Thread for discussion of National Socialism, Fascism, Traditionalism, and European Identity Movements. Share links, PDFs, reading, videos, and propaganda. > 卐 - REPORT IN FOR YOUR COUNTRY! > 卐 - TAKE BACK THE BOARD! > 卐 - DRIVE OUT DEGENERACY!
卐 IF YOU DO NOT SEE A GENERAL IN THE CATALOG PLEASE COPY FROM THE PASTEBIN AND CREATE ONE! - HELP SPREAD THE LOVE! 卐 卐 PASTEBIN - pastebin.com/index/MmJX3eRu 卐
================================ 卐 - MYTHS ABOUT NATSOC (Part 1) >"National Socialism is just (((socialism)))"
Marxist (Left) socialism and National (Right) Socialism are "antipodal zeitgeists engaged in dialectic". That's a fancy way to say they're opposite ideologies designed to clash, like Yin and Yang.
NatSoc was fundamentally an ideology built around race, while Marxist socialism was entirely different: built around class. Hitler aimed to unite the right and left, including workers and their bosses, into a new German nation based on racial identity. Socialism, in contrast, was a class war between workers, bosses, and owners (Capitalists), aiming to build a workers state in which race and gender were insignificant. Socialists, especially Marxist socialists, were anti-religious atheists, whereas NatSoc went so far as to make Christianity the religion of the state.
The differences go on and on: Marxist socialism was internationalist, NatSoc was nationalist. Marxist socialism was egalitarian, whereas NatSoc believed that nature was unequal and required competition. Marxist socialism wanted to nationalize all private industry, while NatSoc privatized every major industry except the railroads (it considered these a military asset. In fact, Hitler once joked "they didn't need to nationalize property because they nationalized people". NatSoc drew on a range of pan-German theories, which wanted to blend Aryan workers and Aryan magnates into a super Aryan state, which would involve the eradication of class-focused socialism as a non-German ideology.
Jeremiah Thomas
================================ 卐 - MYTHS ABOUT NATSOC (Part 2) >"National Socialism is just (((socialism)))"
NatSoc redefined socialism as "Germanism/Volkism", which they saw as "producer-oriented capitalism", as opposed to "Jewish capitalism", aka, international finance, globalism, wall street, etc. In theory, NatSoc economics was a version of Keynesianism, tailored to the Völkisch nature of whichever people adopted it. Its not one dogmatic economic system,and Hitler often joked that the lack of a specific ideology was their strength. NatSoc could be more "free market" as Americans know it, or less. But NatSoc is always in favor of the Volk over economic identity, of "producer capitalism" over "finance capitalism".
Hitler tried to clarify the distinction in 1938: >“’Socialist’ I define from the word ‘social’ meaning in the main ‘social equity’. A Socialist is one who serves the common good without giving up his individuality or personality or the product of his personal efficiency. >Our adopted term ‘Socialist has nothing to do with Marxian Socialism. ((((Marxism))) is anti-property; true socialism is not. ((((Marxism))) places no value on the individual, or individual effort, of efficiency; true Socialism values the individual and encourages him in individual efficiency, at the same time holding that his interests as an individual must be in consonance with those of the community. All great inventions, discoveries, achievements were first the product of an individual brain. It is charged against me that I am against property, that I am an atheist. Both charges are false.”
The thread seems slow so can I see /nsg/'s thoughts on a new ultranationalist/fascist Hungarian flag?
Here are some I've found for proposals:
Blake Young
...
Kayden Martin
================================ 卐 - MYTHS ABOUT NATSOC (Part 3) >"National Socialism / Fascism was a failed system"
It's intellectually dishonest to label something that was forcibly crushed a "failed system", implying that a nation bombed into collapse during war is comparable to a system imploding politically during peace-time. The Soviet system failed, as did the Roman Empire, and every Chinese or Ottoman dynasty. Some of these examples of government lasted thousands of years, while some didn't last more than a generation. All forms of government inevitably fail. This has been true since ancient times. Polybius famously articulated this process of Anacyclosis: social organization paradigms rise, fail, and give way to further systems. This is the cycle of history.
Fascism is not a failed system, it was a defeated system: A.) it was not an economic system, but a social one; B.) the so-called "failed system" had a control group: the US. Germany, Italy, and the US were operating under Keynesean policies; only one of them won the war, and experienced a massive period of growth once their industrial rivals were destroyed. So no, it wasn't a failed system, because both sides were using it, including the side that won.
>Lebensraum: 'Lebensraum' is often intentionally exaggerated by those wanting to push the fractal "Hitler planned to exterminate all races" meme. The actual meaning of Lebensraum referred to the security of the German borders, and the need to provide living space so that Germans aren't threatened by outside forces. To claim that "living space" meant solely "to exterminate and re-populate more land than there would have been Germans to inhabit, for several generations after the war" is absurd, and contradicts the policies of "Germanization" that were ACTUALLY PRACTICED by the Germans regarding their Slavic allies:
Can someone make a mega for all this stuff? Must say one of the webm's was beautiful and although this may sound cowardly, made me cry.
William Howard
it's not cowardly
Andrew Nguyen
Which webm made you cry?
Angel Torres
bump
Gabriel Martinez
Does anyone even support drumpf at this point aside from neocons and zionists ?
Anthony Davis
OK retards
Jaxson Sanchez
I am increasingly not on board with Christianity. It is a pacifist religion of slaves and I become more and more persuaded that the West was ultimately successful IN SPITE of Christianity rather than because of it. The Renaissance was mainly a rejection of the Church and Christianity and its values and worldview in favor of a return to the pagan ways of Classical Antiquity.
Ian Long
>The Jewish-Bolshevik Decimation of the Russian People >Jewish financiers and the Russian Revolution
