REMINDER THAT NATIONAL SOCIALISM IS A L E F T - W I N G IDEOLOGY

REMINDER THAT NATIONAL SOCIALISM IS A L E F T - W I N G IDEOLOGY.

If you're a natsoc, you're no better than a commie and needs to get /out/. Also, enjoy your time in hell when you die, you fucking communist.

Other urls found in this thread:

encyclopediadramatica.rs/Stormfront#How_to_troll_Stormfront
4chandata.org/q/Stormfront-using-Sup
encyclopediadramatica.rs/Hal_Turner
stormfront.org/forum/t350907/
whitegenocideproject.com/new-and-improved-bugs-buddy/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

How is it left wing?

statists

>muh shekels

Fuck off neocon

I guess every form of government is left wing then

So are you saying a state is categorically a bad thing?

Nazis use the same anti capitalist tropes that marxists use to rally the "working class"

Even theoretically dividing society based on "classes" is a marxist line of thinking, it's deterministic. It fails to acknowledge the ability of one to move up the economic ladde in capitalism.

Suck off the big business daddy more, maybe he won't export your workplace to China.

Naaah, who am I kidding, brazilian and working, hehe.

Why does literally nobody understand the difference between Marxist socialism and socialism as an egalitarian nationalism. Y'all motherfuckers need Spengler.

>It fails to acknowledge the ability of one to move up the economic ladde in capitalism.

It acknowledges the ability too damn well to buy into "hard working and good ethics will make you a billionaire" wagecucks and TEMs in America use to cuddle themselves to sleep without blowing their brains off.

You are clueless.


National Socialism criticizes Jewish Capitalism indeed, but it does not wish for a classless society. It acknowledges differences, and does not seek to eradicate them. Instead in National Socialism it is "each according to his ability", and the differences in intellect/strength/ability should be bridged via a national community (Volksgemeinschaft). Class mobility was indeed possible and encouraged in National Socialism, because again: Each according to his ability.

Wrong, the NSDAP were against Jewish financiers, not rich people in general or the middle class.

Also there is nothing wrong with rallying the working class. Good luck having any successful political movement without them.

...

It is a necessary evil, but an evil non the less.

Government roadblocks like taxation and regulation is what stops le bootstraps and elbow grease from working as effeciently, people have a right to complain, were not living in umbridled capitalism.

Look at it this way, capitalism overall in western societies have raised the standard of living so high, that the "lower clases" need not do anything whatsoever, and they still reap the rewards of a growing powerful economy.

Shaniqua is working at KFC and has an Iphone, when in the past she would have been a farmhand with no property.

Economic progress through capitalism raises everyone on the economic ladder.

Good thread.

Necessary to speak avout this.

>alt-lite
Even in comics you can't separate the socialism from the Judaism.

Yes.

>Big nanny-state
>Rights are inherently tied to the government
>Economics on a leash
>Literally following Marx's teachings
And many more reasons. Not to mention, the "SOCIALISM" in the name, and the fact that it spawned out of the fucking WORKERS PARTY are pretty good leads to the true nature of the movement.

Nope. There are right-wing forms of governments, mainly those that base their principles on liberties, rights and moral and religious standards. Which is the opposite of socialism, of any kind.

>Why they don't understand that my socialism is better than the other socialism
They all came from communism and Karl Marx, and they are all based on inherently imoral ideas.

>the political spectrum is 2-dimensional

Yes

Why? Isn't a state merely a means to an end? When a sufficiently large number of people wants to delegate certain tasks to a central organ for simplification/efficiency/comfort, what's so bad about it then?

It only becomes evil when the state stops serving its people. The American understanding of the state is naturally negative, because of the various races and groups living in your country. White Americans want a small government, because they're the ones financing it. Niggers want a large one. This creates tension.

In German National Socialism, the state existed, and gave back to the German people. It specifically excluded foreigners (Jews, gypsies, ...) and even German undesirables (cripples, lunatics, anti-socials, ...).


I'm pretty sure you would have loved the German state if you had been a German back then.

>being a classcuck
>being a statecuck
>not being an anti democracy, anti kike, anti capitalist, fascist syndicalist

Grow up all of you

>he thinks communism won't work with a homogenous people

It's always the shitskins ruining it for everyone else.

"My socialism is better than your shitty socialism."


Out the helicopter you go.

Power corrupts, there are no exceptions. Consolidating social authority into the hands of a few will always grant power, and thus corruption.
Thus, any government is naturally prone to corruption. The more powerful the government, the deeper the corruption.
The only way to combat this by explicitly declaring limits on the government, and enforcing the limits by having the parts of the government hold each other in check.

Marxism and National Socialism are both products of the Romantic school of thought and are thus cancer.

>Big nanny-state
For all those who deserved help. Undesirables were culled.

>Rights are inherently tied to the government
Rights are tied to the power to enforce them. This is true for all systems.

>Economics on a leash
Probably as a reaction to the economic crisis

>Literally following Marx's teachings
National Socialism was explicitly anti-marxist.

>And many more reasons. Not to mention, the "SOCIALISM" in the name, and the fact that it spawned out of the fucking WORKERS PARTY are pretty good leads to the true nature of the movement.
Hitler wrote in his book that the masses are simply needed to win over the Weimar Republic system, which required a democratic vote. He loathed the idea to make politics for the dumb masses; he wanted to uplift them. Not so the Marxist: he wants to enslave them. Marxism is a Jewish ideology, and the end goal is the same as Jewish Capitalism's: Extract the goyim's labour and live like kings among an internationalized, bastardized race of world-humans without heritage and without any fight in them.

Kek. That worked out so well for us. Surely having 1000 idiots all scrambling for power while no one person can be held accountable is the best way to go!

It doesn't matter if communism works or not, it is inherently evil and thus it's not a system that should ever be even tried. And the such applies to all forms of socialism, which were born from it.

Pinochet was pro Jew and evem attrnded Yom Kippur services. He qas more frirndly to Jews then Allende, who was a freemason.

>muh money

Every libertarian I've ever met was the kind of worm who would throw open their borders if it meant a .2% increase in GDP, or who would gladly see orgies being held in the street as long as there was no state.

>because after all, that doesn't impact me, so why should I care?

>are both products of the Romantic school of thought
I don't see that. Elaborate?

>Power corrupts, there are no exceptions.
I'm not convinced.

>you would have liked the German state if you were German
Probably not, lad. The thesis of that state was trust in authority, and that is exactly the opposite of what American culture dictates (classic American culture, nor our subverted one we have currently).
Anything that stands in the way of individual rights of the people is not a good thing.

The hell are you talking about? It was working fine until FDR started curtailing the limits and expanded federal authority. Look where that has left us.

>Brazilian education

>left wing ideology

found the brainlet boomerfag

I bet you believe the fox news "liberal fascism" meme too, don't you? fucking moron.

Looks like those limits on the government didn't mean shit.

Checkmate

The 'socialism' part is not in terms of economic socialism; rather, a social community (Volksgemeinschaft).

>National Socialism
>Socialism

america is proof that that the vast majority of people (whites included) simply cannot handle the burden of individual rights. they are easily corrupted and must be held in check.

>Marxism is a Jewish ideology, and the end goal is the same as Jewish Capitalism's: Extract the goyim's labour and live like kings among an internationalized, bastardized race of world-humans without heritage and without any fight in them.

You make a good distinction; Marxism is about bringing down the top, but National Socialism is about raising up the bottom, and doing so in a meritocratic manner.

>Power corrupts, there are no exceptions
Frederick The Great, Marcus Aurelius, there are more than a few counterexamples, and you merely asserting your opinion as fact is not convincing.

>aha those limits don't mean anything when we stop following them!
Full retard

>inherently evil
the fuck you on about son

That term was coined by a Jew iirc.

>We're anti degenerate
>Obsessed with brown showers

Also implying Pinochet didn't bring in libertarians to manage his economy

How so? You claim it is a proof, but you don't explain how. The issue you seem to be addressing is the subversion of individual thoughts, and not anything to do with the rights themselves.
Either that or you want some type of authoritarian state. If so, you are a fool to think you will hold any power in such a state, unless you are related to someone involved in the inner workings.

We tried that once. It didn't work out.

Hitler wrote specifically that Nat Soc had nothing to do with the Jewish bolshevik socialism. Not that any of you fucking retards can even read. Keep praising a guy that was about 1/100 the man and legend Hitler was for white people.

Your examples are of men who held themselves to high standards. That does not apply to a state, as can be seen by the fall of each state those people were in charge of.
A state that is reliant on the honesty of its leader will not last very long. Men die, but the state is suppose to outlast them.

muh constitution and muh freeze peach. Freedom best many hard decisions.

See

It's not about rights. It's about the survival of your people, and White Americans are being replaced by hordes of shitskins for the promise of economic growth. Your rights don't matter when niggers burn down your house. You can look at Haiti, Rhodesia, and now South Africa, and even Europe, America and Canada. White homelands are being invaded by shitskins. What matters isn't your individual rights, or even you. You don't matter in the grand scheme of things. What really matters is your tribe, your race, and how well it can preserve itself in the eternal struggle for survival. What matters isn't how many rights you have, but how much you are able to give for your children and your brothers, and whether your sacrifice (in life or in death) can secure their future.

> national socialists are exactly the same as communists

World War 2 would like to have a word with you

>newfags want to be in a state that treats them like whipped sheep
Explains why you shill for Hillary.

Objectively he doesn't understand what left or right means, where the terms come from. Hes regurgitating a several decade old Lolbertard talking point.

Lolberts and other completely unread blowhards will compare NatSoc to Marxist ideology simply because they both use the term "Socialism."
This is like claiming penicillin and lobotomy are the same thing because both are medical treatments. Its a crass and superficial examination that holds no value whatsoever and serves only to betray the abject stupidity of the one presenting the comparison.

In reality Libertarianism is more closely related to Communism in that both are ideologically flawed in their base. Both make 100% objectively wrong assessments about society and governance because they are entirely wrong about human beings.
Communism takes away the primary motivating factor to work.
Libertarianism fails to acknowledge that humans are a social animal which inherently form groups, inherently have group interests. We are inherently collective, not individual.

This is what entry level Lolberts rail against Fashy ideals so hard. There exists an ideology that complements human nature. Where participating in the group dynamic enhances community and responsibility gives purpose. The individual has liberties, but also responsibilities to his brother which fulfills a basic human need.

>Reminder that Sup Forums is a libertarian board

>Typical fascist neo-nazi, licking the boot of the man

Reminder that free market capitalism is a Jewish invention and you are doing the Jew's dirty work

>He qas more frirndly to Jews then Allende, who was a freemason.
when you know you are a puppet to a master, you might not be so friendly

>it is about survival of your people
The only "people" that are yours are your kin. You are a fool if you think an authority won't start categorizing people just because they are all from "the same people". If you really believe this, you are naive and don't understand the human condition.

The existence of state is for the purpose of defending us against ourselves. Allowing a small group of people to control the entire state leads to exactly what you keep trying to escape from. Why are you so willing to trust those in power? What reason do you have, that isn't ideology driven? Ideologies have been shown to fail time and time again, as well as to provide a great tool for subversion.

Stop trusting others because they say they are on your side. You will never escape the cycle of state oppression so long as you do.

>For all those who deserved help. Undesirables were culled.
any government powerful enough to decide who lives and who dies is 100% leftist

>Rights are tied to the power to enforce them. This is true for all systems.
not in a constitutional republic. we believe all men are endowed with certain inalienable rights by our creator and the government cannot take them away without violating the constitution.

natsoc is leftist. that's basic politics homie.

The Sedition Act of 1798 was in direct violation of the constitution. Since then it's been constant chipping away of freedoms while the eternal boomer keeps talking about muh liberty.

Your freedoms have never existed in the first place

>For all those who deserved help. Undesirables were culled.
>muh socialism was the right one! xDDD

>Rights are tied to the power to enforce them. This is true for all systems.
No. Rights are tied to your human nature. Life, Freedom, Pursue of Happiness. The state, a moral, right wing state, simply acknowledges them and ensures them. It doesn't give you any other rights, and doesn't take them from you. A left-wing, socialist/communist state treats humans as commodities, and thus their rights are tied to the will of those in power.

>Probably as a reaction to the economic crisis
>muh socialism justified!

>National Socialism was explicitly anti-marxist.
>N-no guys, we don't like that really smart individual named Marx
>Proceed to follow his ideals

>Hitler wrote in his book that the masses are simply needed to win over the Weimar Republic system
>We can be socialists to win then we just say we aren't socialists anymore!
The thing that makes socialism such a problem to deal with is that it attacks in many fronts, some as a direct war, as in Marx ideals of the revolution, and other times as a disguised form, infiltrating institutions and calling themselves everything but socialism. It doesn't matter what they say, when their end goal is the same: creating an authoritarian state that take away people's rights and controls the economy and culture. Hitler wasn't an anti-socialist, he was a socialist, and he memed a bunch of people into socialism by telling them that he isn't one, and just redirecting people's attention from capitalism towards Jews. Instead of burning their heritage all-together, he would give them a false one, tied entirely on the government, so people are chained to it - with the same end goal: enslaving the population.
Not to mention, the same German mindset that gave birth to communism is the one that gave power to National Socialism, and is the roots of their socialism today.

lol because a Hillary supporter shill would write that. Is everyone a shill to the cuck "based black man" maga fags?

>Libertarianism fails to acknowledge that humans are a social animal which inherently form groups, inherently have group interests. We are inherently collective, not individual.
where does libertarianism "fail to acknowledge" this? they only say a community has to be voluntary, and can refuse association from members of another community
or are you seriously so fucked in the head you think social beings = taxes?

THANK YOU BASED WAX
SAGE AND REPORT FAGGOT NAZI LARP THREADS - THEY'RE SHAREBLUE FAGGOT COMMIES

Then why even have governments if they are so easily subverted? Maybe we should just rely on a global government?
>being this retarded
So are you going to insist that all cars are bad because some people are incapable of driving safely?

Any consolidation of power is prone to corruption. Power corrupts, always. Thus, governments are naturally prone to corruption. The only way to deal with this is to explicitly acknowledge it, and work limits into the system to help address the erosion of justice.

There is no form of government immune to this, by the way. So log as humans are a central part of government, it will be prone to corruption. That is a part of the human condition.

Go fuck yourself anarchist nigger.

>get out of my store jew
>nuh uh, this aint a free market, civil rights act bitch!
what the fuck I love forced association now!! fuck capitalism and freedom and shit

>fighting the Jewish corporate control
>bad
Natsoc is neither left or right.
Right and left wings are both Jewish exploitation of the people.
Syndicalism is the way forward

>encyclopediadramatica.rs/Stormfront#How_to_troll_Stormfront

>Reminder that Sup Forums raided Stormfront long before Sup Forums even existed, and similar to project chanology, this brought stormfags into our ranks as a sort of blowback response. They have been raiding Sup Forums since its creation, and are trying to co-opt this board. Stormfags do not know any of the old memes, and h8 anime.

>4chandata.org/q/Stormfront-using-Sup Forums-as-a-base-a213744

how do you spot a libertarian at a party?
they're the ones still outside arguing with someone about their absolute right to park their mom's car on their lawn

liberty is not the norm in human society. it has to be fought for and constitutional republicanism is the strongest deterrent against tyranny to date. however the system has been under attack heavily since the progressive movements of the 20s and 30s and we're getting to the point where article V convention of States is going to be necessary to reclaim our government. gee, it's almost as if our founders were serious about preventing a tyrannical gov.

Muh leftwing muh rightwing
NatSoc is authoritarian center idiots
Also it does not demonize the rich or attempt to create a class struggle

>trying to coopt the board
You give them too much credit. How long have they been trying this? They are farther from the goal now than they were back in the beginning.

>authoritarian
>center
centralized powers are not center.

Can you explain how libertarians are even right wing? They sound pretty lefty to me when they bitch about rights and individualism

Who mentioned taxes, Lolbertard? No one.
A society that idealizes individualism above all else will lead to social decay. A system that facilitates hedonism will produce hedonism. A social hierarchy that allows an individual to divorce himself from the group is a hierarchy that is facing impending collapse.
Human beings cannot be allowed to do thing solely of their own volition, exactly as a child must be kept in line by a parent. Responsibility has to be a driving factor in contributing to society, it cannot be hedonism and profit alone.

You're using too many new words. Lolberts can only respond to things they've seen before with canned responses.

they are a boogeyman. you cant even say nigger and the traggic is less than krautchan

buzzwords and platitudes are not arguments.I mentioned taxes because it is underlying all of your buzzwords and platitudes
a society based on taxes is shit, which is why they all fail.

libertarians would allow a store owner to say
>get out of my store, nigger
while statists of the left and right would start hemming and hawing like little cucks about some sort of 1964 civil rights act

you fags need to get the out of Sup Forums

You may not have the authority to live your life how you see fit, but we on the other hand do. Enjoy your slavery, I will be over here fapping to degeneracy, smoking pot, and eating hallucinogenic mushrooms, AS IS MY RIGHT.

Somebody help me distinguish a libertarian from an ANprim please im having trouble

>israel isn't your dream ideal fascist state except it's for jews instead of whites

>shitskin telling anyone to get out

nah cunt, click clack your wifi together and look up how to kill yourself monkey

>Hurr durr just because you believe everyone has rights and, because of it, economy should be free, you have no morals even though your ideology is entirely based on morals and principles

If a system doesn't acknowledges rights that are inherent to you by your human nature, that system is evil. Why is it evil? Because said system has no rights at all - the one's they call rights were given to you by the system, and thus they can be taken away. In a more tangible example, a moral government will never kill people to reduce population, because life in a right of all humans and thus shouldn't be infringed, while an imoral government would do such thing if the situation demanded so, because the right to life in tied to their will.

You say that jews lie and thus you shouldn't believe them, but them this one guy says something, even though all of his actions go against his words, and you say I should believe what he wrote?

>Muh socialism is different from that socialism
the post.
>Libertarianism fails to acknowledge that humans are a social animal which inherently form groups, inherently have group interests. We are inherently collective, not individual.
Wrong. Libertarianism simply understands that people should be able to choose to act with the group or not, because they have a right to freedom. And that simple different is what creates a world of difference between libertarians and socialists, which are all connected by this sense that the government knows best and all should follow because, for some reason, what a few people decided is the will of the entire population.

Do you even have any grasp on the real meanings of left and right? Its individualism vs hierarchy. For example democracy is left wing and monarchy is rightwing. Try thinking a little bigger than the shit examples you can see in our CURRENT YEAR lol

>rights exist

keke

>so brainwashed and married to your poorly formed ideas that you can't see anything but MUH TAXES
Truly you are the prototypical Lolbertard. Ron Paul 2012 join the r evol ution!

All society guides certain behaviors through negative reinforcement. We punish crimes.
NatSoc establishes a system of positive reinforcement for contributing to society. It sets a spiritual motivation for contribution along side profits. Working for the mutual benefit of nation and brotherhood gives meaning, and that is what America lacks. We have a society where driving factors are divorced from a vital side of human nature. Even Commander Rockwell knew this and talked about it in the 60s and 70s. Yet somehow you Lolberts still can only regurgitate shallow rhetoric.

If you want to revel in pointless hedonistic degeneracy you might as well paint yourself black because you're a fucking nigger at your very core.
Life is not a game of occupying time between orgasms. The future of our people matters.

Take a trip down history lane with me as we unravel how stormfags first learned of Sup Forums, starting with one of the original raids, back in 2007, that of white supremacist Hal Turner:

> encyclopediadramatica.rs/Hal_Turner

No rights. You don't have the Bill of Rights in Nazi and fascist governments.

>rights
>rightwing
Lmao

its not but ok

>stormfront.org/forum/t350907/

Sup Forums meets stormfront

> Re: Why? Question from a 7channer.
>You're involved with an organization that is made up of sick criminals. From what I'm hearing about your group in the lounge section, most of you should be sued by Turner, fined by the government, and put in jail for years.

>I'm not answering any of your questions until you can justify your group's actions, especially when they threatened to rape Turner's son. Sick freaks.

Yeah? What, you think the left-wing who wants to take away free speech, the right to bear arms, free markets, and the right to due process is the side that fights for the rights of the people?

Stormfags also have a hidden JIDF group of there own called SwarmFront, where they raid and try to subvert forums like ours. Here is a link to their documentation for how to argue and debate, as most of them lack the intelligence to do so themselves.

whitegenocideproject.com/new-and-improved-bugs-buddy/

Historically? Yes you fucking idiot

...