I hate his economic policy (literal socialist) but he's the only one standing up against immigration and against the EU...

I hate his economic policy (literal socialist) but he's the only one standing up against immigration and against the EU.

What do, Sup Forums?

Other urls found in this thread:

thelocal.dk/20151101/danish-pm-in-us-denmark-is-not-socialist
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Do you really have to ask?

economy can be fixed. demographics cannot (without drastic measures which are very unlikely to be put in place)

Vote for Geert, Netherlands.

Yeah socialism is gay but he's anti immigrant and God knows you need that

socialism is "ok" when there are no niggers
like scandinavia before the refugee crisis and feminism

But they always lead to that.

Always

That's a good point I guess
I believe socialism could actually be viable as long as you keep borders closed but I despise it out of principle.

I don't think voting for him will do much.

Our media has turned him into a joke for as long as I can remember, especially our youth sees him as a living meme.

Socialism never leads to innovatiom though. People think 'Well I'll make a lot of money on welfare, why work?'. Then the workforce drops, production plummets, the government gets poorer, the economy tanks, the people riot and then the government is overthrown.

It NEVER works.

>like scandinavia before the refugee crisis and feminism

This meme needs to die. Countries like Sweden were going into staggering debt and destroying their economy's long term structure through endless expansions of the nanny state. Socialism does not fucking work, and white people do not have magic powers that make them immune to economics.

...

any system works as long as you have a cohesive, high iq society

the scandis could even make communism work if they didn't import shitskins and held on to traditional values

See

/thread

result of degeneracy and shitty mindset

this nigger esque mindset destroys any society, no matter what kind of policy the state believes in

any society with a high iq people that have a strong sense of community and all want to contribute to their people will thrive

you have to take into account the rise of the automation and robotization that is destroying jobs.

In history having a full time job economy is an exception. Most peasants in the middle ages didn't work except during harvest, because there was nothing productive to do.

Technology is going to drive us to this point again : work and self-actualization are going to become the privilege of the rich.

it's fully planned economy that won the biggest war in History

Who the fuck cares? USSR didn't have toilet paper till 1964. But at least they won, yeah, hooray.

Socialism only works when people are empathic and generous enough to support those "less fortunate than them" out of free will, and the "less fortunate" at least try not to be a burden on society.

So essentially a unicorn.

Vote for him, unless someone better comes along that doesn't get shot.

Open borders + socialism or "fair share" = ded
Closed + socialism = ok
Open + capitalism = ok
Closed + capitalism = good

>Countries like Sweden were going into staggering debt
American "intellectuals"

>national
>socialist
>I dislike his politics
You know where you are, right?

>Socialism never leads to innovation

>"""ebil communist""" Soviet union
would say that they accomplished a lot in space/science
>"""ebil socialist""" finlan
in top 10 most innovative countries in the world
>"""ebil socialist""" sweden
in top 10 most innovative countries in the world
>"""ebil socialist""" denmark
in top 10 most innovative countries in the world

Socialism or communism does not necessarily make something fail, there have been a lot of successful socialist countries as well as a lot of failed ones. It depends how you implement it and other factors.
I think that what matters the most is if the people really believe that working and paying taxes will make their country and community better. That is why in the soviet union it failed, the propaganda was there but people did not really believe it so they started stealing and not working correctly.
That's why it is working (for now) in the Nordic countries (might change with the whole "refugee" bullshit thought, if people stop believing that paying taxes actually helps their community and that it goes to lazy "refugees" instead).
That's my opinion on the subject, believing that your government is honest and that working helps your community.

>"""ebil socialist""" denmark
>B-BUT LOOK AND SCANDINAVIA THEY ARE SOCIALIST

Please, make it stop.
thelocal.dk/20151101/danish-pm-in-us-denmark-is-not-socialist

Socialism can only work in a homogenous society. This is why it worked in Nazi Germany. It would NEVER work in a multi-ethnic society like the US. Too many leeches around.

Government spending on Sven's welfare bucks makes GDP go up (so do hurricanes, that doesn't make it a good thing) and renders that info meaningless.

But of course I wouldn't expect someone from Sweden to be anything other than a brainwashed Marxist retard.

Then fuck off with calling everything else socialism.
>“The Nordic model is an expanded welfare state which provides a high level of security for its citizens, but it is also a successful market economy with much freedom to pursue your dreams and live your life as you wish,” he added.
This is literally what modern """socialism""" is according to Sup Forums.
There are literally no socialist candidates in the US or socialist countries in the world except for Cuba and Venezuella.

Socialism does not work anywhere.

There won't be an economy left if we keep importing inbred goatfuckers at this rate. We need to stop immigration now, fix the rest later. We can handle 8 years of socialism.

ATTENTION HAPPENING

My fellow countrymen think this country is socialist. Their entire argument rest on a false premise resulting from a flawed meaning of word that thrives on vagueness.

You said our debts had exploded but it turns out your debt is way higher than ours (relative to GDP).

There is no clear definition of socialism on Sup Forums.
It's kinda difficult to argue about it so I just go with what people post (bernie is socialist, sweden is socialist, canada is socialist, welfare is socialist, etc).

There has never been a clear definition of socialism.

>You said our debts had exploded but it turns out your debt is way higher than ours (relative to GDP).

socialism is the inarguably best system if your nation is not ridden by selfish non-nationalistic scum of the earth, which is why it is theoretical in nature, as humans will never forgo their selfish nature

National Socialism is the only form of Socialism that has ever proved to be successful.

People like to complain about Western Europe (particularly Sweden and Germany) importing huge amount of shitskins and while I too see a lot of issues with it, you have to keep in mind that the rich European states have been plagued by low birthrates for quite some time. Now, while you may think that encouraging nuclear families, conservative values and whatnot may seem like a good idea, keep in mind that Western Europe is/was completely leftist, cucked and degenerate and looking up to the even more multicultural US didn't really help with that.
I do however agree that they could've done everything differently. For example, enforced assimilation of immigrants instead of letting them do as they please and becoming "culturally enriched" themselves. They also could've encouraged immigration from for example Eastern Europe rather than from the worst shitholes on the face of the earth (for example, Poland accepted a lot of Ukrainians instead of shitskins, which annoys EU to no end)

meant for

Geert will rule the world.

It's the opposite, actually. Capitalism is the best when it's not overwhelmed by endlessly greedy people and ruthless "jewishness". Socialism is protection against that and general selfishness, therefore it's pointless without selfish people.

>Countries like Sweden were going into staggering debt

if selfishness ceases to exist there would be no point in bartering for goods, and there would be no state regulating the goods

people would offer what they could, take what they required, and do everything to forward their tribe in general as opposed to just themselves, so they wouldn't indulge in harmful activites

ideally people would also realize they had to go if they end up being unable to function to a satisfactory degree

this is not capitalism in any way, this is socialism

But without selfish people doing everything out of greed there is no point of socialist safeguard or making means of production public, since like you've said, people would only take what they required and do everything to forward their tribes anyway. On the other hand, socialism is very much welcomed in countries run by greedy and selfish oligarchies.
Bartering for goods would definitely be pointless in socialist society but I don't see how bartering itself is a bad or selfish thing. People don't require things just out of pure selfishness, some things are necessities. These have to be provided somehow, whether by public or private sector doesn't really matter.

Would you rather take a socialist who tells brown people to fuck off or a capitalist who tells brown people to come in?

It's the easiest choice ever.

Life isn't a choice between a good thing and a bad thing.
It's a choice between a bad choice and a worse choice.
Still can choose though.