Most would agree that for a movement based on identity, unity among those of that identity is critical. This principal is a keystone of national socialism. Socialism appears to be the ultimate statement of unity and collective identity between peoples. This explains the failings of socialism in the past, even national socialism, a well intentioned ideology. Race realism is half the puzzle. Understanding that groups of people have massively differing characteristics, is where we get the NATIONAL in national capitalism. All socialism however, fails to acknowledge the differences of people WITHIN a group. That is to say, socialism undermines individualism. Thus where nationalism sees differences between groups, and internationalism does not, capitalism sees differences between individuals, where socialism does not. This does not mean national capitalists abandon the concept of unity. We see autonomy as the ultimate safety net, and see trade as the ultimate common denominator.
With that said let's get this ball rolling.
Items on the table today: >Choose a flag >Links to be included in OP >AESTHETICS >Clear definition of National Capitalism >Better OP template
>National Capitalist >implying that's not an oxymoron Capitalism in it's purist form is literally just another form of globalism, fuck off alex jones.
Jack White
>Butthurt commies LIEBER TOT ALS ROT
Lincoln Price
A movement should be based on ideas. Not a fucking identity. baka
Leo Johnson
Is the preservation of white identity not an idea?
Leo White
Nationalism does not solve the problems created by capitalism
Benjamin Wright
If you are referring to the problem of capitalism encouraging interaction with foreign influence, it certainly does.
Michael Lee
Finally got a NatCap general going, very nice OP, if only Sup Forums wasn't so full of share fags
Jackson Rodriguez
Hazza!
((you))
Jaxson Allen
Some flats from the other thread
Logan Smith
...
Camden Martinez
...
Andrew Ramirez
Best
Justin Taylor
...
Alexander Barnes
...
Gavin Turner
Ideas change, identity does not.
Cameron Sullivan
Think broadly.
National Capitalism is potentially capable to bribe the entire population of niggers and sand niggers so that they allow to sterilize themselves.
Ian Bennett
Hell ya!
Blake Bennett
check this shit out
Jonathan Brooks
...
Michael Lewis
"hurr you can't have capitalism without anarchy durr" A strong government can encourage trade and resource development WITHIN ONES OWN BORDERS as opposed to anarcho-capitalism, which results in globalism and corporatism.
Austin Flores
That's a beauty user. I'll put that in the next OP
Colton Wright
...
Sebastian Roberts
Also saved for later
Xavier Rogers
...
Josiah Sanchez
the snake in this flag is representing a border and its protecting the dollar which is inserted in a pocket of anarchy
Ryan Williams
...
Jayden Myers
here's a variant
Jeremiah Cruz
We need a short, concise definition for NatCap.
Andrew Anderson
These are great
Thomas Jenkins
Jew flag.
Joshua Watson
since it seemingly holds a few internal contradictions (from the viewpoint of a normie), we need to have a written doctrine as opposed to a nebulous ideology. we need maybe an easy to remember 10 point doctrine
Caleb Martin
its actually used all over the place. do you have a better way to incorporate a snake
Angel Hall
Good idea
Brandon Howard
Socialism will never be accepted by Conservatives and Libertarians in the US. Capitalism and Nationalism is what connects us.
Ian Turner
What is national capitalism: >A foreign policy which respects the division between groups, in unison with domestic policy that respects the division between individuals. >An economic allowing the individual to focus on and better himself, benefitting the collective indirectly >An incentive to promote domestic economic growth and resource development based in personal gain, as opposed to mere altruism.
This is still an emerging ideology, so this is subject to debate and change.
Connor Smith
...
Hudson Clark
I didn't get a response in the last thread, so is natcap any different than state capitalism?
Jayden Powell
oc
Aiden Mitchell
National Capitalists are American Nationalist's who oppose Socialism, Marxism and the welfare state. We espouse Traditionalism, Sovereignty, Free Market Capitalism, Individualism, Self Defense. We oppose Marxism, Egalitarianism, Post Modernism, Cultural Marxism, Social Justice.
Kevin Torres
...
Ian Nguyen
National capitalism encourages self sufficiency and is more generally based on the principal that the stronger the people, the stronger the state. State capitalism encourages dependence on the state.
Joseph Evans
You faggots. This is the only flag we need.
James Cook
Checked
Jeremiah King
Oh ya. No welfare state in national capitalism. Only the market!
Blake Martinez
...
Carson Sullivan
We also need a slogan!!
Owen Foster
This movement could easily gather steam if done correctly. The important thing here would be to fuse the free market principles of libertarians (which most people agree with) and the uniting spirit of nationalism.
among the key tenants of the movements should include:
1) Strengthening of negative individual rights. Instead of maintaining the current Bill of rights, I believe that we should seek out new rights to add to the constitution. I think a potential cause to champion within the realm of additional rights could be the instillation of a right to privacy (especially online). If we make invasive personal data collection unconstitutional, we would be able to protect the internet from becoming dominated by data-mining corporations and information monitoring governments.
2) The state exists solely to oversee the growth of the nation. How do we grow the American spirit? Its fairly simple: dismantle the welfare state. Before the welfare state, people had to depend on their friends and families to make it through hard times. Rotary Clubs, the Knights of Columbus, Elks Lodges, Shiners, and any religious institution worth their salt are shadows of their former glory. When de' Tocqueville came to America after the revolution, he was amazed at how the american people had support systems that organically arose outside of the purview of the state. The church was not just the religious center of every town, but it was also the center of the community itself. (Additionally, there is a massive correlation between belief in religion and fertility rates in Western nations. So, if the alright is wants white babies, they better hop on board with this). By removing things like social security (which is going to self destruct sooner rather than later), medicare/medicaid (which is bankrupt in nearly every state), and welfare we will be able to stop depending on the government, and return to depending on our neighbor
Liam Perry
3) The state removes itself almost completely from the market. Deregulation of banks (frame it as "removing the protections of the big banks in order to sell it to normies who don't understand how banking cartels operate), and "unleashing of american industry. Restructure unions to where their purpose is less about negotiating wages and benefits, and more about providing a place a worker can turn to if they feel they are being exploited. So in a sense they are not a collective bargaining unit, but rather a collective legal representation unit. Allow the wages to normalize and see the industry flood back into the U.S.
4) Id leave it up for debate if we want to go back on the gold standard, or abolish the Fed. Im all for ditching the Fed, except I do worry that without a central bank of our own, the global banking cartel would purposefully sink our nation. I would greatly appreciate someone with any kind of advanced economic background to layout the realistic prospects of what abolishing/restructuring the fed would look like.
4) Call a convention of states. Currently there is a massive push among conservative state legislators to call together a convention of states where we could add amendments to the constitution without congressional approval. I feel that the biggest issue of our movement would be to add property rights to the constitution.
5) There is a historical basis to add property rights to the constitution. Originally, the founders wanted the Declaration of Independence to say "Life, Liberty, and Property" but since slaves were still seen as property at the time, many of the founders did not want to enshrine language that would have made it more difficult to abolish slavery in the future. If we correct this, one small word could change the course of American History
Julian Diaz
It also has to be accepted that Communist aren't people and that they are hostile primates!
Jordan Wood
As for the Nationalist movement. I think that in order to gain mainstream appeal as quickly as possible, we would have to piggy back on the rising tide of anti-leftism. The holdovers from the patriot movement, Tea Partiers, and other anti-leftist movements already are reviving the American identity we would need to give our movement life.
The problem with the libertarian party, aside from their massive dysfunction as a unit, is that their party is all policy and no soul.
Our party would focus on the soul of America. The left has successfully diluted the American system of values to where people can openly say "What does it even mean to be an American?" Our nation has lost its soul, and its our job to bring it back.
In order to spread the fires of patriotism, we need an intellectual to cling to, and luckily we already have him. As I stated earlier Alexis de Tocqueville was a Frenchman who came to America after the French Revolution to observe our nation. What he found was a nation that bewildered him. A country so deeply rooted in the values of the enlightenment that he immediately felt that his newly formed French Republic had done their revolution incorrectly. "Democracy in America" is the single greatest reflection on what it means to be an American ever put to pen. If we treat de Tocqueville's work as our "Mein Kampf" (not in a perverse sense, but the notion of having a singular, tangible reference for the soul of your movement is powerful) than we can bring back Americas soul. I think making "Democracy in America" mandatory reading for any one wanting to become a NatCap would be a great way to build a powerful, educated base of activists.
Michael Jackson
Well obviously we would need a very physical removal once we came into power
Ian Adams
What do you think OP?
Parker Watson
Sharing is terrorism.
Christian Hill
found this site on the web. Its a good read. I think we can add a lot to it that is more tangible.
