Isn't NatSoc similar to authoritarian communism...

Isn't NatSoc similar to authoritarian communism, except it just replaces class struggle/consciousness with racial struggle/consciousness? Wasn't Hitler's end goal basically to create a Germany where the Germans become one relatively equal whole and did away with a lot of their distinctions?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/x1tUFx_StSo
youtube.com/watch?v=70E9KA48Sic
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

No, he wanted a Socialist nation that embraced it's heritage and culture as well as respected others. He also wanted to stomp out degeneracy and Jewry.

No, it's not like communism at all.

youtu.be/x1tUFx_StSo

GLR explains it perfectly in this speech if you're willing to listen. Generally, it's not like Marxism because it recognizes the inherent inequality of humanity due to our being a part of nature. We have not risen above nature, and until then, inequality will remain and exist. Furthermore, private property and private companies are encouraged in NatSoc as free enterprise is good for the people, as long as said enterprise doesn't have an outcome that ends up harming the people of the nation; if the people are harmed, the government steps in on behalf of the people.

Then why is it dubbed totalitarian?

Perhaps to drive people away from it because they think it's totalitarian? In reality it isn't, because if it was, private companies wouldn't exist in any capacity at all. And more so, every sector of business was privatized under National Socialism (unlike the previous Weimar Republic) except for the rail roads because it was considered a military asset.

Juice.

Well maybe it isn't like communism in the way anarchists/communists like to think communism is, but it's very similar to the type of communism that was actually practiced by the Soviet Union
> Strict state control of media output
> Very authoritarian/totalitarian state influence
> Strict adherence to and promotion of traditional morality, gender roles, etc.
> Strongly collectivist in nature
> Wanting to create a new man

The whole problem is there is a precisely zero percent chance a national socialist government won't be just as manipulated and bribed by robber barons as any other system of government that allows such people to live and horde their wealth. Nazis also fail to realize that plenty of non-Jews run horrendously immoral and destructive businesses too, being a German businessman does not magically prevent you from being evil, yet the Jews are the only ones blamed for such activities.

When you realize every oversight and inconsistency or outright lie in national socialism you are left only with a totally broken authoritarian war-dependant Keynesianism that will be more prone to corporate manipulation than a typical republic. It's a greater failure in theory than possibly any other system of government in the modern age, it is pretty much based in magic.

They're similar in the sense that the nazis and fascists stole a great deal of their rhetoric and symbolism from the workers movement.
>worker and national solidarity
>the dignity of all men

The difference, of course, comes from the class and traditional hierarchies, and fascism's uneasy relationship with capitalism.

All I can ask for you anons to do is to watch that speech given by GLR. Sadly, I'm not the best at explaining things, and he does it much better than I do.

George Lincoln Rockwell isn't an actual National Socialist and is basically a Paleo-Libertarian/Conservative American who was race/Jew-aware

GET THE FUCK OUT FUCKING REDDIOTS

Yes, America's version of National Socialism. That's the thing about fascism, it's adapted to the ideals and history of each country that adopts it.

America's version of Fascism maybe, not National Socialism, NatSoc is Germany's unique version of Fascism and GLR's LARPing as a Nazi doesn't make him an actual NatSoc, as a non-German person from a non-German country he isn't a NatSoc.

Please never forget that Hitler was from Austria, not from Germany.

Thanks,
German person here.

Removing distinctions as you put it is the common denominator of all totalitarian ideologies including neoliberalism.
The fundamental unit or "relatively equal whole" as you put it would be citizen, worker, and consumer.
Blood and soil, peace bread and work, or cheap consumer goods, take your pick.
Ideology is a simplified reality designed to extract useful energy from passive populations.

Perhaps, but he only did so to bring notoriety to his message which he explains in one of his speeches. Otherwise, he would have been swept under the rug. And he does adapt moral beliefs from National Socialsim.

What does this have to do with the point? To an ethnonationalist like Hitler the two might as well have been the same. Hell, all native German-speakers should have their own nation.

No its pretty simple he wanted to remove the salve master and makes sure no new slave masters are formed, you will be a product of your own hardwork but your volk will always be behind you if something happens that's all

Because it still was a one party dictatorship. And this label was not simply given the Nazi Germany by Jews or the Allies. Hitler himself called it a totalitarian state.

It was totalitarian because all the power bascially rested within one man and his word was law. That doesn't mean of course that he always meddles with every little details. As a result, mostly free enterprise was seen as needed as the burger already pointed out.

>authoritarian communism
No, not when is ideology lacked a universal class struggle, equality, and worker owned means of production. You're on a political board, but do you even understand what "communism" is?

>Wasn't Hitler's end goal basically to create a Germany where the Germans become one relatively equal whole
no

yes but he killed the jews

youtube.com/watch?v=70E9KA48Sic

>Nazis also fail to realize that plenty of non-Jews run horrendously immoral and destructive businesses too

Actually no, even back then, the enemy were "the big capitalists with their stocks and shares (t. Hitler) and that wasn't limited just to only Jews. It just that post war propaganda wants you to believe that it was all about the Jews.

Good Job /nsg/ lads

no
fuck off kike

There are many differences but IMO the biggest two differences are these:
1, NatSoc is a Nationlist movement whereas Communism undermines the concept of nation.
2, NatSoc uses Socialism as a way to serve the ppl, its only good is that it serves the ppl. Communists think Communism is good in-of-itself and if ppl must die or be imprisoned or enslaved to serve Communism than it's for the greater good.
Very key differences.

>Wasn't Hitler's end goal basically to create a Germany where the Germans become one relatively equal whole and did away with a lot of their distinctions?
Specifically not. His goal was to unite the German people by blood, along all levels of education and skills, without making them equals. Hierarchy was a very important part in NS ideology: Leadership was cherished and non-leaders were to be obedient to the leaders, which in turn were expected to lead well and take care of their subordinates. It was a very natural way of viewing society: Some people are better, smarter, more wholesome, and it was their job to lead the weaker, poorer ones - yet every one of the weaker, poorer ones was encouraged to become a better version of himself, and the most talented younglings were to become leaders again. Imagine a tribe of people in which only the naturally gifted, the naturally superior would emerge as leaders.

National Socialism is nationalist and bases its ideology off of conflict between races

Communism is internationalist and bases its ideology off of conflict between classes

>National Socialism is nationalist and bases its ideology off of conflict between races
and what race are you?

...