-headed jewish beast that is the Cap/com structure.

read the thread or continue being a useful idiot

(checked)
Kek approves of your lesson as much as I do. Thanks.

Racemixing screws with the mind and racial soul.

Not by me and certainly not by Hitler.

From OP
Not saying you aren't right wing, but plenty have been arguing they aren't

This guy gets it.

Fuck Socialism in general. Not thank you to all you veiled commie kikes and your shill threads.

I'll remain a republic before the federal reserve took over.

the latter is just an inevitable long term extreme form of the former

great, just have to figure out how to create politicians and statesmen that have absolutely no ties with lobbies, corporations, companies, unions, etc…

its vice versa. look at JP Morgan, Rothschilds, Rockefellers, etc.. Over a hundred years ago people werent cheering for "strong independent" companies, they were cherring for Teddy told them to fuck off.

*insert ancapistan meme here*

they werent even a thing in the late 1800s

1) im pretty sure its the leading superpower
2) a "nation" is a strong word for a meltingpot

they cant infest it because the two are mutually exclusive?

overall you must have one snowflake system in your head that works

what

Honestly this thread is a shill thread through and through. I don't expect you to properly comprehend a sentence let alone basic history of the US prior to it's Jesuit/Banker/Rothschild take over.