Is American education that bad?
Why do Americans think national socialism = communism?
Juan Wilson
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtu.be
youtube.com
atlassociety.org
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
philosophy.lander.edu
youtu.be
twitter.com
Landon Stewart
Because fuck them both equally.
Wyatt Cooper
they don't
Oliver Howard
yes they do, they argue this always.
Jaxson Anderson
>that fucking pic
Please suck off your Putin ruskie.
Robert Harris
Russian education is shit, you're so stupid
stop crying baby.
Alexander Clark
American is too stupid to know his ass from the toilet, but Polyak is stupider.
Hello Dildo
Jace Clark
Communism lasts longer than Nat Socialism.
Adrian Gray
No, we don't. In school we are taught that both were authoritarian shitholes that tortured and killed dissenters which is true.
Henry Adams
Yes, it does.
Russian communism last longer than Polyak communism, but Polyak is not even real Slav. We conquer both Poland and German, because both is subhuman half-jew. American is nothing but nigger, it explains your education.
yes you learn to suck nigger cock and get shit on by Israel, you are cucks to the world huh?
Christopher Jackson
Enough for some Americans not to know how many sides a triangle has.
And yes, they do exist.
John Price
We don't? I've never seen anyone ever make this claim in my life, and I go on this board every day, and have been for the past several years.
Maybe you're thinking of the time before flag IDs and it was just Australians LARPing as us.
Sebastian Cooper
What the fuck are you on about? I don't support Israel. That had nothing to do with my comment.
Lincoln Collins
I adore seeing you leftist shitheads having your feelings hurt from us pointing out national socialism is, unsurprisingly, a form of socialism.
Noah Scott
Stop stealing our memes you uncreative faggots.
Asher Lewis
Americans all suck circumcized dicks, dont deny
HAHA! See? American education is here!
LOL
Ayden Lee
No. Lots of Americans are retarded enough to support Israel but also many are opposed to it in both political parties.
Juan Ramirez
>no american say this
but you see first of many for sure
Leo King
Because all we know is freedom.
Ayden Russell
Brody Cook
threads like this are an indirect shill attempt to associate communism with national socialism in the average reader's mind unconsciously
Before this, nobody thought national socialism and communism had anything to do with each other, especially as the two ideologies literally fought one of the biggest wars in human history.
But now it's implanted; "there was some kind of similarity between national socialism and communism???"
tl;dr shills shilling
Done with a russkie proxy too, so backlash gets directed at a western opponent, rather than the jews/leftists/intelligence agencies actually driving this bullshit in our society.
Cameron Hernandez
That's just retards who can't differentiate socialism from communism.
That said, I kind of understand, because sometimes it is difficult to tell which pile of shit stinks worse when they both smell so fucking awful.
Also, no, every right-wing person I know who isn't a cuckservative (who aren't really right-wing) hates Israel and Jews in general.
Jose Morgan
Communism is freedom, Naizism is death.
Hudson Baker
Even your hero you worship Molyneux say this
>NAZI = COMMUNISM
hahahahah even smartest American is pure shit
Isaac Collins
he's a canadian
David Reed
...
Charles Sanchez
...
Robert Howard
oh even better, you worship a Dildo
but you worship anyway
Ethan Foster
no, they see it as commies who collapse the economy and make everyone near them poor as shit and miserable or Nazis who gas the Jews and made the Japs go after pearl harbor, no problem differentiating the two
Jonathan Powell
>Holohoax is REAL
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
Xavier Jackson
Rand is Jewish? Fuck, they're everywhere.
Henry Baker
Holy fucking shit are you retarded or what?
National socialism is a form of socialism. Its is that simple. Society had ultimate ownership of the means of production and could deprive any individuals of their right to property if the government could cast it in terms of benefiting their collective, (the ethnos or the Volk).
As such it is also a communtariarian (as opposed to individualistic) approach to politics and is far closer to communism than anything that has ever been practiced in the west as capitalism.
>National socialists put socialist in the name of their own party becasue they hate them unto death
Seriously nigger? I mean really?
Parker Parker
Obviously not, but Americans are pretty indoctrinated that it is.
Isaac Ortiz
yes, american is colony of Israel
USA = first colony of Zionist
even this kiwi is a nigger tier look
American = nigger bogan
obviously read this thread, it is full fo what they say
Adam Myers
Ahahaha! Look at you.
>“’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.”
-- Adolf Hitler 1938
Amrican on vacation.
Aaron Hughes
>Soon the Jew became the leader of the battle against himself. I am speaking figuratively when I say “against himself” because the “great master of lies” always succeeds in making himself seem innocent and throwing the blame on others. Since he had the audacity to lead the masses himself, it never occurred to the people that this could be the most legendary fraud of all time...
>Without being aware of it, the laborer is put to work for the very power that he believes he is fighting against. He is led to believe he is acting against capitalism, and therefore he is easily made to fight for capitalism. The cry is heard against international capital, but the real target is the national economy. The current economy must be destroyed so that the international stock exchange can replace it on the corpse-strewn battlefield, with Jewish financial world interests.
>To achieve his goal, the Jew proceeds as follows: he creeps up on the workers in order to win their confidence, pretending to have compassion for their poverty and circumstances or even anger at their miserable lot in life. He is careful to study all the real or even their imagined problems. Then he arouses the desire for change. With infinite shrewdness, he stirs up the urge for (((SOCIAL JUSTICE))), an innate desire that is sleeping within every Aryan. Once the fire is burning, the Jew turns it into hatred toward those more fortunate and puts the stamp of a very special World-Concept on the battle; he builds a philosophy designed to correct social injustice. He founds the Marxist doctrine.
- MEIN KAMPF
the stupid is spreading throught the internet to bogans
Tyler Cooper
If you can't READ your own language, you can listen to audiobooks. Retards.
youtu.be
Sebastian Evans
because hurr durr it says national SOCIALISM so it must be left wing rite?
pol likes to think they're redpilled and enlightened but when it comes to basic definitions in left-wing politics and economics, they're fucking illiterate
Dylan Ortiz
This post is 100% perfect example. It is not logic, it is RATIONALIZATION
>thus it is communitarian
wew. it in more ways the opposite, and justified strong individuals and inequalities as "for the common good". The problem is that Sup Forums is lazy with ADHD. They don't read, and if they do, they only read wiki paragraph. Nothing more. If video is more than 5 minutes, they don't want to watch. Nothing they learn in depth. Nothing in detail. All superficial.
But this is true for most American, all of your politics is superficial. No history, cant even remember 10 years ago history.
Sebastian Reyes
We don't, or at least I don't. Then again the average American student in 2016 would much rather cobble together bullshit in school than actually explore a topic. You would be proud of me ruski-bro, I'm downing a bottle of your finest Russian standard and installed a dashcam in my Volvo last week. I'm not kidding, I have a 40 mile drive to work in both directions, and I've seen some weird shit (like a pickup truck with its bed on fire trying to drive past me. Didn't stop, just flew past. Also saw a guy taking a shit on a parked car about a month ago.)
Luke Lewis
Why do American right wingers say that Hitler was a leftist?
This is obviously not true
Samuel Allen
Jew has programmed them.
They don't learn difference.
They have no history.
Jayden Lee
pol loves to claim to espouse individualism and blame the left for pandering to collectivist principles
heads up idiots, it's the exact opposite. Leftists put the individual before the collective. Sex "posiitve" movements to let women fuck whoever they want without consequence, allowing people to pursue hedonism and abandon morality.
Right wingers are the collectivists, but they zero in on more important and identifiable collectives, the NATION, the FAMILY, the COMMUNITY, the DIOCESE, which are all under CONSTANT ASSAULT by cultural marxist and "progressive' forces of the left. Collectivism is not a bad principle in and of itself.
Also, pol needs to realize big government and social welfare is not fucking socialism
socialism is explicitly worker control over the means of production and the abolition of privately owned property, neither of which Nazi Germany never endorsed, pursued, or accomplished.
Aaron Jones
wew lad
never go full retard
Nathan Moore
MC Tovarich bringing the bantz tonight
What's your view on Finland? Like or hate them?
Henry Fisher
this, the modern left is just hyper-individualism tailored into a messy political programme.There are aspects of collectivism, but they are limited to strict points of economic and welfare policy.
Matthew Gonzalez
Ivan, you should read your fellow country woman, Ayn Rand, before you bash her. A female Russian philosopher has influenced millions of Americans.
Liam Cruz
>Leftists are the individualists
>Right wing are the collectivists
>all these irrelevant examples
Literally, the Left is DEFINED as communitarian. The right, along a spectrum from that, grows more individualistic. None of your examples are relevant to either of those concepts, nor is the tl;dr rant you went on. You haven't thought about these concepts very hard at all. You haven't studied anything.
do you EVER suspect that maybe you need to study these things, or you think you're fine just learning from social media and television?
Lucas Turner
>A female Russian philosopher has influenced millions of Americans.
Yes, that Jew plagiarist of Nietzsche and Stirner has helped you become dumber than ever before. Americans can only consume the fast-food versions of ideas.
Angel Morris
The left is only economically communitarian. They care nothing for the well-being of their nations and families and often oppose both. You're only operating under an economic spectrum of communitarian -> individualist.
I don't consume any social media or television.
Nolan Long
>nuh uh you're wrong
this is what your answer amounts to.
you think nations are the only community to care for? you think there was not a "childlessness tax" under communism?
youtube.com
your only example is "SJW", "consumer activist" or "american progressive". you have literally learned this from television. you do not read. Find "progressive" on the chart there is a reason it is to the right of Liberalism.
Jason Miller
Friedman is based.
Samuel Hughes
no, he was not
Ryan Wright
one google search later.....
atlassociety.org
put down the bottle ivan
Ryder Lopez
What do you recommend I should read? Also, how do you align yourself politically?
Samuel Nguyen
This man try to warn you all.
Why didn't you listen?
All your ideas of left and right are poisoned.
You have no idea who is behind this poisoning.
youtube.com
youtube.com
oh look, Ayn Rand's cult tells you
>Ayn Rand dindu nuffin
well done
red classic works of political economy.
>Das Capital
>The Wealth of Nations
>Mein Kampf
>Alexis de Tocqueville work on America
>Programme of the NSDAP
>The German Ideology
>Antonio Gramsci, learn his concept of "Hegemony"
>The Frankfurt School
>Anything by Stirner
>Anything by Charles Dunoyer and Charles Comte (who Marx plagiarized)
youtube.com
Bust most importantly, study the Jewish influence throughout history. They are at every turn. Your history is not free from Jews, going all the way back to Rome.
youtube.com
You are an occupied country.
Landon Butler
attacking the source and not the arguments
molyneux.jpg
Eli Scott
When we hear National Socialism we think Nazi and then we remember the 6 gorillion just like we were programmed to.
Ian Nguyen
I've already read the first 3, and I've read the Ego and Its Own by Stirner. I'll check the rest out though, thanks Dmitri.
Gavin Martinez
first tell me read Rand
>i have already
tell me you find a link debunks something
>it is more from her liar cult
yes yes, i have read many years now from objectivists, fuck off. isn't it obvious to you, i am ahead of you in my research? yet still you act the superior.
>Dunning-Kreuger effect
Did Rand speak of this?
If not, why not?
>philosophy.lander.edu
I am not here to waste time reinventing the wheel. you cannot be saved if you cannot question your own assumptions, you are the Slave morality Nietzsche spoke of. I give you suggestions to use to question, use them or not, its not my problem. I gave you the chance, you turned away.
cheers m8
Xavier Reyes
All history, the truth is there the whole time, as long as you are not blind to the Jews
Aiden Taylor
simmer down ivan, its just an internet discussion.
Here, since you can't engage the content on your own, I'll post it for you, maybe that will help.
"Conclusion: Summarizing the key differences and similarities. My judgment is that the differences between Nietzsche and Rand greatly outweigh the similarities. They are both atheists, they both are naturalistic in their approach to consciousness and values, and they are both hostile to altruism. Yet they share very little positive philosophy: they disagree on virtually every fundamental issue in metaphysics, epistemology, and human nature; and they disagree about the proper positive standard, means, and end of ethics. My post does not address the questions of Nietzsche’s influence upon Rand or of the extent to which Rand later expunged earlier Nietzschean elements in her thinking. Please feel welcome to address those questions too."
All you have done in this whole thread is call TAS a bunch of liars and asserted your superiority. You haven't addressed a single argument or demonstrated the 'obvious' plagiarism. Moreover, you claim to be 'ahead of you in my research' despite knowing literally nothing about me. I didn't act 'superior', I asked for evidence, and you, instead of giving it, act offended and haughty.
Kindly join the discussion or close the browser.
Colton Smith
This guy is a hero hahah
Austin Morris
>how do you align yourself politically?
I am pan-slavic nationalist, but I appreciate other groups that have awareness of Aryanism/Pan-European. We are basically the same movements, with some who are not, but I think it is same philsophy.
Pan-Ethnic-nationalist, maybe.
We all work together to preserve our nations as distinct.
William Jones
ok, thank you, isaid i have read it.
do you know to distinguish the diverence between the dialectical and rhetorical?
the objectivist is the modern sophist school.
I cant explain this to you, you must study Aristotle. I'm sorry, i cant do this work for you.
Owen Cook
People come from all over the world and pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to go to American universities.
Not so with Russia. So I ask you, is education in Russia that bad, senpai?
Ethan Stewart
>assuming I'm ignorant of Aristotle.
pic related
Brody Bailey
Ayn Rand fans, tell me this:
Her definition of rights:
>“Rights” are a moral concept—the concept that provides a logical transition from the principles guiding an individual’s actions to the principles guiding his relationship with others—the concept that preserves and protects individual morality in a social context—the link between the moral code of a man and the legal code of a society, between ethics and politics. Individual rights are the means of subordinating society to moral law.
This is dichotomy, right to property and human right, is it a logical dichotomy? Now tell me, how did Marx derive a rejection of private property rights from his dichotomy of human rights and property rights in labor-theory of value?
;^)
ok, that is your breadcrumb. look for the false dichotomies. compare them to the fallacies of Marxism. Uh oh, how did this anti-marxist have so many similar logics? It is because it is a Jewish logic; it is rhetoric.
if you weren't ignorant of Aristotle, why do you not notice the sophistry?
Levi Evans
Oh, I'mma keeping this one.
Justin Edwards
The English here is not so great, but I think I get the gist.
No, there is not a dichotomy between individual rights and property rights. People are entitles to what they create, or what is freely given to them. To say that you have a right to life without a right to the means of maintaining that life (property) is clearly contradictory. As Rand demonstrated, property rights are a logical extension of individual rights.
From The Virtue of Selfishness, p93:
"The right to life is the source of all rights—and the right to property is their only implementation. Without property rights, no other rights are possible. Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life. The man who produces while others dispose of his product, is a slave.
Bear in mind that the right to property is a right to action, like all the others: it is not the right to an object, but to the action and the consequences of producing or earning that object. It is not a guarantee that a man will earn any property, but only a guarantee that he will own it if he earns it. It is the right to gain, to keep, to use and to dispose of material values."
glad you like it