Dilemma

So here's my dilemma. As you can see from that chart I'm a leftie. My dilemma is that I am also anti-immigration. Seeing that our big cities aren't even half white anymore really gets me going. I have no problem with a little diversity, but as things are going I'll be needing it soon once ethnic Germans are a minority.
Where do I cast my vote next year? How do I voice my opinion?
>leftie with national sentiments is kinda problematic

Other urls found in this thread:

politicaltest.net
abtirsi.com/quiz2.php
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

As a fellow cuck i fall in a similar position. Its more mass immigration of undesirable individuals who are brought in to fill low wage, low skill jobs, rather than using the native scrotes one's already riddled with. A few high quality niggers here and there will integrate well and rapidly westernize and can be of functional benefit to a nation

What do? Declare yourself socialist but in a national way?

just socialist, not necessarily more nationalistic (as that will sort of happen through the socialism).

under neoliberal capitalism it makes sense that cheap labour heads to rich countries to make more money than they would back home.

under socialism workers rights are more protected and it would start with the indigenous population. it gives a lesser incentive for people to emigrate to the west in search of work if they're going to have a harder time finding a shitty job.

I suppose, generally speaking, i try to avoid dubbing myself a socialist as most of them are nutcases. I dont really have any real political affiliations either. The unfortunate reality of British left wing politics is that its been co-opted by middles class white girls, who care more about virtue signalling on "issues of race" rather than the working class, who they are suppose to care for.

But yeah, i would say im somewhat nationalistic, i wouldn't actively go out of my way to fuck up other nations though.

also don't read too much into the results of that test and its chart. when i take the test i end up in the same corner as in your pic, but i don't really identify as particularly libertarian, especially not economically / fiscally.

there are lots of questions in that test about gay marriage and legalising weed and other stuff that if you answer them sensibly will put you towards the libertarian edge. there aren't a great deal of questions about wealth distribution or fiscal regulations which would probably bump you towards the authoritarian left.

But wouldn't that also mean that you had to suffer through seeing these worker protections vanish?

true dat.

yep, seeing them vanish currently. unions are demonised here and are weakening. zero hours contracts jobs increasing. companies employing only poles / romanians and having them live in squalor and using dodgy contracts to pay them less than minimum wage etc.

lol you know socialism is pure jewish degeneracy right? it removes all intensive to work and has killed 100s of million of people worldwide. fuck of berniefag

same here bruh
maybe try redpill social democrats idk

> i wouldn't actively go out of my way to fuck up other nations though
I always considered nationalism as being proud of your country, not hating others.

>berniefag
wrong country and barely socialist

>killed 100s of million
right and capitalism hasn't killed any

>pure jewish degeneracy
marx was jewish yeah, but socialism at it's core tries to do away with the greedy jew you idiot. it doesn't want banks siphoning away billions into the pockets of a few while large chunks of the population have to use food banks to survive.

do some reading. socialism is a dirty word in the west because the west is controlled by corporate-capitalist jews who don't want to see the wealth redistributed more evenly

Bernie is currently relaxing in his 600k mansion. Under socialism everyone will have a 600k mansion.

That's how I was brought up.
>Wer hat uns verraten?
Part of the dilemma is the Wahl-O-Mat. I find it kinda disturbing to have Linke and MLPD first then NPD second.
>Nato is teh evöl

If you're that far on the left your only solution is to kill yourself. We don't need your kind in Germany nor in this world.

Probably not, but if everybody had a 100k house it would be right. That's like the DDR thing
>OMG we didn't have bananas
while there are countless homeless people on food stamps in the Land of the Free

So you're a leftist who is also a fucking white male? Welcome to the club

Take one of these blue pills every morning, Sir

Being a fucking white male is not a problem for me. German guilt revolves around the holocaust. That wasn't me so who cares.

Socialism at its core: no private property and no profit.
I used to be a socialist until i realized that leaves no intensive to reach for the stars or do anything with your life. Imagine living in a world where no matter how hard you tried, your life will never change, that's socialism. Capitalism allows for you to work and get your fair dues for the work you have done, and those who don't do the work can suck dick and die in my opinion, why keep lazy low IQ no good for anybody anywhere's alive? just to mooch of other people's hard work? please.

Why do you think welth shouold be distributed more evenly? people aren't equal, in a a free market system everyone gets what they deserve, in socialism even the best of society get the same as the retards at the bottom, who don't do anything for anybody. fucking goy like you make me sick

>That wasn't me so who cares.
lol the holocaust wasn't anybody buddy, pretty fucked up who you can be arrested for saying that over there, i feel sorry for you guys, you are so cucked its not funny

What we used to have here worked within the rules of capitalism
>soziale Marktwirtschaft
Why is it necessary that wealth distribution nowadays is more inequal than between Louis XIV and the lowliest beggar back then

when i say wealth should be distributed more evenly i don't mean that everyone should have the same flat rate. like when people try to argue against socialism by saying "if a postman and a brain surgeon get paid the same how can you motivate anyone to do anything?"

i have socialist tendencies because it's absurd that in the UK (and the US and probably elsewhere) there are billionaires living in the same society as people who require food banks not to starve... and people who don't even have a roof over their heads.

1% of the UK populaton has the same wealth as the other 99%

and apparently the richest 62 people in the world own as much wealth as the bottom 3.5 billion

i'm not saying everyone's equal. people have different strengths and weaknesses and are more capable or less capable than others.

what i am saying though is that we're not as unequal as current rampant neoliberal capitalism has allowed us to be

Beyond my point. We are hammered for the holocaust, warcrimes, antisemitism. All of that comes from the anglosphere. Just have a look at the British Press or Hollywood movies even decades later.
>inb4 juice
It's more a capitalis thing I believe
>you keep em dumb, I'll keep em busy

What is your end goal? Do you think 1% of the population having the same wealth as the bottom 50% would still be bad? I don't think this would ever end it seems like it's an insatiable cycle that would just go on and on.

sorry meant 30%. 3.5b is already 50%

yeah, i hear you man, so many europeans went to my high school, and there was a new load of german exchange students every year and they told us how bad they are cucked and made to hate themselves, can never be proud of themselves, was sad to hear.

Also to help getting rid of that meme. I would have to "disturb public order" denying the holocaust or using nazi symbols to be charged with anything. And as mentioned before I dont give a shit. I had nazis in my family. SS and Wehrmacht veterans who actually were good people. The anticapitalist part of nazism actually makes sense. Chances for everyone instead of hereditary wealth and influence.

that test fucking sucks, try another one and post how you did.

Which one would recommend?

600k isn't even that much desu sem
specially if there's property

sorry mate you aren't a socialist then, you are for more social programs, which is the opposite of what you want, what you want actually less government power so there's no point for corporations to lobby because the government dont have the power, then basically things settle back to a fair economic landscape. an example of corporations using the governments social initiatives and workers rights for their own advantage: In america, walmart lobby to increase the minimum wage to crush smaller businesses from competing, because Walmart can afford to pay the wages, but your local bakery down the street cant, so they steal all the business and make the ridiculous money. what you want is a free market, which is just fairness.
capitalism is forced altruism, if you dont help other people you die of starvation, best system. socialism and government power is mostly evil. not the natsoc kind tho kek

>Do you think 1% of the population having the same wealth as the bottom 50% / 30%

not sure what the ultimate end goal would be in all honesty. for what it's worth 62 people owning half the world's wealth isn't top 1%

62 people out of 7.4 billion is 0.000000838%

i mean at the very least enough wealth distribution to provide people with homes and food and healthcare would be a good start. it's not as if it's unaffordable, there is more than enough wealth to allow it. it's just greed at the top has not allowed for it

politicaltest.net dubbed me a national democratic socialist

>what you want actually less government power
>what you want is a free market

no i don't lol

i want to see tougher government intervention on exploitative corporations who exploit their workforce and extract profit from them and pay them a pittance

>give me free shit

lmao

That's top left.

Bottom leftists are even more autistic, thinking people will willingly work for their community without having police, fire departments, fucking any government for that matter - and PRIVATE PROPERTY.

you mean
>pay people decent wages

i don't need free shit as i've been lucky. unfortunately not everyone is as lucky as i am.

>at the very least enough wealth distribution to provide people with homes and food and healthcare would be a good start
Does this mean no homelessness and no hunger and not a single person without healthcare?

Change your opinions. That's what I did. It's not like you were born a lefty fag.

ideally yes. i read a thing a while back saying that there's enough wealth generated in the USA that would allow for everyone to earn $400k a year

that's obviously assuming a flat rate / everyone paid the same scenario, which i'm not advocating.

i just don't see how it's remotely reasonable though to have that much wealth as a country and yet have large numbers of people living in poverty

but that is all they deserve. where do you get this idea that factory workers should be making six figures? how much should people be making? what if somebody honest to god earned billions from there own work, do they still get taxed to fuck? these rich people worked for what they have, there is a difference between what labor is worth and what the product is worth, you want to read some basic economics my friend. doesn't it make more sense for natural selection (the market) to decide who thrives and who doesnt? like where are you getting your ethos from?

you weren't lucky, you had hard working ancestors who ensured your well-being in the free market, evolution isn't luck pal, you are just of a higher order than the lower classes, although you might prove me otherwise if you stay a socialist for much longer.

>where do you get this idea that factory workers should be making six figures
i'm not saying that though am i? i'm saying factory workers should at least be able to afford to eat though, which isn't unreasonable is it. in the UK we have households where full time employment still results in trips to the foodbank and where they are one paycheck away from homelessness

Well not all of that wealth stays in the USA and there's other things like that which would lower that number. But even if the number was still high it doesn't really tell us much if we don't have other countries to compare it to. Do you know what the number would be for other countries?

ill elaborate
>4.0 to the left
>lot of small bussiness is better than a big monopolio here
>thanks to some treaty with murica ((( tlc ))) that gives the right to murica to "protect our resources" destroying the economy in the region
and
>1.0 to the top
>because of the wave of degeneracy that is hitting south america, from north america and europe
>and the thieves that rob like they will never get caugh
>but at the same time i dont want to be stopped by the police and asked a lot of stupid questions, since giving that right to the police will derive into they asking for money and being worse than the thieves

it is unreasonable yes, food prices would go down with lowered taxes. taxes keep prices high, food prices and prices for everything would plummet because the market would be competitive again. Businesses would compete, they would forces each-other's prices down, so they would have to create new ingenuitive ways to increase profit. self interest is what drives society forward, and helps everybody.

Maybe those factory workers should get skilled at something and make them more valuable to employers if they want higher wages.

try abtirsi.com/quiz2.php instead
you can be leftie and nationalist

Hrm. I tried politicaltest.net and came out as a national democratic socialist at forst, after redoing it and weighting some items I was a Social democrat.
Your test made me a Communist Pro-Government Interventionist Cosmopolitan Traditionalist

But Corbyn is going to solve all our problems and get rid of zero hour contracts.

top kek. I know people who actually believe his bullshit.