Thread topic: The stupidity of white nationalists, or more appropriately, white internationalists.
>Of all groups claiming to oppose Jewish power, those who call themselves White Nationalists* (as well as other names such as Pro-Whites, White Advocates, White Separatists, White Identitarians, Anti-Anti-Whites (yes, really) etc.) are by far the most counterproductive. Their very presence taints the heroic image of anti-Zionist activism in the eyes of non-racist newcomers, perverts its purpose in the eyes of racist newcomers, and impedes every effort for unifying all non-Jews against Jewish domination. Clear-thinking anti-Zionists correctly identified WNs long ago as useful idiots led by Zionist agents to forment interethnic tension. As Aryanists, we moreover emphasize how WNs themselves have proven no different from present-day Israelis in their way of thinking (which many WNs themselves even admit). Either way, they have no place within any serious anti-Zionist movement, but should be considered part of the enemy in the broader anti-tribalist movement that we have proposed, for by their ethnocentrism they have already rejected our motto of UNITY THROUGH NOBILITY.
>(* Obviously WNs are not – despite the name they give themselves – nationalistic in any serious sense, as their allegiance is not to any country but rather to the international “white” diaspora, much like how Jews’ allegiance is to the international Jewish diaspora. The quickest way to disprove WN claims to nationalism is to ask them whether or not they would prioritize a “non-white” person from their own country over a “white” person from another country. What WNs mean by their crude abuse of the term is that they want countries where only “white” people are allowed to live, just as Jews have Israel.)
Chase Roberts
>That some WNs speak out against Jews does not mean they understand what is going on, because their description of Jewish goals is incorrect. Typically, they believe that the Jewish goal is to exterminate all so-called “white” people (again, mainly by getting “black” men to have sex with “white” women). It never crosses their mind that ”white”-looking Jews depend daily on the existence of “white”-looking non-Jews to camouflage their own presence. If all “white”-looking non-Jews were removed from the picture, Jews would instantly become so conspicuous in their positions of control that they would no longer be able to infiltrate society. While different anti-Zionists have different speculations about Zionist strategy, only WNs are idiotic enough to suggest with a straight face that the Jewish goal is to blow their own cover.
>On the other hand, Jews have good reason to encourage WNs to believe that this is the Jewish goal, as the WNs who spread this notion (whose absurdity is obvious to everyone except themselves) thus destroy by association the credibility even of more serious critics of Jewish behaviour.
>“And this was worse than if it had made no pretences at all to anti-Semitism; for the pretence gave rise to a false sense of security among people who believed that the enemy had been taken by the ears; but, as a matter of fact, the people themselves were being led by the nose. The Jew readily adjusted himself to this form of anti-Semitism and found its continuance more profitable to him than its abolition would be.” – Adolf Hitler
Kevin Parker
>As a matter of fact, since “white” is the name of a Gentile tribe, the notion of a “white Aryan” is as oxymoronic as the notion of a “Jewish Aryan”. No self-respecting Aryan would ever want to associate with “whiteness”, a racist concept created by the British Empire and other colonial powers for the purpose of segregating the colonists from the colonized populations (in the same way that the concept of Jewishness was created to keep Jews distinct from non-Jews), whereas National Socialist Germany morally sided with the colonized populations around the world, as it perceived Weimar-era Germany as a de facto colony of France under the Treaty of Versailles, and supported folkish integration as the superior alternative. In Hitler’s words, “The misery of the nations has not been relieved but has increased. The deepest roots of this misery, however, lie in the division of the world into conquerors and conquered.” And however much solidarity with “non-whites” Germany was able to express publicly was already toned down compared to what it actually felt, as Hitler also explains: “Diplomats are estranged from reality … They tried to persuade me to address a proclamation to the Arabs, completely disregarding the fact that, until our troops were in Mosul, such a proclamation would be stupid, for the British were quite prepared to shoot any and every Arab who rose to support our actions.”
>“It is not a question of one nation in Africa having lost its freedom – on the contrary practically all the previous inhabitants of this continent have been made subject to the sovereignty of other nations by bloody force, thereby losing their freedom.” – Adolf Hitler
Mason Murphy
>Indeed it was in order to distance Germany from the crimes of the colonial powers that NSDAP publications generally avoided referring to any of the people of Germany as ”white”, preferring the romantic and open-ended term “Aryan” to refer to non-Jewish Germans in general. When Hitler did (on the rare occasion) use the term “white”, it was usually with a negative connotation directed at the colonial powers, for example: “The white races did, of course, give some things to the natives, and they were the worst gifts that they could possibly have made, those plagues of our own modern world – materialism, fanaticism, alcoholism and syphilis.” The same is true of such as Alfred Rosenberg, for example: “The white race has dishonoured itself. It has disintegrated an entire culture and precipitated a just rebellion against itself.” It was on this account that National Socialist Germany was so highly regarded among non-Western countries of the time. Perhaps the clearest demonstration that Hitler did not consider Germans to be “white” comes from his discussing Japan’s WWII activities, when he first states: “The Japanese are occupying all the islands, one after the other. They will get hold of Australia, too. The white race will disappear from those regions.” but then goes on to say: “Thanks to the Germans whom the Japanese will employ in the archipelago, we’ll have excellent outlets in those regions.”
Matthew Scott
>WNs often retort that non-Western states have also practiced colonialism in the past. This is a lie. States throughout history have practiced imperialism (ie. expansion of territorial domain), but not colonialism. The ancient empires (including Rome) integrated the conquered peoples as citizens. The Western colonial empires, in contrast, were historically unique in their practice of segregating the conquered people as “non-whites”, and thus subjects but not citizens, thus Goys in effect. Hitler explicitly noted the difference between imperialism and colonialism: “Can anyone assert that colonization has increased the number of Christians in the world? Where are those conversions en masse which mark the success of Islam?” (Similarly, Western slavery was indeed more despicable than other chattel institutions (including Roman) throughout history because it alone exhibited willingness to do to “non-whites” what it had already recognized was wrong for “whites”, in contrast to other institutions who did not display this double-standard. Hitler notes of the Roman system: “The Roman slave was not at all what the expression encourages us to imagine to-day. In actual fact, the people concerned were prisoners of war (as we understand the term nowadays), of whom many had been freed and had the possibility of becoming citizens.”) Had but any of the post-Renaissance empires been willing to follow the Roman model instead of the Western model, they would surely have escaped condemnation. As they did not, it is perfectly justified for us to condemn them while sparing Rome and other integrationist empires, including the Third Reich.
Elijah Scott
>Even as National Socialist Germany was about to fall, Hitler had this to say of colonialism: “I feel much more sympathetically inclined to the lowliest Hindu than to any of these arrogant islanders. Later on, the Germans will be pleased that they did not make any contribution to the survival of an out-dated state of affairs for which the world of the future would have found it hard to forgive them.”
>WN is nothing more than a Gentile rendition of Talmudism, where instead of the Chosen People being “Jewish people”, it is “white people”. This is explicit among believers of Christian Identity, whose central claims are that “whites”, not Jews, are the true Israelites of the Tanakh, and that “non-whites” have no souls. It is also implicit among all those who will blame so-called “non-white people” as a whole for any injury of a “white” individual by a “non-white” individual, yet at the same time refuse to hold either “white people” as a whole or even the notional abstraction of “whiteness” accountable for the much greater violence perpetrated throughout the colonial era by the colonizing forces upon the colonized populations.
Carter Johnson
>Hence follows every WN double-standard, from the moral hypocrisy of insisting that formerly “white” lands be returned to “whites” while formerly “non-white” lands need not be returned to “non-whites” (the same as the stance of Israel towards Palestine), through the cognitive dissonance of taking every instance of better ”white” average performance (e.g. in school exams) as evidence of “white” superiority but every instance of better ”non-white” average performance as evidence of “non-white” cheating, to the logical paradox of demanding both freedom of association and criminalization of interethnic marriage. Not to mention their cowardly use of the terms “anti-White”, “White Guilting”/”Culture of Critique” and “White Genocide” identical to Jewish use of the respective terms “anti-Semite”, “Blood Libel” and “Holocaust” to avoid dealing with criticism. (More recently, they have even started accusing us of “White Genocide Denial“. Where have we heard this one before?!) And this does not include countless other WN self-contradictions, such as on one hand claiming that “whites” are the least privileged group yet on the other hand claiming that all “non-whites” in the world secretly wish they were ”white”, or on one hand claiming that “non-white” average undercompetence is a reason for segregation yet on the other hand claiming that “non-white” average overcompetence is also a reason for segregation!
Hunter Baker
>WN presence in any serious movement (not just the anti-Zionist movement) invariably turns that movement into a joke. For example, WNs tagging along in anti-police-brutality movements are among the loudest complainers against police brutality when the victims are “white”, yet defend police brutality whenever the victims are “non-white”. The same pattern repeats in anti-abortion movements, where WNs are horrified by abortion of “white” babies, yet want to subsidize abortion of “non-white” babies. And again in pro-firearm movements, where WNs end up supporting firearm purchase by “whites” while simultaneously opposing sale of firearms to ”non-whites”. And when they are – quite understandably – kicked out of these movements, they accuse these movements of being “anti-White” (and take their own accusation seriously).
>Fortunately, all our anti-Zionist rhetoric developed over the years can be re-used against them word-for-word with equal effectiveness, such as: “An anti-White is not someone who hates whites, it’s someone whom whites hate,” or: “The truth is anti-White.” If it is ridiculous for Jews to complain about discrimination against themselves when they are the ones choosing to perpetuate the Jewish identity invented by Jewry for the purpose of excluding non-Jews, then it is similarly ridiculous for WNs to complain about discrimination against themselves when they are the ones choosing to perpetuate the “white” identity invented by colonialists for the purpose of excluding the colonized. “Whiteness” is a racist concept, so of course anti-racists are anti-White! A favourite slogan of many WNs themselves is: “Anti-Semitism is a healthy response to Jewish behaviour.” In which case, by their own logic, anti-Whitism is surely a healthy response to “white” behaviour. If WNs accuse us of being anti-White, never deny it. Instead, proudly admit it, and then ask them to give us one good reason why we should not be anti-White!
Brayden James
>WNs have been trained to defend themselves by saying that “racist” is just name-calling, but this is also easily refuted. If someone lies and we call him a “liar”, is that name-calling? If someone steals and we call him a “thief”, is that name-calling? If someone torments others and we call him a “bully”, is that name-calling? Similarly, to call someone who practices ethnotribalism a racist is not name-calling. These are not slurs, but accurate labels for various kinds of unethical behaviour. (On the other hand, if we want examples of actual name-calling, we need look no further than the slurs used by WNs amongst themselves when discussing people of other ethnicities!)
>A well-known WN trick is to claim that if “Black Pride” is socially acceptable, “White Pride” should be socially acceptable also. This trick can be easily shot down by pointing out non-equivalence in the definitions of “blackness” and “whiteness”. “Blackness” is defined by possession of “black” heritage. “Whiteness”, on the other hand, is defined not by possession of “white” heritage, but by non-possession of “non-white” heritage. (For example, Zionist puppet Barack Obama, who has one “black” parent and one “white” parent, is considered “black” by most self-identified “black” people, but is not considered “white” by most self-identified “white” people.) Therefore, “Black Pride” means being proud to have “black” ancestors, which is not offensive. On the other hand, “White Pride” means being proud to have no “non-white” ancestors, which is of course highly offensive. In agreement with common intuition, and contrary to what many WNs claim in public, “White Pride” indeed implies contempt for “non-white” people as a whole.
Anthony Jackson
>Simply pointing out the non-equivalence in definition between “whiteness” and ”blackness” (or other groupings as the case may be) is a more potent weapon against WN denial of white supremacism than any PC argument that fails to expose the supremacism structurally intrinsic to the notion of “whiteness”. Therefore point it out as often as possible. It is key to defeating the “Every group except whites is allowed _____” trick that WNs use in many forms. Hence the increasingly popular new retort slogan: “Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white because white is a code word for racist.”
>Another fast way to shut down WNs with a minimum of hassle is to simply inform them that whatever they are ranting about is not relevant to you because you do not self-identify as “white”, but rather belong to your country, your town or even your local neighbourhood. As all WN rhetoric is based on people considering themselves “white” to begin with, by rejecting this premise, we dispel their entire repertoire. Or quicker still, simply tell WNs that the fact they even use the word “white”** in this day and age means you already know they have nothing worthwhile to say. The term “white” itself can be developed into a term of derision and dismissal. For example, when a WN speaks negatively about ethnic minorities, we can tell others: “Ignore him, he’s just being white.” (Again this is exactly the same as how we dismiss Israelis who speak negatively about Palestinians: “Ignore him, he’s just being Jewish.”) Ultimately, the term “white” could become a verb (just as “Jew” has become a verb in anti-Zionist circles e.g. saying “You’ve been Jewed!” to anyone who buys into Islamophobia), and we can simply tell a WN: “Stop whiting!”
Jace Murphy
>(** Some WNs think they can avoid trouble by using the term “European” instead of “white”, but the same method as above suffices to expose them: simply ask why people with one “European” parent and one “non-European” parent are not considered “European”. Better yet, argue that any person born in Europe is European by definition, regardless of ancestry, and ask them to explain why they disagree.)
>Some naive people mistakenly believe that WNs are merely overreacting after bad personal experiences involving hostile individuals who happened to have been of a different ethnicity. In fact, anyone who spends time listening to their conversations knows that the less hostile and more friendly and more socially integrated and more contributive a so-called “non-white” person is, the more threatening WNs consider him, on the grounds that he is more likely to encourage others to realize that ethnic background really does not matter. In contrast, WNs celebrate every time a crime occurs in which the victim is “white” and the perpetrator “non-white”, as it allows them to spin their propaganda.
>The quickest way to counter WN attempts to use petty crimes for propaganda fuel is to point out that they are complaining about actions that are already illegal and which nobody is suggesting legalizing, so their complaints are redundant. By calling for action against entire ethnic groups in response to a crime committed by an individual, however, they are demanding no less than the punishment of innocent people for the deeds of the guilty.
Ian Edwards
>Nor do WNs care about individual ”white” people either, or even see them as people. All they care about is the perpetuation of abstract “whiteness”, in relation to which “white” individuals are viewed as nothing more than expendable slaves. They would throw any number of “white” individuals under the bus so long as this contributes to the survival of “whiteness”. And a “white” individual who freely (indeed heroically) chooses not to serve “whiteness” is viewed by WNs in the way that an overseer would view a slave who refuses to work.
>Some WNs deny white supremacism by claiming that they do not wish to rule over “non-whites”. Yet their entire stated ideology is about “whites” unilaterally getting to decide where “non-whites” are or are not allowed to live! What is that if not ruling over “non-whites”? (Case in point: when WNs talk about “sending all blacks to Africa”, they are talking as though “Africa” (which they rarely acknowledge consists of actual countries) still belongs to them as it did during the colonial era, so that they can “send” people there whenever they wish without permission from the relevant states.)
Landon Foster
>Furthermore, we must never believe the WN lie that their ambitions are solely defensive, just as we have never believed that Israel is solely defensive. WNs will say that they have no interest in dominating others or taking the territory of others, but this can be proven as a lie even from their own 14 Words motto. When they say “We must secure the existence of our people…”, it logically follows that if dominating others or taking the territory of others is conducive to ”white” security, that is what they will do. And it is quite practically obvious that the more domination and the more territory they possess, the more secure they will be, so their ideology actually commands them to dominate people and capture territory to whatever extent is beneficial to the security of their tribe, contrary to what they claim in public. Anyone who thinks ”white”-only intentional communities (“PLE”s) are not dangerous should study how Israel was created in 1949 from similar Jew-only intentional communities. The Palestinians are paying for their naiveity.
Tyler Morales
nice try jew but ethnonationalism is the way to go
Zachary Garcia
>Anyone with any geopolitical sense is able to see that WNs want “white” ethnostates in the way that Jews wanted a Jewish ethnostate: as a launchpad for an eventual second round of colonialism as world resources become increasingly scarce in the none-too-distant future. Some WN leaders, from Ben Klassen (Jew) through William Pierce (Gentile) to Kai Murros (Gentile) have even admitted in their writings that this is the WN plan. As David Myatt warns us: “The slaughter which The White Hordes have brought to the world is unparalleled in human history – from the ravages of Alexander the Greek, … to the genocide of the Native Americans, to the so-called First and Second World Wars, to the hundreds of colonial wars in Africa, Asia and elsewhere … The White Hordes of Homo Hubris have committed and are still committing the error of hubris: of insolence; for they have consistently and for many centuries been the destroyers, par excellence, of The Numinous, and have, due to their character and nature, brought chaos, suffering, death and destruction to the world on a scale hitherto unknown.”
>Some longtime and once extremely active anti-Zionists have become so demoralized by the WN degradation of Jew-aware discussion that they have even expressed to us that if the alternative to Jewish racism is ”white” racism, we might as well let Jews stay in power! As a consequence (and despite our best efforts to retain them), they have now quit anti-Zionist activism altogether. This gives some idea how just how damaging WNs have been to our work (which is hard enough even without them).
>National Socialism >(((Socialism))) tfw too intelligent to be a socialist
James Jenkins
...
Jacob Taylor
why do you hate the white race?
Liam Scott
?? HAIL VICTORY! ??
Thread for discussion of the Jewish Question, Race Realism, National Socialism, Anti-Communism, Fascism, Traditionalism, White Nationalism, and European Identity Movements. Share links, PDFs, reading, videos, and propaganda. > ? - SMASH THE LEFT! > ? - SUBVERT DEGENERACY! > ? - EXPOSE ZOG!
? IF YOU DO NOT SEE A GENERAL IN THE CATALOG PLEASE COPY FROM THE PASTEBIN AND CREATE ONE! - HELP SPREAD THE LOVE! ? ? PASTEBIN - pastebin.com/vPZPyDhK ?
Yes, Sweden, because your demographics have proven you really love white race.
Logan Scott
Make your own general for this divisive racist schlock.
This is a thread for Aryans, not stormfags. There is no "white" race, the concept was invented by the racist British to dehumanize nonwhites and is today used by racist progressives to dehumanize whites.
Stop identifying as white.
Jaxon King
I do not understand why people think redpilling or whatever you do will help anything, all it does it alienate people. The people in public do not care about anything but themselves. Do you really think this type of movement will even gain any momentum. Besides being called openly natsoc.
did hitler know if japan was going down or not? what did he think of pearl harbor?
also, was there any chance he might've escaped to japan instead, was killed in the nuclear blast? The thought occurred to me but didn't bother to look it up since you don't know wtf is fact or fiction about WW2.
as you can tell my knowledge on any of that is non existent.
Race relations won't clean up without facing the Jewish Question.
Carter Adams
Im pro zionist. Rather have some sort of civilized people over there than muslim cunts who will destroy jerusalem the moment they have it
Dominic Gutierrez
blindlight.org friend's site
Jews are trying to co opt "anti-semitism" to use it against us stay vigilant find the truth
Julian Jackson
how likely is nationalism socialism to rise in America?
Asher Mitchell
Get used to dealing with Jews. They are everywhere. They will attempt to sink their teeth into any movement gaining steam. Learn to identify them by their attitudes.
Justin Gutierrez
>calls himself a national socialist >ignores the main principle of NS which is a racial ethnostate Why the fuck do you persist with this bullshit? Why don't you just call yourself a (((((socialist))))) already?
Jack Lee
How likely is it that rich people are going to allow you to nationalize industry? Very unlikely. since also American government is privatized.
Hunter Phillips
Oy vey, found a stray retard.
Hudson Collins
>Im pro zionist. gas yourself
William Reyes
I can see it in the 2040s and 2050s, but it would be a leftist-aligned ideology that rises in retaliation to white nationalists (who will probably take over in the coming decades). Once the baby boomers are gone and the world order starts to crumble, America just might become national socialists vs white nationalists. GenZ is looking very brown and aryan.
There is no difference between Socialism or National Socialism. National Socialistic Workers party is merely a name of political party, Socialism is political system. Socialists, Communists and fascists all have same goal, to nationalize the country and bring it under control of people in that country, to cut free from private international owners.
Aiden Reyes
>>ignores the main principle of NS which is a racial ethnostate I don't even know how to respond to someone this uninformed. You can read the basics of national socialism in the OP links.
Ayden Edwards
Believe whatever you want. He's still doing good work. Take in as many perspectives as possible and find the truth. Petty name calling is Jewish.
Jacob Hall
Pan-Germanism was Hitler's plan and that ain't interracial plan.
nu/pol/ needs these daily /natsoc/ threads badly. nu/pol/ is as bad as reddit. Fuck my life. I miss the good ole days of only actual nazis on Sup Forums
Dominic Walker
>actual nazis on pol That's a good one, did anybody here even read the main political party points of Hitler or his actual laws? Hardly anybody.
Nathan Wilson
>Brown >Aryan
Pick one and only one.
Kayden Howard
Great site. Thanks for the link.
Cameron Harris
Kill urself u dirty slav.
Jack Kelly
Stop acting like a Jew. Show some dignity.
Jace Gutierrez
if it makes you feel better I am an Aryan lurking for info
Alexander Sanchez
You're welcome, bro.
This is the book that got holocaust debunking books banned from amazon.
For me and all true National Socialists there is but one doctrine: people and fatherland.
What we must fight for is to safeguard the existence and reproduction of our race and our people, the sustenance of our children and the purity of our blood, the freedom and independence of the fatherland …
Taken straight from the book of the man himself. Fucking wop.
Samuel Baker
I CANT FUCKING BELIEVE THIS WHAT THE FUCK I JUST CAME HERE FROM REDDIT AND I COULD NOT BELIEVE SOMEONE WOULD BE ACTUAL NEONAZI OPENLY LIKE THIS HOLY FUCKING SHIT. HOW IS THIS SITE NOT BANNED, DELETED ETC. YOU STUPID RETARDS NAZIS KILLED 8 MILIONS OF JEWS IN CONCENTRATIONS, 9 ,MILIONS OF THEM GOT GASSED AND 12 MILIONS OF THEM SHOT. FUCKING ANTISEMITIC BASTERDS BITCH
David Mitchell
As far as i know we dirty Slavs became Germanic, while Americans didn't. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Slovenian_history >Adolf Hitler annexes Austria to the Nazi Germany. Slovenes in Austrian Carinthia practically become German citizens.
Juan Cruz
(((((OP))))) isn't even a NS. Just some band wagon riding untermensch
Daniel Harris
And you're bumping his thread.
Christian Ramirez
...
Adam Allen
This is secondary to the Jewish Question. Remove the Jew and these problems resolve themselves. When the Jew is in power people act through confusion and fear.
Adrian Hall
>10 shekels have been deposited into your account
Luke Reyes
People need to wake up and realize that the Jew is everywhere. They're on pol. They're on your favorite "white nationalist" site They're in your facebook friends list People need to learn how to identify the Jew so we can move forward cleanly.
Josiah Roberts
>favourite wn site >implying that those arent honeypots Pol is fucked pretty much thanks to the elections and other things scum flooded our board
Robert Morris
meant to reply to you
Lincoln Morgan
I hear you loud and clear and totally agree.
Samuel Jones
This. atSoc was fundamentally an ideology built around race, while Marxist socialism was entirely different: built around class. Hitler aimed to unite the right and left, including workers and their bosses, into a new German nation based on racial identity. Socialism, in contrast, was a class war between workers, bosses, and owners (Capitalists), aiming to build a workers state in which race and gender were insignificant. Socialists, especially Marxist socialists, were anti-religious atheists, whereas NatSoc went so far as to make Christianity the religion of the state.
The differences go on and on: Marxist socialism was internationalist, NatSoc was nationalist. Marxist socialism was egalitarian, whereas NatSoc believed that nature was unequal and required competition. Marxist socialism wanted to nationalize all private industry, while NatSoc privatized every major industry except the railroads (it considered these a military asset. In fact, Hitler once joked "they didn't need to nationalize property because they nationalized people". NatSoc drew on a range of pan-German theories, which wanted to blend Aryan workers and Aryan magnates into a super Aryan state, which would involve the eradication of class-focused socialism as a non-German ideology.
Robert Bell
Judaism is much more than just a race.
Jacob Bailey
Of course but to blindly just thing that jews are the sole problem behind everything is also stupid. Don't get me wrong Jews are fucking horrible, but to think that if they disappear all spics and niggers will just adhere to our culture and contribute just as much is fucking stupid. It's been 200 years and niggers are still the same crime ridden insects they were when we first brought them over sea.
Cameron Hill
I am a firm believer in the free market and personal freedoms, but the amount of degeneracy and wasteful and shit design today is really bugging me. Can someone convert me?
Blake Roberts
((((Free market)))) To realize that capitalism is inherently jewish is the first redpill towards become a NS. I'm guessing you're a libertarian or a paleo right? Pic related is a pretty good redpill. From the man himself “’Socialist’ I define from the word ‘social’ meaning in the main ‘social equity’. A Socialist is one who serves the common good without giving up his individuality or personality or the product of his personal efficiency. Our adopted term ‘Socialist has nothing to do with Marxian Socialism. ((((Marxism))) is anti-property; true socialism is not. ((((Marxism))) places no value on the individual, or individual effort, of efficiency; true Socialism values the individual and encourages him in individual efficiency, at the same time holding that his interests as an individual must be in consonance with those of the community. All great inventions, discoveries, achievements were first the product of an individual brain. It is charged against me that I am against property, that I am an atheist. Both charges are false.”
Chase Cook
>spics >niggers You need to clean up your language. Can you imagine Hitler ever speaking that way? There was a time in this country where unemployment was lower for blacks than it was for whites. The Jews are the problem. We don't even know in America how will goy can get along without dealing with the Jews.
Nathan Garcia
NatSoc redefined socialism as "Germanism/Volkism", which they saw as "producer-oriented capitalism", as opposed to "Jewish capitalism", aka, international finance, globalism, wall street, etc. In theory, NatSoc economics was a version of Keynesianism, tailored to the Völkisch nature of whichever people adopted it. Its not one dogmatic economic system,and Hitler often joked that the lack of a specific ideology was their strength. NatSoc could be more "free market" as Americans know it, or less. But NatSoc is always in favor of the Volk over economic identity, of "producer capitalism" over "finance capitalism".
Parker Foster
Using an awful lot of brackets there.
Bentley Cooper
>jews are the problem the main ones yes but the nonwhites in our countries are still a problem too
Nolan Robinson
I'm sorry but I simply can't just point to every little thing being the result of a jew. One of these being racial differences. I genuinely would like a world where everyone is the same and there is no differences between us. But I'm not following a "if"
Caleb Price
And before poverty is brought up.
Christian Fisher
I never said they weren't but we need to treat life with respect. I don't care if you people think blacks and browns are lower life forms they still deserve respect. It was Hitler who passed all of the anti animal cruelty regulations. The Jew is the problem. They want us out here killing each other instead of dealing with them. One thing we should be doing is redpilling more blacks on Jews instead of allowing them to continue to blame all of their problems on whites. It was Jews who were in charge of African slavery in the states to begin with.
> I genuinely would like a world where everyone is the same and there is no differences between us. Hyperbole. I never implied that and the more you speak the more I believe you to be Jewish.
Juan Reyes
Can a nat soc society allow business to start easily without countless (((regulations))), also does it allow individuals to pursue the career they are best suited to (within reason)?
Thomas Scott
>area with extremely low population density has a lower crime rate than a big city really makes you think
