Socialism (defined as a capitalist economy wherein the state directs capital in important industries for the long term...

Socialism (defined as a capitalist economy wherein the state directs capital in important industries for the long term interests of the country, as opposed to capitalists directing the country for the short term interests of capital), without shitskins and subversives in your country, is the best conceivable system in the history of humanity. See Denmark, Norway, and Nazi Germany as close examples.
If you disagree, you are one or more of the following.
>1. A rootless amerimutt
>2. A greedy kike
>3. Larping rugged individualist (No such thing)
>4. Ayn Rand reading kiddy
>5. Autistic lolbertarian/ancap
>6. Anti-social sociopath
>7. Not white.

Other urls found in this thread:

elgar.blog/2014/09/09/embracing-capitalism-the-real-success-of-swedens-universal-welfare-state/
telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11349597/Switzerland-was-once-a-safe-haven.-That-is-no-longer-true-today.html
youtube.com/watch?v=zhE_68GMJIk
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

>best conceivable system in the history of humanity
is that why america is so great, again?

>great
>56% white

Bump

Only after liberal minded reforms changed immigration policy.

But that's the problem. Liberals want to help the poor and capitalists want cheap labor. The tradcons get fucked, even when they built the liberal's soap box and the capitalist's market.

can confirm this is true

>the state directing capital towards anything beyond the next elections
>the state having a fucking clue what's good for the republic in the long run
>the Flynn Effect not turning backwards

Wait, what, you're saying that a state that lets businesses run free will degenerate society into liberalism because liberalism is good for profits?

>thinks I'm advocating democracy

>50.3%
>"minority"
heh

>America was great.
>Liberals ruined it.
>National Socialists give them the black triangle.

I think for people to understand that national socialism is the way, they have to accept a lot of other truths as well, which are often quite hard for them to swallow. Firstly, any system which gives people something, whether it be voting power, money, etc can only be practiced in a relatively homogeneous society. The social welfare system of America is a failure because we are extremely heterogeneous while it succeeds in countries like Sweden and Denmark because they are much smaller and all but homogeneous. Without homogeneity, you cannot have socialism.

>defined as a capitalist economy wherein the state directs capital in important industries for the long term interests of the country, as opposed to capitalists directing the country for the short term interests of capital

thats such a vague description that we cannot have a reasonable discussion here.

>Strongest economy on earth
>Strongest military on earth
>Most Nobel prize recipients among any countries
>constantly on the cutting edge of science and technology
>shining beacon on the hill and the envy of the world that everybody wants to come to and live in
>Not great

Your definition of socialism is not socialism. It's just social democracy, and suffers the problem that poor people becomes a necessity for the survival of the left-wing political elite. A true socialist within a social democracy will always oppose a tax reform that removes tax revenue from the state, even if it's certain that it will improve the conditions for all social classes.

It's not about people, it's about taking care of yourself and your class of career politicians.

>Most Nobel prize recipients among any countries
Because of foreign scientists going to your country, mostly.
Anyway. What good is all that if you destroyed yourself in a mere 250 years of existence? This is what you can't see, you put materialism above everything, make short term gains, but then destroy yourself.

>Socialism (defined as a capitalist economy wherein the state

Stopped reading right there. In today's day and age, states are easily (((corrupted))). Thus the modern colonization of 3rd world countries.

I'm not advocating democracy.

But yes, I am not using the Marxist definition. I am not against private property like Marxists are.

So you're using Scandinavian free market focus and social democracy as examples of authoritarian state-capitalism? Ok.

Then why use Oswald, you shitposter?
Also capitalism without welfare is best for the economy and technological progress, fight me.

its the true red pill

I said close examples. There's no reason why the Scandinavian system wouldn't work without democracy.

>Because of foreign scientists going to your country, mostly.
So what you're saying is that were so appealing that fuckloads of people actually want to come here?
>Anyway. What good is all that if you destroyed yourself in a mere 250 years of existence?
We haven't destroyed yourself though. We're still a sovereign nation, we still uphold constitutional values nd we still the envy of the world despite MUH 56% meme

>best for the economy and technological progress
Maybe, maybe not.
Though Nazi Germany would put your statement into contention.
Progress for the sake of progress leads to a degenerate American type society. The most mentally and physically Ill, the most rootless and nihilistic, the most self destructive. You'll make short term gains, but in the long term you'll lay down the path to your grave.

>So what you're saying is that were so appealing that fuckloads of people actually want to come here?
Did you see the state of Europe after ww2?
>We haven't destroyed yourself though. We're still a sovereign nation, we still uphold constitutional values nd we still the envy of the world despite MUH 56% meme
Lmfao. You're in denial. You're the most degenerate country on the planet. You will soon be majority nonwhite. Everyone that is 4 or younger is already majority non-white. You are irreversibly fucked.

So why don't you fuck off to one of the Scandinavian countries where you can have half your paycheck stolen from you while actual countries continue being relevant and successful?

>Denmark
>Norway
>socialist

Look anons, we have a Berniebro lost on his way to Starbucks for Christmas reddit meeting.

>MUH DEGENERACY
Now try making an argument without using subjective buzzwords

Litteral Ab Hominem: The Post.
The absolute state of fucking britain.
Also
>>socialism defined as to be not socialist is the perfect system.
Sister Miriam, the Nun who taught me philosophy, would have a fucking field day on your ass; she would have you recite the fucking Timeo with your Rosary in 5 minutes.

>Denmark and Norway are socialist
stopped reading there

False, lack of laws puts the state in degeneracy. Also have to add, the weak die out in capitalism without welfare, so less low-iq retards and profligates.
You can see the stem of decadence are single mothers and those along with the damaged kids would die out in such a system, ergo less profligates, same goes for promiscuous women, who would die alone, as men would go for better.
Those gains are long term, as they were in the Roman empire, that is what Sup Forums should root for, not nazism, but roman fascism.

>Thinking the problem of socialism is heterogenous societies
>Thinking free market social Democratic Scandinavian countries are examples, which btw are failing due to socialism taking over
>Calling Nazis a good example when they themselves were state capitalists
>Thinking every person in power will have the countries best interest at heart

I thought I lived in lalaland but boy you can break both your legs and still think you can run with it

I am from the US and I can guarantee I am more Aryan than half of the fucktards who talk shit about other Euro ethnicities on this site

The perfect option is for the workers to join together and create their own companies, most small businesses could work much better, look at the Basque country and many of its industries are cooperatives. unemployment, wages, security for dismissal are incomparable to the rest of Spain, and the most important thing is the feeling of working for a common ideal.
It should not be so difficult to implement if public institutions buy and in turn re-rent property rights to the company for a certain period of time and provided that it is the worker himself or who works.

>Nazi Germany had deficit of basic goods and breadlines
> is the best conceivable system in the history of humanity

????

>False, lack of laws puts the state in degeneracy.
Saying false and then making an assertion isn't an argument.
>the weak die out in capitalism without welfare, so less low-iq retards and profligates.
Survival of the fittest may may.
Totally retarded. Read the history of the industrial revolution and you'll see you're wrong. Plenty of retards survive because they are needed for the system.

>Socialism (defined as a capitalist economy

Can you just fuck off and read a book?

look at this orbea one of the mayour fabricant of bikes here in spain all made by working class people joining together

>Totally retarded. Read the history of the industrial revolution
Saying it's retarded and saying "you're wrong" isn't an argument.

To simplify it to you.
Pre ind. rev. you had about 70% of the population working in the primary sector/agriculture. After that, most went into the secondary and tertiary sectors. But that does not relate as to how people in any of those sectors are retarded, as IQ and general intelligence are hereditary in large. So not sure at what you are pointing, but the poor are less able to have lots of kids, while the middle and upper class can have many and will need them if they wish to be taken care of when old.

Regarding the laws, you have laws that will solidify a culture, such as a Burka ban, mandatory school attendance, which can have some classes to "indoctrinate" the youth or have a cult of personality established, etc.. Lots of ways that laws can influence culture, those mentioned above are extreme and were used in nazi germany.

social cooperativism is the answer

>only the Marxist definition of socialism is socialism

>To simplify it to you.
>Pre ind. rev. you had about 70% of the population working in the primary sector/agriculture. After that, most went into the secondary and tertiary sectors. But that does not relate as to how people in any of those sectors are retarded, as IQ and general intelligence are hereditary in large. So not sure at what you are pointing, but the poor are less able to have lots of kids, while the middle and upper class can have many and will need them if they wish to be taken care of when old
Wait, so we agree that capitalism as a means of survival of the fittest is a meme? Great.
>Regarding the laws, you have laws that will solidify a culture, such as a Burka ban, mandatory school attendance, which can have some classes to "indoctrinate" the youth or have a cult of personality established, etc.. Lots of ways that laws can influence culture, those mentioned above are extreme and were used in nazi germany.
Except laws like that are bad for business. You're shrinking consumer groups and segregating people. Capitalists want a mass culture of consumers, that's why 99% of them support liberalism and total abstract freedom. You are totally lost.

>that's why 99% of them support liberalism and total abstract freedom
Reference?

>bad for business
Wrong, very wrong. Bad for multinational corporations, great for local business.
Let's take the revocation of immigration for example and let's say we have a positive fertility rate. If smart niggers from india couldn't go to 'murica and increase their GDP, they would instead increase India's GDP.
Same in our country, people go to Germany and Austria to work, be the uneducated or educated, meaning they wronged our social system/tax payers. Were they to stay, our companies would have it far better.
Also, still no argument.

>Wrong, very wrong. Bad for multinational corporations, great for local business.
This is the crux of out contention. And it's pointless to go on without clarifying this. You are conflating capitalism with small businesses. They're irrelevant. The big dogs rule the system and set the standards, influence the laws, and the market. Small businesses are blowing in the wind caused by the big capital owners. You are a delusional idealist and don't understand anything about capitalism. Your capitalism is some meme theoretical abstraction.

You seem to not understand what the "perfect" capitalist system looks like in the text books.
Full on competition, the consumer does not differentiate between trademarks and no patents. That is true free trade as semi seen in Rome. Libertarians and ancaps know this very well and so do classical liberals. Basically anyone educated in economics does.
Now go ahead and make an argument, as it is getting dull, due to your ignorance of the topic. And stop with those commie tier tactics already, be a bit more forthcoming.

>lack of laws

No it's the philosophy of individualism. When the individual is God, obviously the colective will perish

>You seem to not understand what the "perfect" capitalist system looks like in the text books.
>Full on competition, the consumer does not differentiate between trademarks and no patents. That is true free trade as semi seen in Rome. Libertarians and ancaps know this very well and so do classical liberals. Basically anyone educated in economics does.
>argue against my special snowflake capitalism that never existed for longer than a decade (arguably never at all) and not capitalism as it actually exists
I'm interested in the read world. Not fairytales. Brainlet.

So you think the church held us from degeneracy? Not those holy laws? Not the authorities shunning anyone going against the norm?
Fear of outcome is what kept us in check, prevention.

>never existed
Sure, let's take sweden and how it went from dirt poor to one of the richest countries, richer than 'murica. Hell, you can even use Switzerland as an example and how they are one of the richest.
elgar.blog/2014/09/09/embracing-capitalism-the-real-success-of-swedens-universal-welfare-state/

Yes, and for how much longer? Every single item on your list I could've said the same about the British Empire a hundred years prior. And what happened to that? Given that you've withdrawn with your tail between your legs from every military confrontation for the past 70 years, I'd say you're far past your due for your own Suez Crisis. In the end, all it amounts to is hubris. You will be humbled, like we've already been, and none of us will feel sorry for it.

>Socialism (defined as a capitalist economy wherein the state directs capital in important industries

Switzerland is meme where rich people fron other countties keep their money.
Sweden had lots of state involvement and investment, and foreign investment from big capitalists. No matter how you look at it, big capital comes first.

>keep their money
Keep up with the times
telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11349597/Switzerland-was-once-a-safe-haven.-That-is-no-longer-true-today.html

Sweden had no govt involvement and low taxes pre 1950's, that is when their economy slowed down and now you can see mos of the new jobs are public sector and they have a deficient economy, much like nazi germany.

Again, I advocate for the Roman fascist system, big capital has a place, but is kept in check, as it has always benefited the people. Crony capitalism is poison though.

>amerigoy education

Canada is sitting on cash with all its oil yet it's kikes that exploit those ressources instead of the state which would put that money into healthcare and education instead of offshore bank accounts. Cuckpitalists are corporate shills and best goys.

Okay.
Highest mental illness and physical illness.
Highest levels of nihilism.
One or the highest divorce rates and family unit integration.
Highest levels of obesity.
Third world crime levels.
Extremely low levels of social trust.
Extremely low levels of trust in leadership or institutions.
Enormous debt and squabbling political systems.
Infantalized corporate produced culture as the norm.
Irreversible demographic displacement.
Failing education system.
Third world levels of health care.
Third world levels of corruption.

You are Rome 2.0 turning into Brazil 2.0.

>family unit integration.
Disintegration*

>3 year old opinion piece article
>Sweden had no govt involvement and low taxes pre 1950's,
Bullshit. And Sweden still has very low corporate taxes.
>that is when their economy slowed down and now you can see mos of the new jobs are public sector and they have a deficient economy, much like nazi germany.
This is a baseless assertion.

>opinion piece article
>didn't read
>doesn't know that FBI can search banks database
>doesn't know swiss banks have negative interest rates
telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11349597/Switzerland-was-once-a-safe-haven.-That-is-no-longer-true-today.html

>has very low corporate taxes
And a EU study showed they have the highest overall tax rates in the EU. That also harms corporations.
>Bullshit
Not an argument. Here, trust the words of Johan if you are that cynical.
youtube.com/watch?v=zhE_68GMJIk

>baseless assertion
Not an argument.

>Denmark, Norway
they have the freest markets of the world, not even close to socialism
try again

>socialism can't ever involve a free market

peddle off pedro