Attention NATSOC explain Venezuela

attention NATSOC explain Venezuela

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Nazi_Germany
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

It only works with white people

...

Hitler's socialism is different from Marx's.

>Hitler's views on economics, beyond his early belief that the economy was of secondary importance, are a matter of debate. On the one hand, he proclaimed in one of his speeches that "we are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system",[13] but he was clear to point out that his interpretation of socialism "has nothing to do with Marxian Socialism," saying that "Marxism is anti-property; true Socialism is not."[14] At a later time, Hitler said: "Socialism! That is an unfortunate word altogether...

>What does socialism really mean? If people have something to eat and their pleasures, then they have their socialism."[12] In private, Hitler also said that "I absolutely insist on protecting private property... we must encourage private initiative".[15] On yet another occasion he qualified that statement by saying that the government should have the power to regulate the use of private property for the good of the nation.[16]

>Shortly after coming to power, Hitler told a confidant: "There is no license any more, no private sphere where the individual belongs to himself. That is socialism, not such trivial matters as the possibility of privately owning the means of production. Such things mean nothing if I subject people to a kind of discipline they can't escape...What need have we to socialize banks and factories? We socialize human beings".[17]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Nazi_Germany

protip: a large state can only try to provide for people the way people will naturally provide for themselves/the starving. the state can never keep up with industry or voluntary charity and will always hinder it

It only works in homogeneous populations that give a shit about their population

no one gives a shit about anyone anymore

that was hitlers interpretation but once you open the floodgates there is no turning back, it may be stable under a great leader but how can it last centuries or even generations?

First post, best post.

Larry wilmore is a cunt, who deserves to inhale silica powder until he dies from silicosis.

so it cant work?

What does NatSoc have anything to do with Venezuela, you retarded Burger?

i disagree for a stable system it should be stable under any moral agents but i agree with the second part

>Hugo Chavez
>Nicolas Maduro

What else needs to be said?

socialism is socialism is socialism once you justify it it sets the precedent for any of its related forms

so a system should be dependent on the character of its leaders? eventually any system will get shitty leadership the point is to set government up so nobody can fuck it up

>national socialism
>marx socalism

>so a system should be dependent on the character of its leaders?
A totalitarian one is. And when those leaders are people like Chavez and Maduro, what do you expect?

todays republican is a 70s democrat
> politics dont shift to the left when given the chance

>Niggers are people
>This logic

im saying any big government will fail eventually ESPECIALLY totalitarian ones

National Socialism hasn't gone more left

refer to

Marxism focusses on class struggle and gibs me dat.

National socialism unifies all the classes under the nation towards a common goal: prosperity of the nation as a whole. Doesn't apply to jew parasites.

the ideology never changes obviously you fucking idiot if we were talking ideology everyone would be a communist im talking about practical application

Nazi Germany had one of the strongest free market economies in the world until around 1942 when Speer started instituting wartime controls. Even up until 1944 Germany had less restrictions on companies producing for the civilian market than the Allies.

So yeah, Fascism =/= socialism

Still, NS isn't the same as Marxist socialism

>how can it last centuries or even generations?
It can't. No country will ever reach a status of an "utopia" until they get some sort of great leader and some way or another make him immortal.
It is very unlikely someone will ever reach the same status as the same great leader that was ruling the country. Unless you turn the land into a "Brave New World" dystopia, it will never last forever.

>one ideology unifies people for a common goal
> but my perfect ideology unifies people for a slightly different goal
how is it not abundantly clear that any totalitarian system is trash

Who is this black turtle penis motherfucker I see posted here?

No I won't Google image search.

but speer did institute wartime controls any system that gives people the philosophy to control will eventually lead to more controls

Venezuala based their economy on a single thing, of all things a natural resource, of all things a non-renewable one. That and the rampant corruption is why it failed.

Could be a strong economic partner because of the oil.

Venezuela is destabilized by the Zionists.

They want US to buy oil from Saudi Arabia and they put 20 military bases close to it to also protect Israel.

I FUCKING KNOW
> MY PERFECT INFALLIBLE VERSION HASNT BEEN TRIED YET

I'm going to need a source for this

Yes, if you would like to learn about the true form of ideal socialism, read Plato's The Republic.

Even in homogeneous populations, it does not work, because it concentrates too much power into too few people.

corruption infects every socialism if not now then in 100 years its fallible because it gives some control

>IDEAL
stopped reading at
>IDEAL

Why?

ITT: faggot cucks try in vain to defend their socialist hero with a tiny, mutilated penis.

IF I HAVE TO EXPLAIN WHY EVERY BOOK EVER WRITTEN DOESNT PERFECTLY FIT INTO SOCIETY THEN YOU ARE TOO FAR GONE WITHIN YOUR OWN FAITH IN YOUR IDEAS TO BE REASONED WITH

What is the end goal of marxism? The pursuit of the well being of the 99% by forcing wealth redistribution by robbing the rich 1%. All without taking in consideration that even if you manage to do such thing, giving money to dumb people will not stop them from being dumb and wasting it.

National socialism has the same goal but, on the other hand, does not merely pursue wealth redistribution. It is more pragmatic. It focuses on hard work as a mean to reach individual independence from the contraints of being a retarded welfare nigger.

So yes, both have the same goal but one is fundamentally flawed in its approach.

I'm not sure why you're so angry, I clearly stated that socialism does not work later in that same post.
It's a given that an ideal society cannot exist, as there are no ideal human beings to inhabit or govern it.

>mei
>korean

wow i totally misread the first 3/4 of that post and ignored the last part my apologies here is a meme

both are because they assume one group of people can help another to be independent

They cant.

Same eat lolbertarians can't explain roads.

Capitalism is just better. Even the chinks realized it

>libertarians cant explain roads
lurk more

Hayek was actually kind of a fascist himself. Like most capitalists he gave up his alleged belief in freedom in order to protect his precious ideology via authoritarian rule. Pretty ironic.

Isn't that what everyone says with their idealogy?

>both are because they assume one group of people can help another to be independent

Are you implying that your parents didn't take care of you and taught you how to be an independent person?

I don't think that's true. I agree that taking someone by the hand will never allow them to become independent, but that doesn't mean that you can't help them.

You can teach a man how to fish instead of just feeding them, after all.

>venezuela

> attacking the person instead of the philosophy or logic
classic progressive

Doesn't mean it's not true. White people can make most of the ideologies work. Some are still vastly better than others though.

>implying that I am a progressive

National Socialism isn't Marxist socialism, dumbfuck.

natural social states (family) =/= government regulation (nanny state)
also people learn to fish without govt assistance every day

i just assumed because every progressive i know if they are confronted they will just start pointing out how one conservative was evil one time and bring up pinoche and shit lol

> le my specific form of utopian ideology hasnt been tried yet

Germany didn't have the controls on foreign capital that Venezuela has. Venezuela has sanctions on money leaving the country whereas Germany just swallowed up other nations.

This too. Venezuela failed because the people weren't given incentive to work and improve.

>natsoc
>seizing the means of production

national socialism has nothing to do with seizing the means of production for the government

It just means enacting pro nationalist economic policies with private ownership of the means of production, the exact opposite of Venezuela.

the German government didn't own the means of production and forcibly turn the economy into being based around a single commodity (oil)

this

the nazis never seized the means of production

the worst they ever did was take some jew banks, and for good reasons

Yep. Germany only had caps on how much one could earn and how they could spend it. They didn't go full retard.

What is there to explain, they don't have a border or a single race.

They aren't a nation nor a state, so why does this socialism fail?
Because there is no people to socialize, you don't have one but many and each with differences.