Is the Alt Right a stepping stone toward natsoc?

...

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preussentum_und_Sozialismus
google.com/#q=definition of gender
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

i wish it was, but realistically, no.

Probably not but I can dream

The national socialistic idea has been discredited long time ago. Even at its hight in 1933 it faced severe resentments.
So, if the Alt-right is close to the NatSoc movement, it will not do the same things the Nazis did.
It will be different.
To even think that there are complete analogies when arguing history is ridiculous

Wait? No 4th Reich in North America?

I guess I have to put down NatSoc and be more realistic and go with being Libertarian

The alt-right is natsoc without the JQ. and it works as a stepping stone.

I would 4th Reich America. This country has gone to shit.

No it's a watered down version of nationalism for the sake of (((inclusiveness)))
Absolutely disgusting

Which alt-right? Because the larger "alt-lite" as it's called here in America is super free market and pro-degeneracy and pro-racemixing. It's pretty stupid desu, bunch of normie republicans running around with Pepe signs acting like they're radicals when their beliefs are as mainstream conservative as it gets.

It is and if not, that kid you sperged out to might be more willing to do what's necessary

German education

The Alt-Right isn't civic nationalist.

>all those mongrels

No, lack of a strong identity and a sense of disorder in your country does. Young people are turning to more authoritarian regimes because our system lacks paternalism to inspire loyalty and faith in the processes of the state. The extremes promise things that modern day people are lacking, and government continues to fail as the center crumbles away. Alt-right and other groups are the result of each side of the spectrum splintering, and chances are you will see increased Balkanization of ideologies and stances as this problem gets worse.

We're not organized enough to create a genuine national socialist system, saying you're national socialist isn't enough, if you're truely dedicated to the idea you need to take over a small town and privatize the land, make enough money to develop the infrastructure and education, healthcare, law enforcement and other nessesary systems. The problem in doing so is trying to avoid media attention and infiltration from hostile forces.

The "Alt Right" is buffoonery intended to delegitimize right-wing views.

No.
NatSoc is a social culture, rather than a coherent political ideology on its own.
AltRight is formed of many subcultures.
NatSoc is a subculture which is AltRight.

I'm older than 90% of you. I've seen it all before. I'm happy that you are interested in these things. I'm also drunk and have aspergers.

No.
The "Alt-Right" aren't Socialist.

I think they're regular citizens and Republicans who dislike the radical left and use the same memes as us to mockingly combat their idiotic ideas and behaviour.

Nice of you to slip in that literal Satanic symbolism on us, on the far left of this image, kike.

Nice meme

Redefinition of phrases is the exact same sort of thing the SJWs do. Why should Hitler's redefinition of the word Socialist be respected while the SJW's redefinition of the word racist be disregarded?

>The NATIONAL SOCIALIST party.
>Levy quotas on corporations and otherwise tightly control them.
>Heavily tax corporations and fine them exorbant amounts of money (up to millions of marks) for small errors.
>Completely prevent the formation of small scale businesses.

>responding to shills

Nazis are part of Alt-right and many even autists like Richard Spencer still admire Nazism. this meme that alt-right is just moderates is pure shilling.

You'll never know if you don't stand on your own two feet, first.

He didn't redefine it you moron, Marx just didn't invent it. Saint-Simon defined it in a similar way.

There are lots of people all over Scandinavia that are getting fed up with the cucky high octane altruist facade of their anti-white governments.
Pretty sure the best place for a full on return of Nat Sac will be Norway, Sweden, & Denmark. Their's a Finnish chapter of Nordfront too, but obviously I think white Finns and Sami people might split off into two countries or it'd just be an apartheid situation.

He still provides a definition contrary to the actual written definition. What gives his definition legitimacy when compared to the definition given my Marx, for example.

Actual written modern definition on google?
Marx is the one who redefined it and Marxism just became common. all definition are legit in a way.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preussentum_und_Sozialismus

Doesn't matter what he defined it as when he still acted mostly according to the common definition.

No it's a stepping stone towards a FBI honeypot.

>Sadik Kahn
>alt-right

>alt-right
>civ-nat

SURE IS GASLIGHT IN HERE FAMALAN

Next you'll say the oathkeepers are alt-right.

No, he mostly acted as he defined it. it was still Fascism. everything was not socially owned, it was just regulated.

Not even close
Alt-right is just usual US GOP policies + anti-Sharia

...

The "owners" of the means of production had no real control over it, the state were likely to seize any company that acted out of line, as such they controlled the means of production.
Later through their heavy taxes and their hard fines, those which it is quite clear that they were actively looking for reasons to give, they reaped effectively all the monetary gain that they would normally have from them.
The common definition of a socialist state is one where the state controls the means of production, you can keep up your doublethink all you want but it doesn't change reality.

Like I said, it's regulated. government can arrest you if you commit crime, does that also mean that government owns you? by your logic no government is non-socialist.

common Marxist definition includes being anti-private property and being anti-corporations. I still don't see any contradiction with what he did. if nazi were really that close to modern socialist they wouldn't have put Hjalmar in charge.

State control of the means of production is Stalinism pal

Regulated to the point where the supposed owner has no real control aside from figuring out the best way to fulfill the state imposed quota.
The difference between socialism and your form of "regulation" is more equivalent to saying "we didn't gas the kikes, we used firing squads." or that you were always in prison, it's just that you didn't have to have both your feet and arms shackled beforehand.

The nine points they use as their main goal are so vague full of bullshit that they can be interpreted however they want.
Only those gullible/desperate would join them

For example, they want the northern nations to be joined into a single nation mostly cut off from the rest of the world, and want a more democratic system.
But what if the majority of the populace doesn't want their nation to be cut off from the rest of the world?
They want a lot of free speech, but also laws against things that are "acts of public hostility".
But where does the line go between criticism and being an enemy to the public?


If these fucktards come into power it will only swap out one shitty system with another one.
At least things are improving without having to give in to that crap.

there's no charismatic leader to unite behind

Give an example of so called owners having no real control. National Socialism was a form of Fascism and therefore corporatism.

I figured that the whole takeover of companies which didn't follow the wishes of the state were evidence enough, but i seem to have found some other golden socialist nuggets.

>In other cases, where the Nazi administration wanted additional industrial capacity, they would first nationalize and then establish a new state-owned-and-operated company. In 1937 Hermann Göring targeted companies producing iron ore, “taking control of all privately owned steelworks and setting up a new company

>On July 15, 1933 a law was enacted that imposed compulsory membership in cartels, while by 1934 the Third Reich had mandated a reorganization of all companies and trade associations and placed them “under the control of the state

There was both nationalization and privatization of certain companions. it all fits in Hitler's definition and in definition of corporatism, they didn't have the same policies all the time thought. take over of companies at certain times is not the definition of socialism.

if a company was negative for the country it was destroyed as it should be. it is not socialism if most private companys are still allowed. get your anecdotal evidence out of Sup Forums

btw, thanks for posting that picture and letting us know that your a fat neckbeard faggot.

Except those companies weren't specifically a negative, were they?
They just weren't positive enough, I guess they just wanted their wishful quotas to be met.
"It technically wasn't socialism."
"Sure they controlled the means of production, it's just that they didn't technically own them."

Did you know that according to statistics 87% of all jews have serious mental illness related symptoms?

They controlled means of productions the same way American government does for owning NASA.
now you are resorting to putting words in my mouth.

>everything was not socially owned, it was just regulated.
I guess you "technically" did not say those exact phrases.

Tightly controlling various industries and clearly taking down those which would in any way deviate from the states ideal vision is effectively the same thing as normal Socialism.

We have a genius among us, watch out everyone
Who would have thought that a nation preparing and going for a world-war would take control of vital industries like steel
Mind = blown
Dumbass

It absolutely is
The best, fashiest reply

u are the only nigger here

The act of taking control of the steel industry is just a notable splash in the sea.
Did you suddenly forget about the "by 1934 the Third Reich had mandated a reorganization of all companies and trade associations and placed them “under the control of the state.”" part?
I guess that one is too inconvenient for you.

I said those things, I didn't say the other too.
No, it not the same thing as socialism. you are also over-exaggerating, they didn't take down those which would deviate from the ideals in any way, they didn't take them down at all just preventing them from doing certain things, it's not like if you made one mistake government was going to take your whole company away, owners still own companies and get profit from them. again your definition makes America socialist. most regimes do what they did during a war. you are desperate.

Yes it is

This! The so called leaders are pretty weak. There is no cult of personality to rally to, just a bunch of infighting factions led by bickering women. I wish it weren't so

In your quest for quote-mining and defending some abstract incoherent agenda you conveniently skipped the next paragraph where they give explicit examples of privatizations the Nazis put in place
Crying out "commies !!11!1" everytime there is state intervention like a 200kg american is sublte nor smart, it just makes you sound obtuse and uninformed on basic political knowledge

>it's not like if you made one mistake government was going to take your whole company away,
>" In other cases, National Socialist officials were levying harsh fines of millions of marks for a “single bookkeeping error.”"

And hardly, if it was the same then the recent coal thing with that dying fellow would have been quite different.
>Those industries that somehow remained in private hands often received favoritism, subsidies and various state assistance. Nonetheless, Hitler was “an enemy of free market economics”
I would certainly argue that if the United States was socialist if something like Wallmart or potentially Amazon also was run in a similar fashion to NASA and SpaceX were given fines on the semi regular.
You'd also have to fix proper healthcare and social security networks first though, even the nazis had those, how can the US be so far behind on it?

>reddit
>alt-right

when did Sargon paint his hair blond?

>Vereinigte Oberschlesische Hüttenwerke AG, a company controlling all of the metal production in the Upper Silesian coal and steel industry.
I guess that one didn't last since they later took the steel industry.
>Giving control of banks to the Jews.
Kek.
>Between the fiscal years 1934/35 and 1937/38, privatization represented 1.4 percent of the German government's revenues.
I wager they simply couldn't be bothered at that point.

>Wait? No 4th Reich in North America?
>I guess I have to put down NatSoc and be more realistic and go with being Libertarian
No shit, US. Just let the federation dissolve and finally have your confederacy. Hopefully this will keep you from jewing with the rest of the world.

The Alt-Right is against Jews and Gays, and is even against Trump now. Also, I dare you to find me a fat Alt-Righter, because I've never seen one in my life.
t.AltRighter before it was popular

>" In other cases, National Socialist officials were levying harsh fines of millions of marks for a “single bookkeeping error.”"

This is an opinion of some guy. not an actual proof and a policy.

Yeah, Hitler was not for free market, what a surprise.

>US would only be socialist if companies of my choice are run by government
ok

>conservative
Try again, burger. The last conservatives you retards had were fucking democrats.

>I'm older than 90% of you.
This reminded me of the story about 128 year old Adolf. I would imagine that he shitposts on Sup Forums every so often.

I was always natsoc by heart. Called myself a communist most of my life so I wouldn't break mothers heart. But wasn't really all that political until I started paying taxes.

>US would be effectively socialist if companies that mattered were run by the government
Who's putting words in someone elses mouth again?
Besides you know damn well that all companies, even the smaller ones were being supervised and that the owners would likely be sent to work camps if they were caught really out of line.

inb4 OP is just working on a story for CNN
>pic related. write about this instead.

Oh, also
>Opinion of some guy
I guess academic papers and quotes from businessmen who actually operated during those times are just opinions.

So you choose companies that matter, that's completely different of course.

Supervision and regulation of companies alone falls under Hitler's definition, while it doesn't' for Marxist definition.

>But the google definition!!!111!1!!!

google.com/#q=definition of gender

Jewgle and all other dictionaries are already being (((revised)))

Here we go again with the whole
>Strict regulation isn't technically ownership
Thing again.
You're starting to sound and awful lot like a broken record, so I guess I can get away with repeating myself as well.
>Tightly controlling various industries and clearly taking down those which would in any way deviate from the states ideal vision is effectively the same thing as normal Socialism.

There is no academic papers, just what some random guy said.

Yeah, it isn't, without technically in there.

Oh, it appears that you're correct, I'll retract that then.
You're still assuming however, that the opinion of a business owner is somehow invalid.
>Sure his reign was pretty much the same as one would expect a socialist reign to be, however since he didn't directly own the businesses it wasn't REAL socialism.
Just like it wouldn't be communism if the state merely dictated to company owners that every one was work for free and receive an equal amount of food from the farmers no matter what.
As long as they don't directly own them, it is literally fine.

Again, trying to put in my mouth complete bullshit I would never say and doesn't come close to what I said.

What would Marxist define socialism as wasn't Third Reich, ask any Marxist or socialist, ask anyone at that time.
I never said that it wasn't "real" socialism, I'm saying that it is not Marxists socialism and made it clear that Marx redefined the term.

>Just like it wouldn't be communism if the state merely dictated to company owners that every one was work for free and receive an equal amount of food from the farmers no matter what.
That's just not possible. it isn't anything, because it can't work. people want to own companies because it gives them profit.

Oh we'll just put them in "voluntary work camps" if they don't want to run their businesses!
After all, "totally not actual marxist communism" has never been tried!

You know what my father always says?!
If it smells like Marxist Socialism, looks like Marxist Socialism and produces effectively the same result as Marxist Socialism, then it's probably Marxist Socialism!

Fuck drumpf and fuck white people

That's not communism, Marxists never produced or implemented that, nobody will be able to implement that and nobody will want to implement it.

Too bad none of that is true for National Socialism. to you probably Roman Empire looks like Marxism socialism and medieval states look like Marxism socialism, because they don't worship big black cock of freedom.

Marxists never proposed*

>If they don't do as we want them they go to the Gulags.
Have I made it clearer?
My "totally not communism" is gonna be so good I totally didn't base it on Marxist principles and as such it is okay.
Did the Roman Empire send people off to work camps because they went out of line?
That sure does sound awesome! My totes not communism is gonna be Muh Holy Russian Empire! We be gonna be Emperors and shit! Except we actually don't have classes and as such I can only call myself Emperor in private which is a shame, at least the people in work camps can feel truly good about not living in communism!

thats pretty good.

Alt right is a meme cooked up by leftists to try to create a spooky boogey man ideology to scare people to support them. They called everyone neo-nazis, white supremacists, kkk memebers, and wore those terms out so now they have a fresh one. It's just a slur applied to the new counter culture right wing figures emerging as a method to keep in power. Milo, Lauren Southern, Gavin, Sargon, the IMAJUN MUH SHOWK guy. The media reports them all as this (even though we know they're just libertarians, conservatives, centrist, what ever). When the media doesn't report them as it they try to stick the label anyway they can "Infowars is a controversial show with a large alt-right following...Breitbart the ultra conservative news outlet that is a haven for alt right supporters... Trump's latest action is cheered by alt right..." Spencer is a white nationalist who is just rolling in the controversy of this alt-right meme to gain support for his cause.

It's not about the people in the picture you fucking retard. It's an example of what your future looks like if you accept people of all backgrounds as long as they support the (((Western))) values.

Yeah, every government sends you to a prison if you fall out of line, it's just that the line is different for different governments.

Show me Marx's writing about working camps.

>Based on
Oh gosh this Roman Empire sure sounds wonderful! I'm sure they also prevented those with less than .2 million marks from creating a business and levied quotas on their industries as well as taxing the preexisting ones for almost half what they make! They sure sound like a shining example!
That thing sounds perfect for my totally not communism since it makes it really easy to monitor which industries exist! after all they can't ever have 1/5 of a million if they don't earn any money!

Every western country took control of steel production at some point during the war dipshit
They gave strict limitations on foreign finance and you can bet your ass the jews weren't part of the executive anymore in the banking industry
Got any more straws to grasp at ?

Of course not, retard.

National Socialism is incompatible with Free Market Capitalism. America is a capitalist ecosystem. Only college students and idiots want socialism of any kind.

1933 was the beginning, not the height, 1938 was more like their height of power and there was basically zero resistance to the Germans from then on till the end of the war.

>I lost the argument so let me start it over again but this time I'm making the same argument smug sarcastic way

kys moronic faggot. not it doesn't sound wonderful, but it's not communism you utter retard.
bye faggot, I'm not wasting any more of my time on this.

Alt-right has the JQ, but not everyone in it is NatSoc. A good portion of the alt-right hates everything leftist, and that includes economics.

>Privatization represented 1.4 percent of the German government's revenues.

>Even at such a small portion they presumably still had strict quotas and control over the various industries that were still privatized.

>It works exactly like communism has worked during various implementations yet it's still not actually communism because of this small reason that doesn't actually change anything in any meaningful way.
>My point.
>Your head.
I wasn't planning on wasting more time on your shenanigans either, it's been 3 hours for fucks sake.

Yeah, good job not addressing my main points, nuance seems to be something you also learned from your dumbass father
Good point highlighting you needed a minimal capital to create a PRIVATE business in nazi germany, everybody knows the USSR had a thriving private sector
Maybe at some point you should look back and realize your father is a stupide uneducated piece of shit and you took a lot after him, since you cannot comprehend how it is possible that massively opposite political system are still at odds with each other despite sharing MINOR similarities in their economic policies
Or just kill yourself, you're a lost case at this point
Georgian user, you're a cool dude by the way

Honestly, I don't care about zionism or gay rights or whatever Sup Forums thinks is degenerate as long as the demographics remain European. Once the demographics are gone, you lose your country. Use Japan as a guide. It's time for the West to learn from the East.

I have enough connections that I won't be lynched for being gay on the day of rope ;)

Not like Marx literally wrote "seize the means of production" in his manifesto or anything

Jesus fucking christ you sound genuinely angry about my shitposting.
>My other points
You mean the joke I made about Jews being involved in banking?
Or the point about iron production which later became irrelevant?