A question

alright Sup Forums i wanted to ask a genuine question how many of you are actualy natsoc or is it just larping?
if so why?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schutztruppe
strawpoll.me/13034542
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

NatSoc before 1941 was God tier.
After that, it went to fucking hell.
Just look into what Germany was doing.
It was amazing until they made the war machine the staple of their economy.

well after ww1 and the treaty of versiales the german (weimar) economy was in hyper inflation i still find it remarkeble that the krauts got their destroyed economy to become one of the most powerfull in europe in a few years.

>NatSoc before 1941 was God tier.
the had a war economy and the needed to expand its quite ironic that the system that brought natsoc germany such sucses is the same thing that condemmed it to an early death.

>It was amazing until they made the war machine the staple of their economy.
over-extensive program of re-armament that, despite greatly reducing unemployment and poverty in the short-term, would actually—if unchecked—result in a general collapse of the German economy in about 1942 or so.

Hitler would have been fine had he not been such a rapid expansionist.
All he would have had to do is restore the original border, and been cautious militarily.
He over-expanded in a war where he was completely surrounded.

Proud black National Socialist here.

>Hitler would have been fine had he not been such a rapid expansionist.

the thing is too that if the soviets invaded 2 weeks earlier the brits and france would have declared war on them instead of germany the krauts could have used the same excuze as the soviets did about muh etnic oppresion.

patience was something he lacked.

Nah, NatSoc Germany's economy relied entirely on the war industry, if they did not expand their borders and fight, demand for the war industry would dry up and the economy would collapse, if they DID fight atleast they could go out with a bang

>Proud black National Socialist here.
black national socialist?
how does that work the 2 things are conflicting.

I hold no strong opinions either way.
The failing status quo has led us to a point where people are LARPing about natsoc and stalinism seriously, because Libertarianism is no answer to the predicament we find ourselves in.

Democracy is truly the way forward, but we need to redefine (((culture))) and (((capital))) so they don't lead to our destruction.

How?

Idk, we're fucked lads.

Nat Soc here
War with Russia was mistake

>All he would have had to do is restore the original border
How he would do it without war?
Whole Poland is pretty much kraut clay.

War agains't the soviets was necessary because they attacked Finland

Shut up!

I SAID SHUT UP!

>Throws garbage on you
>Wheels wheelchair around

HE STILL WON'T SHUT UP!

Not really NatSoc, but I'd prefer NatSoc over the current systems that dominate the world.

>the thing is too that if the soviets invaded 2 weeks earlier the brits and france would have declared war on them instead of germany the krauts could have used the same excuze as the soviets did about muh ethnic oppresion.

The Soviets Would never have invaded first. For All of Stalin's Fault, he knew from the get-go he was in a precarious situation. The Few times he did play his hand, he got his nose bloody.

if the attacked north africa giving rommel his battalions .he could have sucseeded the thingis natsoc germany was low on oil in the late war it put the noose on the already shrinking sucses the had.

well that the thing stalin knew he could tempt him
he had the patience and the correct economy for patience hitler did not have that.

why are you a natsoc?

>the 2 things are conflicting.
National Socialist means a combination of Nationalism and Socialism

From wikipedia-

Nationalism is a multidimensional social construction reflected in the communal identification with one's nation.

Socialism is a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

Notice there is no part in their about hating blacks, that was exclusive to intensely ethnic focus NatSoc that was the economic and social model for the third reich.

Nationalism can be civic as well so even multiethnic societies can be nationalist

So a black person can be a national socialist by having a) Intense pride for ones nation (either ethnic or civic nation) and a desire to redistribute goods and services and make property co-operatively held.

no it does not, National Socialism is the love for your race and people. Blacks can also be National Socialists.

Greatest system that humanity has tried so far.

Inb4 communism was never tried, kill yourselves retards

You be a black and a nat soc. Only good blacks in my opinion

>love for your race and people
not necessarily, nationalism can be civic too
see

well hitler was apethatic to the iranians and islam and no blacks where actualy persecuted in germany suprisingly.

i think its becuase htler was a soldier in ww1 and the german empire was allied to the ottomans and the had collony's where the got colonial troops shutztruppe is the name i believe?

Yes, but my point still stands, blacks can be ethnic nationalist socialist whereby they estabilish an ethnonation of their own withsocialised economy or civic nationalists who estabilish their own civic nationalist society with socialised economy

the black in that pic is actualy a
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schutztruppe

Lurk more

Shitposting

Hans Hauck (1920-2003) was an Afro-German who served in the Wehrmacht during the Nazi regime in Germany.[1]

Hans was born in Frankfurt in 1920. He was the son of an Algerian soldier of black descent serving in the French Army. In 1933 he joined the Hitler Youth while living in Saarland (not integrated into Germany at that time). An SS officer helped get him work on the railway. During 1935 or 1936 Hauck was sterilised under the Nazi racial purity measures.

sorry for the wiki.

War was an inevitability.
Europe as a whole was unstable at that time.
I'm suggesting that he not go into France, Holland, etc.

Why do we have this thread every hour all of the sudden?

Datamining?

love for your own people does not mean discrimination against others

LARPers get the FUCK out

that is treu but it can easly become that.
i wanted to see why some posters here are natsoc and why.

This

>how many of you are actualy natsoc

According to recent """strawpolls""", the board is comprised mainly of Libertarians and Nazis.

>if so why

Most people who are NatSoc seem to have come to that destination after being libertarian themselves. I would suspect that this is because Libertarianism does not have answers for the moral issues that are currently plaguing Western nations. There are of course those who see parallels between Western society as a whole and Weimar Germany, and came to the conclusion that National Socialism is the most effective way to counter rampant decline.

Because I believe world today is really degenerate and if you want to change anything you need strong state ruled by one leader and I think sacrificing some personal freedoms in authoritarian state for greater good is worth it
Democracy is nice in theory but is so easy to manipulate when you have money
also NatSoc =/= racist or antisemite

Yes but Hitlerian NatSoc (If that's what you were talking about) did have very strong influence of ideas of ethnic superiority.

For example, the hatred for Jews and sterilisation of many non-whites termed untermenschen (literally: low people/subhuman) was something exclusive to Hitlerian NatSoc but it is not a core principle of National Socialism as such

>Most people who are NatSoc seem to have come to that destination after being libertarian themselves. I would suspect that this is because Libertarianism does not have answers for the moral issues that are currently plaguing Western nations.
This

what you are seeing now is just history repeating iself where becoming the new weimar republic full of its hedonism and complete disregard of morals.
the cycle usualy goes like this left or right goes to the exstreme right balances it out then the country goes back to libretarianism.

i see the left or the right as counters that balance eachother out.

Yeah, kinda i guess.

Here's a more comprehensive poll that should give a better insight on this boards demographics

strawpoll.me/13034542

well thats treu i used to be a libretarian when i realized it was retarded i went more and more to the right.

The thing is that "extreme left" was abandoned because people realized its retarded system but NatSoc was destroyed in war

There's actually funny how few natsoc are out there and how big of a problem silly people think it is

communism sadly still exists today.
the left used to be more libretarian but it morphed into the horrid beast we see today.
its a blend of marxism moral relitavism and libretarianism.
national socialism has a massive stigma attached to just the name alone the only way i could ever see it beein ever implemented in a country agian would be if the changed the name and some of the policies.

the stigma thats attached to the name is the problem people today only see a "democracy" as valeuble as thats the only thing the have ever been tought was "right".

the thing with democracy is that its only as good as the education surounding it.

The Neo-Nazis on the streets today would have been in the SA back in the 1930's, the "intellectual" class of the National Socialists typically can only be found online as they realise the impact that being open about beliefs like these can have, at least beyond the scope of close friends and relatives.

You're correct in assuming these people are no threat, without leadership their efforts are useless.

Libertarianism is as right as you can get boi

There are 3 axes to the economic spectrum-

Economic axis - Left/Right, Leftism advocates redistribution of wealth and goods and common ownership of property, Rightism advocates private property ownership and no redristribution of wealth

Control axis - Authoritarian/Liberal, Authoritarianism advocates more state control over society and economy (Big government), Liberalism advocates more personal freedom and less state control on society and economy (Small government)

Social axis - Progressive/Traditional, Progressivism advocates for equality and equity (sometimes even when it already exists), more stress on individualism and ideals like LGBTQ rights, womens empowerment, forced equality, etc;, Traditionalism advocates more stress on family as a fundamental unit of society and on preserving honour, culture, reliogn, heritage and tradition sometimes at the expense of civil rights

Libertarianism is the mix of Liberal + Right with no specific social alignment (but usually moderately traditional)

NatSoc is a mix of Authoritarian + Left with strong fixation on Traditionalism on the social axis

>The Neo-Nazis on the streets today
Just white thugs looking for some identity

exactly the "normies" see the sad state of neo nazis but few have ever had a decent argument with an itelectual one that did not devolve into autistic screeching.

the thing is the neo nazi movement has no smart leader today who is willing to descuss.

Just post em

isnt national socialism a mix between socialism and strong conservatism with a bit of optional etnic nationalism blended in?

but what youre saying is treu if you take the right to the logical exstreme you get anarchism or ancapitalism

pic related is my result

>national socialism has a massive stigma attached to just the name alone the only way i could ever see it beein ever implemented in a country agian would be if the changed the name and some of the policies.
Like marxism had on imperial Russia.
History shows that the most radical is usually the winner group

>isnt national socialism a mix between socialism and strong conservatism
Yup, thats what I said. Traditionalism is the same as conservatism
>take the right to the logical exstreme you get anarchism or ancapitalism
Not necessarily, rightism is an economic ideal the extreme right only deals with complete market freedom the amount of state interference in personal life is determined by Authoritarian/Liberal axis determines closeness to anarchy

You could theoretically push Liberalism to the extreme and get anarchy in a rightist OR leftist state

Liberalism (not Rightism) taken to the logical extreme yields anarchy

Liberalism AND Rightism taken to the logical extreme yields AnCap

Liberalism AND Leftism taken to the logical extreme yields AnCom

Stop voting communist you niggers

the thing is that communism came forth after ww1 emperial russia was on the brink of collapse after the monarchy fucked the country.
the exstreme authoritarian dictatorship came from the fact that stalin rose to power instead of lenin who died. i wonder what would have happened if lenin was the leader of the soviet union?

Left-Right dichotomy is severely out-dated in modern politics, especially now that the media does a firm job at associating anything or anyone with right wing views as "wrong". Modern politicians and pundits describing National Socialism and Fascism as "far right", or Redditards calling Fascism "far left" is equally disingenuous. National Socialism was never about left or right politics and it deliberately distanced itself from both to present itself as an alternative to the chaos of Marxism, the degeneracy of Liberalism and the uselessness of Conservatism.

Stigma is so hard, that even some things not connected to nazism frighten people. For example neo-paganism. Some people follow logic, that goes like this: Has Scandinavic runes->Nazis used runes->He loves Hitler.

Even in German you're a group of faggots.

>isnt national socialism a mix between socialism
No, NatSoc is not anticapitalist

thats treu it doesnt help that people are disincouriged from engaging in any descusion about national socialism or the will become a social pariah.

it has socialist policies to help birth rates
and nationalized alot of privite company's.

but unlike communism you where allowed to own private property.

the where more anti banker crony capitalism.

>especially now that the media does a firm job at associating anything or anyone with right wing views as "wrong". Modern politicians and pundits describing National Socialism and Fascism as "far right", or Redditards calling Fascism "far left" is equally disingenuous.

Yes but that doesn't mean the representation system itself is wrong, its just being misrepresented it's upto us to set the usage right.

And for now, its the best system we have if you use all three axes correctly, there are some 5-axis and 6-axis systems but they are cumbersome to use/understand and usually provide nuanced differences that are mostly overlooked in broader political discussion, the 3-axis system represents most relevant information without being overly loaded.

Thats just wrong, it has everything to do with anticapitalism, socialism is inherently anticapitalist since they lie on the same political axis (see )

>more anti banker crony capitalism.
Yes pretty much
btw what are your political believes?

>National Socialism is socialist because its in the name

i used to be a minarchist
but i became a conservative after i realized that you need some form of state control to guide society from falling into exstreme hedonism or becoming the modern left but im still a believer of a small state and not a giant goverment.

National Socialism in practise was not anti-capitalist, and that was one of the reasons that it found support in the CEOs of larger German industries which were discovered to be funding the NSDAP in Germany.

National Socialism advocated for Capitalism openly, but only so long as it was in favour to the people of the nation, and only so long as it wasn't used to benefit a small group of international individuals.

How is it not?

>inb4 Hitler privatised German industry

Hitler stopped following the NatSoc model sometime around 1934-35

National Socialism as an ideology is still inherently anticapitalist

it had socialist features ones like pension also the had programs that virtualy rooted out uninployment the also had maternity leave and ones to increase birthrate.

thats what i mean it was more of the nation first the individual capitalism later.

I used to be until I realized nobody else is willing to actually create such a government. My hat goes off to any of you fuckers who could successfully lead a movement that brings natsoc into reality. For now I will focus on things that matter, getting money and women. Social and traditional values, complaining about degeneracy, muh white race, is absolutely meaningless at the moment

>Hitler stopped following the NatSoc model sometime around 1934-35
Ok well I was referring mostly to his policies after that period so how should I call it german fascism? Most people refer to his regime as NatSoc I know this name is not right but I didnt create it
Yes I believe NatSoc is economically centrist, there were right and left policies

I'm not larping, bring it back.

economically centrist and in term of policies the where mostly authoriterian right.

and why are you a natsoc?

I'm not a Nazi wehraboo stormfag, or a fascist, I think there are lots of good jews and black people, collectivism is cancer. plenty of horrible shitty jews and dumb violent blacks though. voted for Trump. I'm here for the happenings and memes.

Call it Hitlerian NatSoc since it still had some core NatSoc elements in it until '45

>the thing is too that if the soviets invaded 2 weeks earlier the brits and france would have declared war on them instead of germany
no, the guarantee was specifically for a german invasion

>comprehensive poll that should give a better insight on this boards demographics
>Stop Voting Something I don't like.

did he not swith to a war economy after 1940?
the had an economic reform simular to the soviets when the first got into power.

are you talking about the moletov ribbetrop pact?

>did he not swith to a war economy after 1940?
Yes, but tax-funded state education and maternity programs still existed so he didn't abolish the Socialism aspect completely

>implying they are voting unironically

i seems that by the sight of the commie treads that there are communist on here i would not completely rule the possibility out.

You must be at least 70% homogeneous to post in this thread

I have stumbled on some street-nazis and I can tell they are lost. They were only fueled by hate but they didn't understand the reasons for the hate. Not to mention anything remotely political. Just because I said I'm NatSoc and I take care of myself they agreed on everything I said. You could've told them the moon is cheese. Neo-Nazis are the obstacle we need to get rid off.

thats the thing if the natsoc movement actualy had competend leaders willing to descuss and argeu istead of the neo natsoc street thug trash you see today there might be a chance for the stigma to be removed.

nobody was ever convinced by violent street thugs.