AnCap V NatSoc thread

In this thread we present arguments for and against the most popular ideologies of this board. Seeing that AnCap has risen back up in recent months and NatSoc has fallen I will represent the NatSoc arguments.

Problems with AnCapitalism
>There are no boundaries set for those who desire great power withen a nation, allowing limitless manipulation of the populace.
We can see this in what was late eighteenth century America. Rockefeller, Carnegie, and J. P. Morgan were making what would be hundreds of billions a day through manipulation of their workers. Their workers would live in towns these people would built but have no room to progress forward. People were exposed to harsh conditions and payed very little, no matter how hard they worked. Everything was owned by the conglomerates; the houses, the stores, the factories, it was basically a small city state. Along with this there was no room at all for competition because the monopolies bought them all up, claimed all the resources, and bankrupted their competitors.
Only when did the United States realize that these monopolists were gaining more control and lobbying the government it became a concern. Here the Sherman Anti-Trust act comes into play and breaks up monopolies and allows competition to compete. The world does much better without monopolies just viewing people as a recourse, while basically enslaving them and putting a false facade that there might be hope you will progress and become the next millionaire, but with a system like that in place, the millionaires make sure they stay rich and the poor stay poor. It isn't always a matter of intelligence but of the willingness to not view another as a human but as something to exploit.

>lobbying the government

What government?

Problems with AnCapitalism:
Creates a power void which will be filled by authoritarian people

>Whats so great about NatSoc?
National socialism acts as a collective uplifting everyone, making sure everyone is working and not just making life worse for another. National socialism works towards a brighter, happier, and progressive society. Under the NSDAP millions were employed within the first year, and unemployment was slashed in half, while providing a well off life for all Germans. The economy of Germany grew roughly at 11% throughout the entire depression right up to the war when Germany had to switch to industrial military focus. People such as Werner Von Braun might have taken men to the moon more than a decade earlier if France and Britain had let them sort out their territorial disputes. The German government actually reported surplus and not deficit too, with an astounding level of happiness. The NSDAP issues labor based non inflating currency, the reichmark. The manipulation of markets was gotten rid of so the economy could grow gracefully without self interested people.

The one created by powerful(rich) people

>Problems tih AnCapitalism
Roads
You can't enforce the NAP
You're a fat neckbeard and will have your shit stolen by niggers the second we flip the switch

>Problems with NatSoc
Literally Hitler

>national socialism
>socialism

>Hitler
>Problem

Hitler unironically did nothing wrong

>not combining the best of both worlds

>Problems tih AnCapitalism
Cartels
Monopolies in finite goods systems
Private for-profit courts are inherently biased
Will never be implemented (arguably not really a problem)

>problems with NatSoc
Will never be implemented again

Socialism just in name, pic related. Every single thread there's one of you retards

>Democratic peoples republic of Korea
>democratic republic of Congo
Wow really democratic

>marxist socialism is the same as national socialism
Read a fucking book about it dumb fuck

>muh monopolies
name 1 (one) monopoly that wasn't created thanks to government intervention

Both are idiotic ideologies, a nationalist free market social democracy is the best choice.

>cartels
But what about NAP?

Example / Evidence please?

The person that owns the shortest path between two points has the monopoly on the quickest path between those two points.

Cartels don't violate the NAP.

>social democracy
>not decaying into socialist shitholes

I'm not sure i've heard of that monopoly.

It doesn't exist at the moment because we have a government to prevent it.

So how would cartels exist without violating NAP? I'm genuinely curious, wouldn't they just be a trade caravan?

thats new
is it in mein kampf?

I shouldve checked your flag before I responded

I am an Anarcho-Authoritarian. Checkmate athiests.

If you knew what a cartel was you would realize how ridiculous your question sounds.
>an association of manufacturers or suppliers with the purpose of maintaining prices at a high level and restricting competition
What about this requires an initiation of force, and what prevents initiations of force in an AnCap society anyhow? Private courts which are inherently biased?

Australian government is literally cancer senpai. No guns. No drugs. Outrageous taxes. Borderline socialism. Wellfare system that is easier to game than America. Abos benifits. Legit cancerous.

Ill admit i didnt know. But surely market compition would arise and prevent cartels from existing?

cartels always devolve into the members secretly selling to consumers at a lower rate than the cartel to make a profit.

...

>No guns
Wrong
>No Drugs
Good you fucking degenerate and we're fucked on ice anyway, and that would only get worse in a shitty anarchist society.
>Borderline Socialism
No the people are not about to overthrow the government then seize the means of production
>Welfare is bad
No Welfare for Whites in a nationalistic state is good provided, not for Abos or in a shitty liberal easy to cheat system and if you cheat you get fucked over hard

Not if the members of the Cartel owned all of the finite resources required to compete.

Then they would never be able to do business with the cartel again.

>Problems with AnCap
The ultimate form of ''divide et impera''. People astray with no leadership especially when so many need their hand held and can't govern themselves. Easy prey to opportunists and (((other assholes))).

>Problems with NatSoc
Unless applied globally, which is absolutely unrealistic, said NatSoc society becomes immediate target of all (((other))) countries.

wew, Sup Forums is literally TWO PERSONS

Free markets are proven to produce good economies but humans are imperfect so some might need a social safety net to survive and nationalism is needed to protect the nation from getting invaded by low iq immigrants that would exploit the social safety net.

>social democracy
A big problem, first off, is that it's democratic. Democracy is a form of governance that has failed us, is easily manipulated, and taken over by the Jews. Secondly, it provides equality for everyone, social justice, et cetera and not just for one race. As well, it's a Marxian socialist idea.

>Hitler 1930
>is it in mein kampf?

every.fucking.time

Social democracy is not socialism.
A social democracy is capitalism with a social safety net

I agree, (((they))) would target the NatSoc country, as they later did with Nazi Germany. Unfortunately, I think some form of global representation would be useful to prevent war between each nation if NatSoc was implemented everywhere.

>No guns
If you use a gun for self defense you will be imprisoned
>No drugs
Countries with legalization of drugs or even decriminalization of drugs experience far less adiction. Alot of the reason people move toward hard drugs is purely because other drugs are either too expensive or arent available. We have laws that will jail you for even having an ounce of weed
>Borderline Socialism
Unless you are top 1% you have NO means of production. Theres a reason why small business fail constantly in this country. Regulations are beyond a joke
>Wellfare is bad
Having pot smoking, good for nothings living off our tax dollars who have the ability to work SHOULD NOT EXPECT OUR SUPPORT. People game the system all the time. Sure theres cases that get caught but far more go through than get caught.

What you are talking about is globalist social democracy.A nationalist social democracy would be a free market combined with a social safety net and with strong anti immigration laws to prevent subhumans from invading the country.(I personally would ban people based on their iq)

Both.

idk
not going to search tough
put the goddamn source in the next time naziboo

That is fucking retarded. Lmao

Nazi Germany still had a free market though. Either way, democracies are still too easily corruptible by all of our favorite (((friends))).

all economists refer socialism as marxist-socialism

adolf hitler was not an economist so I would take anything he says about economics with a grain of salt

ancaps btfo

Not an argument. Lmao

>cartels always devolve into the members secretly selling to consumers at a lower rate than the cartel to make a profit.

This is hopelessly naive. Sometimes the 5 or six guys that lead the corporations in the cartel are bros. Sometimes everybody is making so much money in the cartel it pays just stay in it instead of breaking the trust.

I'm not sure what Hitler's plan was exactly but I don't think any NatSoc society will ever want to conquer another one, at least not for too long.

When you care about the Deutsche folk you can't keep the french folk under you forever. That would mean the French folk become Deutsche folk and the Deutsche folk stop being just Deutsche folk. The nation is now mutt.

The other solution would be to conquer, genocide EVERYONE and repopulate new earth but hell not even the Ottomans did that.

>If you use a gun for self defense you will be imprisoned
You use whatever means are available at the time for SELF DEFENSE, if someones robbing your house you don't shoot them according to our laws you gtfo and call the cops, I don't agree with that but that's how shit goes in a left society. But if you've been shooting and some abo runs at you with a knife screaming im going to kill you you can shoot him dead.
>Countries with legalization of drugs or even decriminalization of drugs experience far less addiction. A lot of the reason people move toward hard drugs is purely because other drugs are either too expensive or arent available. We have laws that will jail you for even having an ounce of weed
Muh drugs muh less druggos in a "open society' how apart instead of being a pussy and catering to degenerative nature you line up the Chinese drug dealers and blow their head off. next you'll be telling me people benefit from being allowed to be gay. Muh Weed
>Unless you are top 1% you have NO means of production. Theres a reason why small business fail constantly in this country. Regulations are beyond a joke
Well then that's not socialism. Socialism is 100% of the community having the "means of production" We are the opposite of Socialism then
>Having pot smoking, good for nothings living off our tax dollars who have the ability to work SHOULD NOT EXPECT OUR SUPPORT. People game the system all the time. Sure theres cases that get caught but far more go through than get caught.
Exactly but there's a difference between fuck all welfare fuck the state fuck poor people fuck widows and fuck orphans. Or the welfare state is bad but some people generally do gain a lot and put back into the community with a helping hand I want to help my fellow countrymen and make sure my society doesn't degenerate into who's the greediest AKA who can suck up the most welfare or who can suck exploit the people the most

I don't see any reason NatSoc needs to be expansionist. Hitler opened the door to be (((attacked))) when he was so expansionist.

And Nazis did not have the people collectively owning the means of production they had free enterprise rich people and privatly owned compaines etc.

Only in name Socialism as in giving a bit of charity not being a Commie

>what jews say is what is truth

Doesn't change the fact that there is nothing democratic about the DPRK

If you read some of the Hitler natsoc means floating around, it's pretty obvious that they were fairly free market. It's just that if you were engaging in a degenerate or harmful business practice, the Reich would drop the hammer.

Basically, NatSocs don't feel the need to worship at the altar of the free market like everyone else on the right. It's not necessarily "good" just because it turns a profit.

Basically you were able to do anything that most right wingers WOULD do in a free market economy. The most extreme Jewry was not tolerated.

>nothing
Ok and how many things are democratic about NZ in comparison?

AnCap allows for the destruction of ones civilization by those who can manipulate capital.

National Socialism allows for the ownership of private property, the accumulation of wealth and basically all the benefits of healthy capitalism with none of the detriments of AnCap.

However, the main reason NatSoc is the only way forward is that it inspires and ignites the souls of everyone who makes up a nation.

They feel pride in themselves, their countrymen and their nation. The pride a people take in their identity, history and their future is an amazingly binding force.

>for you weebs who try to suggest that NatSoc has anything to do with Communistic Socialism, Communism teaches the destruction of history and making the state God

It is undeniably the most powerful and positive force known to us.

>authoritarian person violates my NAP
>Pay the local PMC 190BTC to take him out
simple as that

>It's not necessarily "good" just because it turns a profit.
Amen to that.

no thanks, i dont debate nazis, i smash their faces in if they come on my property.

t. libertarian

I don't understand what that has to do with anything

There are plenty of non-jewish economists

This. Sup Forums has devolved into shit.

I'm saying that it's socialist in name only, it's not Marxist-Leninist in practice.

>organized army forms and takes over everything

fun while lasts lol

I'm not saying NatSoc should be expansionist. If anything, it should be isolationist on some level and respect the boundaries of the outlying nations as long as they respect yours. Inherently, it isn't an expansionist ideology, but Hitler began retaking lands he saw as rightful German clay that (((they))) had taken away from Germany through the Treaty of Versailles.

Authoritarian person just pays him more money to kill you instead.

It would only a democracy in the sense that you can choose the leader but their would be a strict constitution that defends free markets and would be against people with low iqs from immigrating into the country.

Can you point me to some articles on what his "socialism" was? I don't know much about it

Exerything cannot be privatized because of conflict of interests.
Private military owned by Jew A and roads owned by Jew B
Jew B has interests in seperate military company owned by Jew C, and denies access by Jew A on Jew b's roads, thus denying service to Clients of Jew A.

Privatizing everything would be a logistical Jumble fuck, and would ultimately, create States again. States are Organic.

INB4 "States are not organic because they are enforced with a monopoly of force"

All forms of property are enforced with a monopoly of force. Dont blame your failure as a business owner or entrepeneur on taxes. Whether those taxes be TAXES or RENT or TOLLS you be paying them. Stop bitching

Perhaps then, it may work.

As well, National Socialism DOES support the Free Market as long as the people of the Nation are being abused by whatever company or individual may be doing so.

>Seeing that AnCap has risen back up in recent months and NatSoc has fallen

That's a polite way to say that newfags now outnumber oldfags again for the first time since ~2012

>You can't enforce the NAP
Wrong.

The treaty of Versailles was a real bitch, but he blew his ideology and his people the fuck out by giving a casus belli for all of the non Axis states to fuck Germany up.

The way to think about this point is that the "real" rules of human existence are Ancap. Literally every time a state has arisen, it's arisen from an Ancap society.

This is hopelessly naive. Maintaining cordial relations when there is serious profit to be made has never worked.

Heterogeneous organizations formed from formerly competing units are inherently unstable. Look at the EU.

I understand. He was short-sighted in that aspect, but I think a good bit of that could also be attributed to Jewish influence.

Yep, I've migrated mostly to infinitychan now but I figured I might as well help the movement grow. The newfag invasion started around February of 2016. I gotta say, December 2015 - April 2016 was a golden age of memes, this site has taken a sharp turn into the shitter lately

The problem with an-cap is that it is purely economics (materialism) and doesn't address culture or race. It has no answer for the flood of immigration from the Middle East into Europe. It has no answer to the rise of degeneracy and the breakdown of the family.

Societies are more than economic systems, they are a people with shared values, traditions, and histories. There has never been a strong civilization in all of human history that did not also have a strong unifying culture.

Not without a state you can't. Ancap is the easiest fucking idea to strawman around. It fails as soon as you have one or two dudes that aren't true fucking believers.

Ancap would benefit the already extremely super rich kikes.

National Socialism benefits whites with morals and honor.

There isn't serious profit to be made. As soon as someone steps out of line, all parties race to the bottom, and your product is a commodity with low profit margin.

Is it that hard for you to grasp that it sometimes it makes sense for companies to not sell at the lowest price possible?

>you violate the nap
>I shoot you in the fucking head
or
>I call my security company and they shoot you in the fucking head
Not that difficult.

So you're assuming some utopian world where competing firms, whose motive is profit, are going to solve the prisoner's dilemma by quietly accepting a lower profit instead of trying to secretly screw each other over, something humans have always done throughout history?

How did Ancap even gain any momentum in the first place? It has to be the most moronic ideology ever put forward.

Money = Power
Power = Authority
Authority = Control

It's a childish way of saying, okay guys, let's reboot and maybe we will get it right this time.

Ancaps are idiotic and have nothing interesting to put forward except for the fact that the name of their ideology is a portmanteau.