National Socialism vs Libertarianism/Anarcho-Capitalism

strawpoll.me/13379476

Which and Why?

Other urls found in this thread:

mises.org/library/omnipotent-government-rise-total-state-and-total-war-0
youtube.com/watch?v=Fmy8UyvKvYE
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Speech_Movement
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

National socialism was an ideology which was very nation-specific, time period-specific, and economically- specific. Many fail to realize this and act like it could ever be implemented in any other country besides 20th venture germany. It couldnt, it was crafted for the nation at the time exclusively

>unironicall stormfags

In what ways?

Nazism is dead, cringe, inviable ideology which killed millions of Europeans, divided Europe and let half of it fall to communism, nazis are laughingstock in the real world outside the internet.
Also (((socialism))).

What about scoopism?

lolbertarians and ancucks are underage memesters

I bet most of them haven't been here longer than 2 years

Voluntary fascism

Libertarianism, because nationalism is retarded and socialism (even Hitler's own definition) is retarded and detrimental. I'm a taco and I believe socialist policies have been ruining this place since 1910.

People are generally pretty hesitant about any form of big government because they're worried they'll become mindless slaves to a soulless, puritan society. It really depends on which freedoms you'd want to limit. If you even do so much as touch things like vidya, sports, music, and especially free speech, most people will jump off the boat right away. And they'd be justified in doing so.

what if i consider myself to be a national liberal (fascist capitalist)???

Anarcho- Capitalism
Because it is the only fully moral political position to take.
National Socialism is socialism wich is incompatible with property rights.

I'm so fucking sick of the Gadsden flag being associated with libertarianism. It's been around since the fucking revolution.

i wish nazis would be happy with Sup Forums reclaimign their logo and fuck off already

At best I am a libertarian but I'm starting to understand where capitalism hate comes from, because we are not just replaceable cogs in a machine
There needs to be a state and the state needs to have the interests of the people and race at heart

the snake is just defensive. He can delay the inevitable but he simply can't win. He's just defensive.

...

>Ancaps
>Having a reason to organize based on race
Someone will sell out your race in your system and then you will be left with nothing

neither

elaborate

Ancaps are a meme.
I don´t mind libertarians and notsocialism is at least a idiology

You're a spic so nothing you say has any meaning

Libertarianism without going full Ancap.

White-only libertarianism

AnCap

No government. Gold is law.

NatSoc

Nazis have hotter guys

Monarchism

lmao your society is full of degeneracy, homosexuals, jews, niggers, fauxicans and feminists.
I can't hear you over my traditional family, conservative values and stable work.

This for the short link for the long

mises.org/library/omnipotent-government-rise-total-state-and-total-war-0

Although i don't like the whole control everything i do authoritarianism of nat soc i believe a form of it is needed now in the west in order to put our civilization on the right path. Other than that i believe that afterwards we can have some form of a libertarian nations.

yes, goyim, become a deracinated libertarian.
don'tcha know nazis are socialist?
r-read the mises institutes literature! it's true!

>Mexican "traditional values"

Low taxes and constitutional carry will surely get rid of the kikes and niggers

>is needed now in the west in order to put our civilization on the right path.
You do know socialist have made the same argument for damn near every expansion of government power into the economic sector since progressive types socialist took root in America 120 years ago and mercantilist before that.

I still really don't get the whole "use free speech and emphasize its absolute importance in order to push your platform, then take it away once you've achieved it" aspect of the growing fascist movement. It seems a bit hypocritical to me. Either you believe in free speech or you don't; there can't be a middle ground.

It won't, see: US

youtube.com/watch?v=Fmy8UyvKvYE
Any system with a ruling class will inevitably become corrupt. The free market is the best way to improve the race.

You can self segregate in an Ancap society and discriminate on the basis of race. You can build your white "ethno state" and put a big on your front door that says: "No negros, no jews, Arbeit macht frei Sieg Heil".

I don't see my non-mother country help me with my university degree.
And until I do, NatSoc is the only valid answer.
Because, guess what, if you're white, and from europe, no other country than your own gives a damn, you might as well die in a ditch for all they care.

National capitalism

This
Affirmative Action for whites and protectionism for their state will in the long be their downfall. Only those who compete stay at the top of the race hiereachy.

Heil Hans Herman Hoppe
88-88

Who ethno-national libertarian here?
>Citizenship and libertarian freedom for whites only
>only whites allowed into country
>non-whites are not citizens and have no rights

Libertarians/Ancaps are all traitors who nearly cost the election and gave Hill the popular vote. They should all be executed

I don't like the socialist aspect but the nationalistic aspect is what is good to me. I believe we need a sort of mildly right wing authoritative society. Where there is enough authority to keep the culture, big business, immigration and family values in check but freedom in market, speech, music and other things so people are still happy and don't get fucked in the ass by big gov.

Johnson wasn't a libertarian, and neither was anyone who unironically voted for him.

ancaps/true libertarians voted overwhelmingly for Trump. Only meme leftist libertarians didn't for him.

an unfunctional system with communism levels of understanding of human nature vs a great wartime governance system that wouldn't work nowadays due to massive advancements in technology and the way wars work.

If you think either of these would be a good idea in today's world, you might be retarded(or more likely an ideologue who hasn't read enough to understand the flaws with these systems).

>Which one?
the one I voted
>Why?
Because I really think it's the superior ideology which would really help humankind to develop and thrive

leftist libertarians want open border because they are in cahoots with globalist anyways.

The free market will eventually lead to eugenics and the purification of the White gene pool. National transhumanism is superior to both libertarianism and national socialism.

Is that a boy?

>Affirmative Action for whites and protectionism for their state will in the long be their downfall. Only those who compete stay at the top of the race hiereachy.
I'm fine with just surviving.

>cross libertarian
>pic
what the fuck man

National socialism, because it removes debt slavery, Jewish bankers, and it allows you to tread on those who have been treading on you for your entire life.

Not an argument.

Wow, it's practically even.

At least it's dead even. Still too many cringe natsocs for my taste.

I have mixed feelings on the matter. All fascism is tailored to the nation it takes root in but the actual "lowercase" idea of national socialism, socialism for the nation by the nation and everyone else can get fucked, is I think a good idea.
We can take inspiration from German National Socialism without trying to implement it in America wholesale, just like we can take inspiration from other fascist groups and writers. Also, the flag is and always will be aesthetic as fuck.

A fucking utopia because people will govern and people are made to put their personal interests at first before others.

A nation is a collective. There is no reason to care for a collective that confers no benefits of membership. Therefore it must be somewhat socialist or fail to have appeal.

It should be socialist without being marxian socialist.

There is a happy balance between the collective interest and the interest of the individual. That balance may change with circumstance, but I think we can agree that it is desirable for the balance to be struck in favor of the individual where possible.

So national socialism, but valuing the individual, and ultimately by the individuals for the individuals.

In an anarcho-capitalist world, there would be national socialist enclaves

Fuck you are worse than muslims.

"God is the law"

What the fuck is this supposed to mean? What do you think would happen in a society where the law is subjective and based on a mythical being ?

Fuck I read that comment as GOD not GOLD.

Dyslexia kicking in HARD

This is the core of my opposition to ideological capitalism too. Evaluation of the individual as their contribution to the GDP is extremely Jewish and unseemly if you have any national feeling at all. Ideologies that place their economic ideal at the center and think that culture and politics should grow out from that are shit-tier in general.

*blocks ur path*

Dyslexic & retarded is not a good combo
>Mythical being
Replace the word "god" with "good" & you might start to cure your stupidity.

The (((Free Speech Movement))) set this precedent in the 70s that there's no such thing as obscenity, blasphemy, slander, et cetera so that they could push Marxism. Now that they're on top they've made efforts to close the range of speech again so that they maintain control. Fascists are throwing that old poison back in their face but I don't think that they ever maintain the pretense that free speech is the paramount ideal; it's a means to an end, sort of malicious compliance more than anything. "Muh freedoms" is the purview of the alt-lite.

Strasserists are better

fascism saved Europe, but it's only a temporary reaction to communism and socialism; it should never be considered a permanent solution.

National (((Socialism)))

Gee, I wonder who's behind this post..

The ideal balance for me at least would be a high level of personal liberty, social benefits (fair housing loans, free education, financial stimulation for having children etc) for all legitimate citizens and a somewhat capitalistic system but highly regulated to avoid monopolism and corruption, driven towards sustainable development of the country.

That is not capitalism, especially since GDP includes government spending, which is anti-capitalist.

>he thinks nazi germany actually went socialist
>what is the night of long knives
They were national populists if anything.

Recessions really do breed socialism, as shown by America trying to be socialist during the Great Depression.

Co-opting socialism and then subverting it from being too extreme with the economics but cranking up whatever social factor you prefer is good, Hitler was smart in that.

also
>iFunny watermark
Let's have a little chat, user...

I don't know who is behind OP but I'm sure that behind your post lies a man that hates National "Socialism" without reading anything about it.

True but the same thing could be said about anarchism. It's a transitional situation that leads to the formation of one or more new states.
In the long term something like archaeofuturism is probably a better idea.

Fair enough but you understand my point. Evaluating the individual as an atomized economic unit is extremely Jewish. People aren't islands and they're not shekel-generating machines.

>no Strasserist flag

>libitarians argue that the private sector is the one that creates innovative technologies
>almost all innovative technologies were created by the army
damn libertarians are retarded

Libertarianism, because national socialism would give me at most 8 years of degenerate free society, while a private community/covenant would give me a lifetime of proper values.

What, are you gonna go in a time machine and go back to the Wild West?

>70s
Are you talking about the 1770s? Because that's how long freedom of speech has existed in America. You clearly don't know how easy it is for someone to twist your words into making it seem like you're trying to subvert the government and get you executed based on something you said. But sure, just continue putting basic human rights in triple parentheses and wallow in your own stupidity, but don't say I didn't warn ya when you're the one on trial for your life.

>"Wild" west
>Much less crime than any modern US city

You'd rather live in today's Chicago, I guess?

>1770s
looks like we were only truly free under the crown

Only one of these political ideologies is viable, and you know it.

Oh, so you have the time machine? Well, what's stopping you? Did you trip on a straw man?

libertarians have no moral or ideological foundation

Yeah I have a time machine, I come to this year from time to time to shitpost.

...

An individual is an economic unit (you could make the argument that a household is an economic unit, instead of an individual); however, I agree with you when you say economics should not be the center of your ideology. Ideology should be centered around ethics and morals, and the economic system that works with those ethics would then be advocated for.

>muh human rights
>not knowing about the FSM
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Speech_Movement
Read something sometime, alt-lite bitchboy, and stop pretending the Constitution is divine revelation.

I would like to be libertarian when this is all over.

>Not an argument.

Huh? I'm pretty sure saying "libertarians don't understand human nature" is an argument. It might not be very elaborate but that doesn't change the fact that it is indeed a reason in support of an idea which is the very definition of an argument...

I mean do you seriously expect me to write an academic paper level of explanation as for why I might hold this view, when you could simply search for some psychology/sociology papers on the subject of hierarchical structures among humans.(warning: both of these fields are soft sciences and therefore filled with postmodernist garbage so it might take a while to sift through bullshit like social dominance theory and similar postmodernist nonsense before you find some solid material.)

They believe in the right of individuals and communities to organically self-organize in the absence of distorted incentives or coercion by self-interested individuals or entities.

Once you create the mechanics of monopolized force, it acts on behalf of whoever gets their hands on it. From the Weimar to the Nazis, from the Nazis to the Globalists, and if the Communists had won an election, go figure.

Its not an argument, it's a strawman. Your dumb preconceived idea of libertarianism cannot serve as premise for anything.

Libertarians understand human nature, and we embrace it.

this. libertarianism might work if the US was still like 90% white. national socialism would realistically probably never be implemented due to its negative connotations

i think the government should be smaller than it is now, but some things should definitely be regulated by it

Daily reminder that vanilla is the is the master flavor

This. The current world is not worth defending. Mexicans, degenerates, commies, SJWs, obese, Antifa, homosexuality, trans, they need to go or civilization perishes.

I could literally say that about Nazi. In fact it's pretty accurate. People on stromfront know this and despise Sup Forums "Nazis", because they aren't serious and give actual white nationalists a bad name because of it.

Now I think both of you are dumb idiots.