Which specific political ideology / movement resembles this the most?

which specific political ideology / movement resembles this the most?

>capitalist free market
>nationalistic
>ethnocentrist
>anti globalist
>anti immigration
>anti socialist / communist

pic not

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/lIUX97O11Vk
youtube.com/watch?v=bX3EZCVj2XA
twitter.com/AnonBabble

...

>capitalist free market
>anti globalist
pick one you drooling retard

kill yourself you fucking retard

american paleoconservatism, look into the john birch society

>not being a National Libertarian
Rake yourself, fag.

they are not mutually exclusive concepts you fucking leaf

you can't be claim to be an advocate for free markets if you support trade tarrifs and protectionism

kill yourself you retarded swedecuck

retarded ideology for fedora'd internet special snowflakes that doesn't exist in real life

yes they are you fucking idiot.

Protectionism is a mutually exclusive concept from free markets lmao, read a fucking book you moron

...

You are very retarded if you think free markets can exist with prohibitive anti-globalist tariffs, read a fucking book about international supply chains you fucking NEET loser faggot holy shit

They are though, unless you think your society built on individual greed will magically avoid it's most succesful citizens desiring the greater profits globalism can provide.

>this system is ethnocentrist
>NO, IT DOESNT AUTOMATICALLY SLAUGHTERS PEOPLE BASED ON SKIN COLOR DIFFERENCES, ITS NOT ETHNOCENTRIST, REEEE
you are basically this stupid

Free market isn't the same as free trade, you fucking moron. Globalists are all about partnering with governments to regulate their competitors out of existence. Their economic philosophy is more in line with fascism and socialism than anything else.

you can advocate for a free markeT without advocating for free marketS

if you cannot understand this you are literally retarded, but that would come as no surprise because nazis are literally subhuman retards

Nice false equivalencey you fucking retard, nobody mentioned the ethnocentric point in your OP, you must be too stupid and out of your depth to discuss the actual economic points in my post.

Free markets cannot exist with excessive government regulation. If I need to buy a component from country X in order to manufacture widgets competitively and the government prevents me from doing so, that is government interference in the market and therefore not a free market.

Eat shit you drooling anti-capitalist retard, you will next for the helicopter rides.

it was an analogy, just to show how retarded you are, not even an attempt at an argument, but you had to see your own stupidity somehow

The nazis were closer to your economic viewpoint, nice try though. You're just as stupid as the berniefags

Sherri Few is Based!

youtu.be/lIUX97O11Vk

You still didn't address my argument, probably because you're too stupid to do so.

>~33% of the replies in the thread is from the same autistic leaf who just spouts retarded bullshit and thinks he's right
>MUH ARGUMENT
>didn't actually present an argument
impressive

very nice

You're retarded and your worldview is incoherent and contradictory, enjoy the cognitive dissonance yurotrash.

The leaf is right.

What's stopping a huge international company from coming to your country and destroying all the small businesses via price wars and other means?

If you need to buy components from some commie country with slave labor and price fixing, and your competitors are doing the same - pretty soon all the products on the market are going to be made by that country, and not you. That's not a free market economy - that's consumerism of controlled market goods.

>slave labour is the only reason you would buy components from a company in another country
Go look up comparative advantage before you reply to one of my posts again

I hate NEET retards like you so much.

national socialism was also against capitalism, fucking retard

Not an argument. The US had thriving textile, steel, and electronics industries before they were dominated by East Asia. Overabundance of cheap labor, and ridiculously low prices due to price controls and currency manipulation are not valid comparative advantages in a "free market".

Who said I was talking about China? Or even any asian country? Comparative advantage can exist between any two countries. You didn't do any reading on comparative advantage, or if you did, I can tell you don't understand the concept.

>being able to make something cheaper is not a valid comparative advantage
lmao

It was against rootless bankers committing usury and controlling the flow of wealth via central bank, not free enterprise and private property you dingus

Why can't you screaming weenies all just accept that National Socialism was good? We're talking about from-rags-to-riches almost all of Europe conquering Nazi Germany here.

I know the mere mention of social benefits makes your NAP ache but think for a second about how you're going to maintain your free market ethno state without a strong central government. Opinions change, counter cultures spring up. With the guiding hand of Fascist leadership you wouldn't have to worry about later generations tearing down what you built. You only gotta sacrifice some taxes and some liberties in exchange for the paradise you're looking for.

Anarcho Capitalism in the Hoppean tradition.

When its time to throw down against international communism theyll choose the right side. Love Life Anarchy and Stefan both are crypto or explicitly fascist now

>you will next for the helicopter rides

kek

Stop falling for the controlled stereotype thinking.
It is just another way to divide us and distract us from (((them)))

>what is world communism

youtube.com/watch?v=bX3EZCVj2XA

Hate to break it to you, but most people don't want to live in a fascist state perpetually waging unsustainable wars (see: Operation Barbarossa) under the rule of an amphetamine-crazed hubris leader.

National Socialism wasn't good because it was still socialism

>national socialism
>capitalist free market
wew lad

What's with leafs invading the thread?

>A free market economy is where everything is manufactured by foreign slaves, and that's great! It's comparative advantage!

No, that's not how it works. Stop drinking the globalist propaganda.

probably some sort of conservatism?

>With the guiding hand of Fascist leadership you wouldn't have to worry about later generations tearing down what you built

In non-democracies it isn't the people that tear it down, it's the government itself that grows corrupt. We're biologically wired to grow more corrupt with more power and only very few manage to resist that.

One of the big advantages of a functioning democracy is that you can peacefully depose the corrupt rulers with other people.

They are because of human nature, corporations would never deny themselves cheap labor and outsource their manufacturing. The commies also tried to make the "new soviet man" which was also a farce against natural tendencies of men. Libertarianism is opposed to nationalism, people on Sup Forums just haven't realized it yet.

Who the fuck said anything about slave labour? You are aware that a comparative advantage differential can exist in manufacturing of two different types of widgets between two wealthy countries with highly paid workers, right? Do you even know what comparative advantage is?

Was it? Well it sure looks a whole lot fucking different from all the other times socialism was tried, doesn't it?

Really makes you think.

Its the technical description of paleoconservatism - American conservatism before the GOP was taken over by Trotskyite NeoCons.

Yeah, well that's currently not working out so well here in America buddy.

That swamp practically just ate Trump whole.

I've seen figure heads swapped. We can't change the actual government at all.

>perpetually waging unsustainable wars

There is nothing about fascism that requires you to go to war with anyone. That was merely a product of the interwar political situation.

Lebensraum was a pretty central tenet of National Socialism.

It didn't last long enough for the underlying problems to make themselves obvious

Okay

National Socialism and Fascism are not synonyms

Lebensraum was a product of Hitler and the Germans. Being National Socialist does not automatically mean you have to pursue lebensraum. Even so, we were talking about Fascism, which is not necessarily National Socialist.

paleo-conservative

> Even so, we were talking about Fascism, which is not necessarily National Socialist.
You specifically said this:
>Why can't you screaming weenies all just accept that National Socialism was good?
in

So? Every system has problems. Do you know for a fact that they were terribly damaging? That they were worse than democracy's problems?

Either way, saying National Socialism was "still socialism," comparing it to the likes of Venezuela, is just ridiculous. It operated completely differently.

Chaos. Not even the CIA can figure it out

You said "Fascist state" so I addressed Fascism.

Even so, like I said earlier, National Socialism does not obligate you to pursue Lebensraum.

I'm just saying that you can't really draw any conclusions about how a National Socialist state would function in the long term from the example of Germany. Democracies produced the most powerful and wealthy societies to ever exist

National Socialism is a subset of fascist ideology, it is reasonable to call any national socialist state fascist.

It's unsustainable in any case.

>National Socialism does not obligate you to pursue Lebensraum.
But Lebensraum is one of the core tenets of National Socialism. If you told this to Hitler in 1934 you would've be hanged as a Strasserist.

Neo Nazis are fucking retards, man.

>But Lebensraum is one of the core tenets of National Socialism
Yes, for Germany. I do not live in Germany and the year is not 1934. Do you really think a modern implementation of National Socialism in, say, America would need to acquire Lebensraum with so much readily available space in their own country?

>I do not live in Germany and the year is not 1934
Discussion is a moot point in that case because Nazism is a nonstarter in America for anyone except human trash crust punks.

>Democracies produced the most powerful and wealthy societies to ever exist
But can we so surely attribute this solely to democracy? It seems equally likely to me that this is simply a result of technological development and increased productivity over time. After all, America was a democracy for a very long time while Europe remained mostly monarchies, and never really surpassed them until after WW2.

I agree that there are plenty of unknown factors considering it did not have a long run in peace time, but immediately discrediting National Socialism as "socialist" and therefore inherently broken is just silly, since it clearly operated very differently from actual Marxist Socialist nations.

This should be obvious. I guess globalism to Sup Forums means 1 world open bordered government? No wonder they all hate globalism when they build it into this straw man.

We're speaking hypothetically here, so it doesn't matter how realistic the situation in question is.

>nazism is a nonstarter in America for anyone except human trash crust punks
that's literally not an argument

>We're speaking hypothetically here, so it doesn't matter how realistic the situation in question is.
i.e. nobody should listen to your opinions because you're talking out of your ass with no sense of historical context, got it.

kys

explain yourself