National Socialism

National Socialism is the only way to make america great again,; try and prove otherwise.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=FaCHBmGWcBc
youtube.com/watch?v=x1tUFx_StSo
youtube.com/watch?v=uNLTbPy0idg
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_syndicalism
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

but you are right.
youtube.com/watch?v=FaCHBmGWcBc

Kick ass video.

Have not seen a better video

WTH I'm a nazi now!
Seriously though.. that fucking video.. so damn inspiring!

How about i keep the money i earn, use it for my family, and you earn your own money.

youtube.com/watch?v=FaCHBmGWcBc
This will explain a lot

That was definitively a strong natsoc value IIUC. They were "socialist" in the very vague sense that they didn't want private interests to ruin society for common people.

It's more of protection against globalist companies than meaningless taxes
socialism is only good if money is given to people who deserve money based on character alone.

Instead of one company deciding whether to give higher pay to a majority of workers who deserve the higher pay or to stay competitive in the market, it is national obligation of protection for good character and societal strengthening while still being anti-degeneracy.

Henry Ford did a good self-demonstrating job of this with his ("invasive") Americanization company policies.

But fuck the good of the people it has a SCARY commie word in the name so it must be bad.

>national obligation
sounds like communism. what if I want to run a newspaper that criticises the nation?

Then go fuck yourself and start one in another country.

but I'm already in my country, I just disagree with my government on a bunch of things

is free speech not a thing under national socialism ?

Well I'd say that It depends on the light.
The video link posted twice in this thread already has better explanation than I do.

To answer your question, that is a question of authoritarianism. It really depends on the subject matter. It just can't be outright anti-(insert country here)

>It just can't be outright
free speech is a double-edged sword

Not really, in regards to criticizing the government it isn't welcome. If you want to complain about the nation taking care of you, to may move to another one.

"All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state." ~ Benito Mussolini

I love this video enough to download it to my phone and listen to him almost every night while walking my dog, but is there any other video of him?

I'll watch the video and get back to yous....

Rockwell was one of the greatest Americans we've ever produced. He's a hero.

Here's the full version of that speech where this clip is abbreviated from - youtube.com/watch?v=x1tUFx_StSo

.... and how authoritarian the movement takes can be across the spectrum, as long as national interests are at its heart.

There is debate on clarity of matters regarding authoritarianism: the psychological implications.
National Socialism in its root, is that the status of the country's people should be protected with their willingness to be a role model.

youtube.com/watch?v=uNLTbPy0idg
This shit man.

Come on, mate. How can you be that obsessed with Rockwell and not search high and low for all his things?

Here's a fun one of him being interviewed on Canadian TV - youtube.com/watch?v=uNLTbPy0idg - also see my prior post of the full speech where that Oscar Turner video was made from -

Watch the full speech here - youtube.com/watch?v=x1tUFx_StSo

It's the best breakdown of National Socialism I've yet to hear, in an easy, digestible format. I think he gave it to an audience at Brown University in the '60s.

It was restricted. tbf at the time it's nationalism that was being suppressed after they had lost the war. Germany was being economically exploited by the victors. They had to do everything they could to regain their nation. And then there was war again...

Yeah, it was very authoritarian. But I would guess modern NatSoc would be probably be more liberal in some ways? We wouldn't be going back to the 1930s...

Making sure cultural values are being impressed upon children would probably remain an important part of it though. In the end, you don't need to control your citizens as much when you know they share common values that aren't being self-destructive.

You'll find plenty on youtube.
It is outright, but the defining factors are tricky.

It's a question of what makes the country or country's image better and more free.

If the free speech isn't pairing with the Country's image, then that is where it'd be censored.

However strong the proposed Country's image is how protective and authoritarian the gov will be.. ("no behalf of their people")
But my belief is that the really authoritarian guys care more for their image than the country's

Sieg Heil my brother! Glory to the Germanic Language and Glory to the White Culture!

on behalf of their people*

Death to communists.

this is going to take a while I'm only 10mins in...gonna hafta grab another coffee

but on the point of free speech, it's interesting to note that the MC at the start says that they were hosting Rockwell so that students would have an opportunity to hear from the man himself rather than 2nd-hand from people who might oppose his views

>implying we have true freedom speech under totalitarian cultural Marxism anyway

What needs to be protected, though, is that the nation doesn't go to mob rule.
Mob rule is something a majority feel on a subject, that apparently does not need to be explored for clarity. You'll need a strong leader, I say a cultural monarch, to unify the people under a banner who people will look up to such controversial matters that can seek out the path for the benefit of all.
an example of one such idea: the religious right versus gays
If you let this come to a war of mobs, no one wins. I'm sure you will be surprised if you search up a list of historical figures that would likely be an open homosexual if they were alive today. The intelligence of gays is something worth acknowledging before you start adverting banishment.

America will never be great again, it was never great. It just had at the start and for the first 2/3rds of its history the least shitty of a bunch of mindless cowardly animals.
The only form of Government is Theocracy
To Govern Man one needs divine authority, but not to have divine right to rule, but to have "divined" right through the divinity which is this infinite existence and it's governing principles.

Man is only to be Governed until he can Govern himself.

ok well 20mins in, posting before thread dies

some points of agreement so far:
-he mentions he is for "social justice" (actually uses that phrase)
-also specifically mentions he is pro free enterprise
-also emphasizes his respect for the rule of law

overall it sounds like he wants to build a high-performance society influenced techniques he observed in the military....but I think it could work without the racialist bits.

That seems to be intangible rhetoric about divine-right.
Religion can be great, but it can also get in the way of doing things right.
There are many benefits to a theocracy, but not when it can be mutated into an authoritarian regime of a fear of government.

Because people used to be more racialist in general, he doesn't delve into too much.
The racialist bits are for
>Identity (country pride and underlying racial unity)
>identity reiterated/promoted up by how there are racial disparities and there doesn't need to be races that were not included in the founding of the state (Identity)

no I was against divine right, even though I could claim it personally, I wouldn't as it's nonsensical.
I was saying that to have any chance at legitimate claim to the right to rule is granted only by having divined (to have perception by intuition or insight; conjecture) what is right what is truth etc.

....
promoted by races overall bringing down the founding race**

Ahh I see...

Well I have nothing against it, except that the

idea seems to be breathtaking of the natural

chaos as is the way of nature. It seems like

it is what people dislike about cults, the way it snares people.

I have nothing against it, but I'd prefer not to live in one.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_syndicalism