Libertarian Prussianism

I don't give a shit what it is, as long as it's National Socialism.

Thread theme

So the army deposes itself?
If the military is the nation, any tyrannical government would have been created at the behest of the army, as such there would be no interest for the military to get rid of the tyrants.

But it (the militia) would still have to be subordinated under the regular military forces.

Why?

The Roman Republic had a system not too dissimilar from the one you're proposing, and it ended in constant infighting and civil war, it took Augustus to sort that shit out, and then everything went back to shit with the successive emperors anyway.

Fact is that the old feudal monarchies were the most stable political system ever to have existed, and since its downfall there has been nothing but constant degeneration.

Really? I don't know much about Prussia, except that they were militaristic as fuck and gave us the rotten public school system under Bismark.

They were economically very liberal.

Because then your just the HRE. Your countries completely Balkanized and run by roving bands of militias.

No, you want a military with a country, you must have an ORGANIZED military with a country. Proper ranks, training logistic, everything that makes a modern army function. Built on a foundation of a millibars hierarchy, that is radically meritocratic by Design and Necessity. In essence a military dictatorship, with some sort of absolute leader at the top. Since you have such a hard on for Prussia let's call him leader but in German or something…

And bam, now your national socialist. The very best kind of state.

Now the rest of your concerns, I want my own guns, and the like are probably a given in an American natsoc state. I think the only way fascism is going to rise in America is by offering more freedoms then our competitors. But always remember, freedom is a duty, not a right.

That's not the only bad thing. Electoral Kingship is best, like it developed in Slavic countries.

Stop looking at history through rose colored glasses. You are nostalgic for a time that has never existed.

Drink bleach Moshe.

-for one, oops

The army is made of people, soldier-citizens not of proffesional soldiers that are on the end of the day mercenaries of the state they would value freedom and wouldn't do their duties for money it would be voluntarist on the core, there is no army as a meta-structure it is made of people who form local militias to the purpose of policing their communities that on time of war come together as a single unit, like the levies of medieval times but free people rather than serfs.
Like local militias only subordinated under war time, like the US patriot movement.
To be a beacon of freedom to all whites wanting to flee their countries

The HRE was a feudal institution, here there would be no such thing as feudalism.
Militias are organized but are voluntary associations that grant further rights to its member, no conscription.
The point is having a very free society without the cultural marxist degeneracy and having the people protect it.

Here's your german monarch. Kneel to your pedophile, globalist queen, you peasant.

Hitler was not a monarchist. You can't be both, it's time for you to choose one.

Man i swear, this is the monarch i most hate, she turned the royal back on rhodesia and south africa, allowed the nigger colonies independence, allowed the british army to kill people on northern ireland instead of fucking off and leting people sort themselves and supported the mass immigration that left britain a totalitarian FUBAR country.

Superior theme

You wouldn't know a true monarch if they came behind you and hit you over the head

Gas yourself you fucking retard.

Elective monarchies were not developed in Slavic countries, but in Germanic tribes, where previous to Christianity the king was elected by the aristocracy. And it was only implemented in Poland out of necessity due to the massive sectarianism in Polish society, and was generally a shitty system due to the fact that the kings were weak, and had no real power.

Just look at history m80, feudalism is superior to anything else that we've ever tried, simply due to the fact that it creates a society that is naturally authoritarian and balanced between the nobility and the king, no one is an absolute ruler.

So it's a completely disorganized fuckfest without a clear chain of command?
That's just an invitation for civil war and subversion.

This sounds almost liberal, there is no place for signaling in reality laddie, it will only fuck your people over in the end by painting them into a moralistic corner.

'Dude, just wait for Wilhelm!'

Have you ever read anything related to National Socialism?

Are you a butthurt britbong? You seem like one.

Think about it like the militias of the early US history.

Which didn't work, which is why the system was reformed.

Yes it did work, until the federal goverment fucked over the state's rights.

Fucking hell, don't you know that we Holla Forumsacks are too emotional to like libertarianism?

I bet you think that Bismarck was shit too

Let me guess. You imagine yourself to be one of the nobles. Am I right? It never occurred to you that you would be a peasant living under the rule of King Rothschilds, Baron Soros and Countess Feinstein.

This, now we are ruled by a jewish nobility.

There's absolutely no reason a country can't have an emperor and also follow NatSoc ideals.

(check'd)
She's just a figure head. Charles has been knighting everyone and their mom for years now.

tbh i rather have a free economy without stupid state regulations and i lived enough in my socialist shithole to dislike any kind of state interventionism.

Really, so that's why the war of 1812 was such a victory? The war where Britain literally had to send troops across a fucking ocean managed to capture Washington DC and burn down the white house?

My position in the system is entirely irrelevant to the subject, you're just seeking to move the goalposts, try making an argument instead fuckwad.

Go lick some dukes dick somewhere in europe.
Are you a yuropoor?

You literally know nothing about history.
The only reason the Brits didn't crush America is due to the fact that many of the British officers were sympathetic to the American cause and didn't crush the rebels when they had the chance.

Eternal anglo is that you?

Which socialist shithole? The European kind or the spic kind?

Spic kind

Lad, really now, you can't be this triggered.

...

Look at the OP, and ask yourself; "how the fuck could I not realize this off the bat?"

OP is a white argentine of french descent.

...

I hate mestizos as much as burgers, maybe more, having lived on argentina all the time.
Have a argie waifu.

You shit skins will do anything in order to be a degenerate.

M80, you're too late.

The catalog is garbage right now.

I elaborated my points what have you done (((1)))?

(check'd)
(check'd)
The dreaded Argentina is not white meme rears its ugly head again.

(checked)
Those quads say you're telling the truth.

Today is my lucky day, Kek has blessed me on this night.

How about we fucking well don't Schlomo, you lolberg pile of shit.

Is the search for freedom something kikey?
Because if nothing kikes have enslaved us to the state.

He didn't breath life into your thread though, which is pretty much dead.
People know nothing about prussia and even less about libertarianism. If you come forward with a strange idea like that you better carry the thread.

Everyone is a jew, never give anyone the benefit of the doubt. Always call OP Schlomo just to be on the safe side. It's better that a million OPs get needlessly insulted and banned than to have one Schlomo get past our Schlomodetectors.

Its always good to have dubs trips and quads m8.

I know you were trying to be snarky and sarcastic, but what you typed out there is literally correct.

I guess it's not just a meme then, 8/pol/ really is full of self hating spics & other non whites.

"Free economy" is inherently Jewish.

But the true King of England, Scotland, and Ireland is Francis II of the Jacobites.

hardcore hoppe libertarian here, i love it

Having a highly organized militaristic outlook is not compatable with being anti authority.

And the president of the US was a nigger until a few months ago. Your point?

You realize Pinochet was a Jewish CIA pawn, right? And that he was a traitor to his nation, right?

Libertarianism is as left-wing as socialism, it's a post-1789 bourgeois construction, as abrahamic as communism that followed it.

Do you know me?
No then you don't assume my race, you will have to take my word for it.

I don't think so, he might have colaborated with the USA, same as the argentine junta, but they where far from being totally under jewish control.
The democracies that followed them are fully kosher thought.

Its inspired by enlightenment and early america you stupid fuck

This

Exactly. There's a clear line going through para-Jewish Christianity to Reformation to Enlightenment to libertarianism. Through America, the terrible last degenerate republican moment of the decaying West.

What? Didn't you know Tocqueville and Locke were kikes?

And earlier in Athens, don't be so big headed Hans.

Wewie.

Thats laughable coming from the republic faggot. Democracy has done nothing but decay stop looking at the US with rose colored glasses

The one with the beard

Americans choose our leader every four years. Monarchist peasants have no say whatsoever and have to live with their fag leader for a lifetime. Does that answer your stupid question?

It's looking golden. Problem?

Does it? A European monarchy couldn't have a negro at helm, now could it?

bumb

It is impossible that a monarchy has a nigger prince, right?

Only white, gun owning (therefore part of the militia) males should vote

go back to >>>/trs/ you sodomites

That's because you're an illiterate moron. Pinochet was a CIA regime change pawn.

Still hasn't happened in Europe. A President of two terms has happened in America, the vanguard of downfall for the West.
Also, where comes this bonerfest for middle-class to rural proletariat owning guns? The monopoly of violence should be given to the State. USA, from its early republican roots, has a weirdly similar goal to other leftist projects: to destroy the State.

Holla Forums has an always will be a Prussian board you inbred Hapsburg dog

There is no such thing.

In the last, most degenerate, downrodden version of weird after-echoes of the West, America, there is no such thing.

There is literally no such thing as monopoly of violence in natural law, if someone comes to your house with the intent of stealing your stuff you have a right to kill him, if someone wants to kill you, you have a right to kill him, if someone wants to rape your daughter you have a right to kill him, if the sandniggers start flooding your country you have a right to kill them, if the goverment becomes tyranical you have a right to kill goverment enforcers.
In the natural law there is no such thing as monopoly of violence, it is a statist invention.

There is no law. There is no natural law. It's a irrelevant piece of paper, If your weirdly appaling governemnt finally gets to have his way and take your quaint little hobby away from you, then at last you'll be a real state. If.
I don't think it'll happen.
You're the last, most bizarre puzzle piece in line.
Why do you even exist, you terrific monstrocity?

Take the nihilism somewhere else, then you would be validating all the faggotry and any other cultural marxist shit.

...

Lol never change libertardians

Well, when you put it that way, being disarmed and stripped of all my freedoms sounds great.

It's the most simplistic version of Spengler and D'Annunzio's proto-Futurism, you truly uneducated yank. Are you actually not familiar with the most basic thinkers of Quieting West?
It would make sense, sure, but…
I mean, are you truly just a living example of the most terrible thing the last decades if the West have produced? Do you really want to be *that*?

No, but there is natural order.

He's not a Yank. He's Argentinian.

He isn't calling OP a faggot, because he doesn't like Prussia. He calls OP a faggot, because Prussians having extreme and over proportional militarism is a meme created by its enemies to make it look bad. Prussia was never more militaristic than other European nations of its time. Its the same shit as comparing Germans to machines and robots to dehumanize the view other people of them.

Then that's, to an extent, even worse, isn't it? At least they could have Peron to look up to, right?

bumbb

Matey, have you never not heard of regicide? Voting is for pussies. Feudalistic lynch mobbing is far more adaptable to my sense of propriety.

...

GAS YOURSELF AND YOUR ECONOMIC FREEDUMB FETISH YOU WORTHLESS LOLBERG FAGGOTS

YOU CANNOT EQUATE THE EXTREME STATISM OF PRUSSIA AND BEST GERMANY WITH YOUR ECONOMIC DEGENERATE FETISHES

ITS TIME TO STOP

It isn't about the spending, it's about the culture. It can't be denied that Prussia had a very militaristic culture.
And that's okay!

Because I can totally see those people gearing up and leading an army.

Any aristocracy worth following is forged in fire.

cant argue with those trips, but he's probably equating libertarianism with free market minarchism, not the social poz generally associated with the camp

Libertarianism is a live and let live ideology and as such it allows degeneracy to flourish. Just because someone or something isn't doing physical harm to anyone else doesn't mean it's harmless. Gay pride does cultural harm to society. The normalization of light drugs does cultural harm to society.

Back in 4/pol/ NatSocs and Libertarians co-existed, but it is not welcome in here.

Hop in an oven, Moshe.

This.

Actually, he wept when he learned of the Kaiser's abdication.
Oh, and America should join the Commonwealth. God save the Queen.

Her Majesty didn't do any of that. As far as I can figure all Queen Elizabeth did was back Brexit. Not so bad for a figurehead.

I lol'd.

Arguably she didn't have the power to intervene in Rhodesia or South Africa. She certainly did not have the power to stop the downfall of the Empire, and even as far back as WW2 the Monarchy was deemed to be potential allies of Hitler and hidden away. She could well just be playing the long-game and waiting for her opportunity, but it seems she's waited too long. She has had several opportunities as of late to regain power with public opinion of Government at all time lows, and a clear public desire to restore sovereignty, remove immigrants and leave the EU; this was her opportunity, and were she a monarch worthy of the title she would have seized upon it and led the loving masses to victory (realistically government would immediately agree to her terms so as to avoid any potential bloodshed and she could barter for more power).

Then step down and let someone else rule you dusty traitorous hag.

She had the power. She instead chose to be accomplice to the destruction of Rhodesia and South Africa. She condemned Thatcher's refusal to impose sanctions on South Africa over its apartheid government.
The monarch of the UK actually has some significant power. It's defined in the Magna Carta, which is still the constitution of the UK. The monarchy is currently weak and unwilling to use said power, and supposedly parliament can simple take away said power if the monarchy decides to become politically active.
Why should the traitor empress or her spawn care about anything, anyway? Politics and leading the country you supposedly rule takes work. Why not just sit back and let an incompetent bunch of elected officials do it for you while the tax payer continues to fund you living the highest and most luxurious lifestyle imaginable with absolutely nothing in return from you or your family? That bitch has no morals, she has no principles, and she has no will to lead. Neither do her spawn. The last king who gave a fuck was Edward VIII, the nazi sympathizer, and they forced him to abdicate the throne for his good goy brother.

My entire point was that in 'playing the long-game' she was waiting for an opportunity to strike out where should could not be silenced. I'm completely with you on her terrible it was to have the Empire dissolved, or for her to let SA and Rhodesia go to the apes; but you also need to realise that the public was not on her side, and parliament was out-right hostile to her.

I was citing recent events as an opportunity for her because it was CLEAR that the will of the public and the will of parliament were at odds. The government has refused time and again to do any of the things which the public has been asking for; this gives the monarch an opportunity to regain power. If she had tried to intervene without public support, saying over Apartheid; they would have been able to get rid of her very quickly. Media would have just accused the monarchy of being out-dated relics who still hold 'evil' views about colonialism and racism; mass public support would have ensured an easy removal of her power, and the few who cared about the monarchy would not have been bothered to march on the streets.

Recently however we have had a semi-militant populace, many rallies and protests. The populace is being oppressed by the goverment; their desires are being ignored and their resources and land are being given over to others. That was the golden opportunity for the monarch to seize power. They could not just get rid of her because the masses are already riled up and they do not want to risk a civil war. There are of course risks involved in any political power-plays, but I cannot imagine her or her sons ever getting a better chance than the whole brexit/migrant-crisis/government-banker scandal stuff that has taken place over the last few years.

As such I'm labelling her a traitor. I would have let her off if she was simply biding her time and waiting for the perfect moment to strike and save the country instead of making a suicidal protest against government. She has failed to strike though, and thus all her inactivity in times prior must be seen as treachery. Hang the harlot. Only an Anglo-Saxon man should have the throne.

Lolbergtardianism is a greater danger to this board than even leftism. They larp as "fashy goys" and make oven jokes and then enable faggotry degeneracy and cultural decay by saying crap like what do you care what sodomites do in the privacy of their own homes? The entire repugnant anti social muh rugged individualism abomination ideology that young white American males get brainwashed with must be destroyed.

One foot in the grave and still hasn't used it. All her children are cucks. She outright condemned apartheid and was pissed at Thatcher for not doing so. I know you believe she's a traitor, but you're still being far too generous to her. She outright hates her own people. I just don't see her making an announcement on her death bed or something that the UK has gone in a horrible direction. Maybe, just maybe, she'll shock me and her last words will be "Fourteen eighty eight." I'd really love to believe the theories that she's a secret nationalist, but she's not just failed to act, but outright gone against the best interests of her people so many times that's it's too obvious to me that she believes what the Jews told her.
I agree that only Anglo-Saxon men should have the throne. The Hannoverian dynasty needs to be abolished and the throne reclaimed by the English.

Hear hear!

You could go even more hardcore and emulate Ancient Sparta. The jews would have no power over a state like that.

I have an idea.
Why not pay people the minimum wage to work on public works during the weekend while at the same time you have to pay money equivalent to the wage you would have been paid to work if you don't want to work on these projects?
It would tax (((people who don't want to work))) while all other income tax could be canceled.

Some aspects certainly. The slavery would be a little tricky.

Aye. Fuck the Germans.

Yeah you'd probably have to segment people into classes.

I am wholly against slavery because it means inferior people will be allowed in the society, and they would take all the jobs too! I mean fuck that.
Slaves and servants make people dependent, do your own damn work.

trips of truth

this is the attitude everyone should have and be forcing on our so -called 'leadership'

You should read Liberty or Equality by Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn.
The book consists of reflections on the nature of liberty and the same opposition to democracy as seen in Kuehnelt-Leddihn's later work Leftism Revisited. Kuehnelt-Leddihn who describes himself as a "liberal of the far right" argues against the dangers of leftism and the herdist mentality found in democracy and totalitarianism.
He challenges the common understanding of Catholicism as "strict", the near-universal faith in democracy, and the widely-held belief that education must be provided to all. This constant opposition to conventional wisdom sets up an important theme late in the book: good governance is lost among the amateur voters and rulers that comprise a democracy. Skillful ruling and diplomacy is the hallmark of monarchy.

For those who say
You are mistaking my support for a non-regulated market and disdain of statism, as influence of the state on unecessary matters with tolerance of social degeneracy.
No i don't support the live and let live outlook, i think that racemixers, faggots and enabler politicians should go into the oven, the browns forced into the border and it sealed off to non-whites.
If that is "lolbertarianism" i think that we have gone a long way from actual lolbertarians that want to see drugs become legal.
What i am saying is akin to minarchism, minimal goverment necessary while it maintains a enfasis on national security.

I think you two misunderstand something here. The english royal family had rights to Hannover because THEY WERE A GERMAN DYNASTY. The queen was the cousin of the German Kaiser for gods sake. They just changed their name from House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha to Winston because of WW1. The british are being ruled by germans.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Saxe-Coburg_and_Gotha

Nvm misread your post

How much do you wanna bet that there are a couple or more of cripto-kikes in that family tree?

>en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Saxe-Coburg_and_Gotha
lol

Can anyone explain what the hell you're talking about with the Hannoverian dynasty? The House of Hanover was deposed was it not?

The last with the Hanover surname was Victoria, but their successors use the Windsor surname because of WW1.

Spartans were traitor greeks. They were mediocre at military and invented nothing. Athens ran circles around them consistently. Sparta had to take Persian money and naval equipment to even get on Athen's level. Nothing but backstabbing spear chuckers. Sparta and Prussia idolizers are slavish manchildren.

That happened in USA, isn't it? What's the story on the poor boy's parent?

...

Prussian was ultra militaristic?

I got that, but didn't prince albert effectively end that dynasty?

On the sense that it has another surname yes, but it is the same bloodline with one surname.

Again another clueless Sparta nigger. Spartans were much more homo than Athenians. Sparta forced kids to have sex with thier teachers. Athenians generally looked down on homosexuality.

Yes, 1/4 of all men were in the military. Prussia was alright up until after Napoleon was defeated. Then they instituted Prussian education, and ended up turning the whole western world into stupid meat puppets. The kind of people that see the state as their family and want to molested by their teacher(Sparta niggers).

http://
archive.nevadajournal.com/nj98/05/prussian.htm

"As Governor of Massachusetts, Everett had to deal with the problem of the influx of poor Irish Catholics into his state. In 1852, with the support of Horace Mann, another strong advocate of the Prussian model, Everett made the decision to adopt the Prussian system of education in Massachusetts. Unfortunately for the children and poor Irish Catholics of Massachusetts and elsewhere, the system produced a willing, cheap labor force with minimal reading and numbers skills. The Everetts of the world understood that people who could read and understand are dangerous because they are intellectually equipped to find out things for themselves, thus becoming a threat to already established power elites."

https://
hybridrogue1.wordpress.com/2015/04/26/compulsory-schooling-indoctrination/

Inglis, for whom a lecture in education at Harvard is named, makes it perfectly clear that compulsory schooling on this continent was intended to be just what it had been for Prussia in the 1820s: a fifth column into the burgeoning democratic movement that threatened to give the peasants and the proletarians a voice at the bargaining table. Modern, industrialized, compulsory schooling was to make a sort of surgical incision into the prospective unity of these underclasses. Divide children by subject, by age-grading, by constant rankings on tests, and by many other more subtle means, and it was unlikely that the ignorant mass of mankind, separated in childhood, would ever reintegrate into a dangerous whole.

Sounds like a good book, ive personally always held a belief that if you force people to be equal then you cant get truly great people who drive society forward because they wont be free to excel and society as a whole would be hobbled by the ineptitude of others as a result, but couldnt quite expand on my logical reasonings why until I read specialization and trade by Arnold Kling. It basically takes the premises that people are reasonable and seek to better their lives using their skills and talents, and continues to expand on that premises into economic and societal terms. Really brings to light that a society has everything to gain from being economically free and that the cries for equality is a blatant attempt by the incompetent and slovenly masses at benefiting from the hard working and gifteds propensity for profit.

On a side note, I believe a great way for society to not only greatly reduce the amount of people retarded enough to give into self-destructive habits that makes them poor and reliant on handouts is to make soup kitchens and homeless shelters charge the retards who need them on an IOU basis so that the pauper who is retarded enough to be in a situation of dependance on a third party to either find a way to pay his debts or risk having his debt (once it is suitably large enough) sold to a person or institute who will then be free to force the person to repay his debt in any way of his choosing, by force if necessary.

This way retards, welfare queens and institutionalized criminals will be free to be dependant on an institution for its basic needs while still being a benefit to society, due to their inability to put their self-destructive habits into practice and having all need for initiative and natural talent needed to be a productive member of society removed from the equation.

This benefits society because there will now be a cheap and readily available market for little-to no skill workers doing menial jobs like working in fields and building roads insert a free market roads arent a thing maymay here without having to rely on society rotting migrant workers any longer.

And lastly this benifits homeless shelters and soup kitchens and other places like them because rather than relying solely on the humanity of the local community in order to stuff the bellies of societal leeches they only require little to no actual donations from the community because while still being a benifit because they can still feed people who only need to get by in between paychecks because they will pay them back, while recurrent squatters will be identified and sold off for a small profit, putting more money back into programs that actually need it.

Who created the Prussian education?

Fuck off kike.

theres loads of stuff the Prussians invented which have royally screwed up the West for centuries to come
Prussian parenting methods in early childhood development was adopted by Americans in the early 20th century
and the Americans spread it to the rest of the West
Prussian parenting in early childhood development when compared to English, Swedish and Japanese studies showed that the model of Prussian 'neglect' by separating the baby from its mother and father for long periods of time with ideas like babysitters, day care and putting the baby to sleep in a seperate cot in another room instead of in bed with the parents was in contrast to traditional English, Swedish and Japanese parenting in early childhood development shown to cause baseline increases in cortisol the stress hormone in the babies due to being separated from their parents
this baseline cortisol shift is believed to be a significant contributor to developing emotional and personality disorders
not to mention other Prussian inventions like the welfare state

read the Symposium then tell me that with a straight face

Do you have any links to some of this? It sounds interesting.

Torfags pls

i dont have some of them because I read this while studying my bachelors
but heres one of them I think its the same topic
the studies also went into the early childhood development of Amazon indians and how children are with their mothers every moment waking or asleep when they're babies compared to White Americans who leave their babies in daycare so they can go to work and the baby sleeps in a seperate room
jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/346276

I'm not a libertarian, but you are just lying there. That happened after forty long years of your failed authoritarian drug war. That picture only helps libertarians.

probably
the line is German and the krauts had jews in their land during the time when Spain, France and England had deemed the jew to be illegal
incidentally the royal blood of the true throne of England still lives
two men are alive today, one Australian and the other Irish have legitimate claims to the throne of England descend from John of Gaunt and therefore Henry II who's wife was the granddaughter of Margeret of Wessex who is the niece of the grandson of Alfred the Great, King of Wessex and Brytenwald of Britain himself a a descendant of the first Saxon kings to invade England who married Romano-British Celtic princesses of Cumbria and Kent to secure early peace
Britain has a very ancient lineage of Kings who earned their thrones with their own swords
the current German aristocracy occupying the throne are pretenders who were ultimately installed in Britain after the Dutch invader king William of Orange who ordered the first bank of England to be opened in England under the Rothschilds died and the title passed to his cousins

If monarchy would be the way to go, isn't it better to just let the most worthy claim a throne instead of going over centuries old claims?

thats why we have our Excalibur legend
fairly certainly there is a clause in some of our ancient documents pertaining to the legitamacy of the legend of King Arthur in order to prove the legitamacy of Britain as a former empire in order to legally break withe Pope and the Popes authority
and if the legend is true whoever finds and weilds Excalibur is the true King of Britain
and remember the line of Kings of Britain was only broken 300 years ago
by traitors and zealots