What political ideology best fits this:

What political ideology best fits this:

"I'm economically communist but socially traditionalist and ethno-nationalist, and I also fully support freedom of speech."

Isn't that almost National-Socialism?

Other urls found in this thread:

ub.edu/graap/EHR.pdf
townhall.com/columnists/brucebartlett/2004/01/16/hitler_and_keynes
jstor.org/stable/4401913?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
mises.org/library/three-new-deals-why-nazis-and-fascists-loved-fdr
youtu.be/pKnFN8P21-0
youtube.com/watch?v=Gax7eg3E49k
youtube.com/watch?v=iI9rqx1iLsc
youtube.com/watch?v=-6nZ1Wfrx80
counter-currents.com/2014/03/white-nationalist-delusions-about-russia/
rt.com/politics/putin-accuses-bolsheviks-treason-877/
youtube.com/watch?v=-pDtgWUtdUM
timesofisrael.com/putin-calls-goebbels-a-talented-man-at-meeting-with-rabbis/
filteries.com/
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

>Economically communist.

Hitler would spit at you.

>freedom of speech
>natsoc

Man, naw dog. Naw.

You're basically that edgy teenager who thinks communism has never been tried before.

you're a national-bolshevik, which is a different way of saying you're a total moron.

but anyway, look up the term. It's pretty much you, except for the free speech part, but all nationalists grow out of that, eventually.

I actually know quite a few baby boomer democrats that are like this.

...

Thing about Hitlers germany was not socialism muuh we have money for everyone but instead was we have jobs for everyone.
Hitler was against using machines for building the Autobahn because it would destroyed jobs.
We had many rich people but they were german and helped other germans.
Muuh everything is free was not Nat Soc

You're an African nationalist like Robert Mugabae.

With the exception of the freedom of speech.

Not necessarily. The communists in pre-Nazi Germany were much more like cultural Marxists than Stalinists. They didn't care too much about the economy they cared more about the whole idea that everyone is equal. Hitler was an anti capitalist as well when it comes to the laissez-faire side of it.

To answer your question OP. It's almost NatSoc if you take out the idea that you support freedom of speech. In terms of the economy NatSoc isn't hardline socialism, it's a government that controls wealth, but isn't a welfare state, instead it's a state controlled capitalist country with public works programs, where the economy primarily exists to fund the state and their war effort. NatSoc needed war to thrive off of.

What you're describing as ethno-nationalist, economically communist, and socially traditionalist, is literally Soviet Russia. Except the part about supporting free speech is a principle and concept directly antithetical to the thought-crime government of the Soviets.

So essentially that ideology is basically Soviet Russia but with free speech...

I can't picture that, doesn't seem like it would last long without people not being able to speak out against the government. That's the only way the Communists in Russia were able to hold power for so long.

>Amongst these was Professor Nikolai Ustrialov, initially an anti-communist, who came to believe that Bolshevism could be modified to serve nationalistic purposes.

This is basically it.

Am I bad for being a sort of National-Bolshevik?

>am I bad for being a communist?

It's "I haven't thought about politics for long enough to have a coherent position"ism.

Do you think communism has been tried sufficiently to dismiss it?

Well look at Soviet Russia. Would you want to live in a country where you're forced to work a shit job to support the government. You get terrible mass-produced food in a line every week. You can't speak your opinion for fear that you'll be sent to a mysterious work camp. The only thing you have to be proud of is your country, but that pride is nothing but a bullshit feeling manufactured by the states propaganda.

You don't want to live under an autocracy like that, brother. And by the way, you might like freedom of speech, but it cannot exist with the other ideas that you mentioned.

Sounds cool as an ideology but it will be terrible to live under. Who knows though, maybe you'll be a good communist and the state will give you extra cabbage and vodka for your support of the government.

You sound like a Strasserist to me, basically a more economically left form of NatSoc.

Its a non existent form of traditionalist left.
Are you against private property? I think I remember that online test. By the moment you consider that the market cannot dictate whats best for society you are already a communist (which is bs).

Why do both contradict each other?

Surely there's some way to make communism work.

I'm indifferent about private property as a principle, however, in order to make sure everything works as intended, yes I'm against it.

Makes sense.

Am I retard for being a Strasserist?

No, but you'll find that most self-identifying "strasserists" are socially-left near-communists that hate Hitler and traditionalism, but you'll find a few who legitimately subscribe to white nationalism and its goals. Read up on the works of Gregor and Otto Strasser if you're interested.

Socialism hasn't even worked well desu and socialism is basically just soft communism.

Don't try to give me that muh Denmark, muh Sweden argument. Less people live in Denmark than fucking Massachusetts and both those countries aren't even fully socialist yet under the Marx definition. Look at a country like France that has expanded the unitary government out of Paris and is only getting themselves in more debt, losing jobs, the youth don't work, businesses don't thrive, the public sector is absolutely huge and the private sector is dying, and the country is too committed to big government to deregulate and at least try being profit minded. Also you can't compare the welfare state of France to a country like Denmark because the population makes a HUGE difference on the economy and whether or not a welfare state can function.

So take those failed economic policies and multiply them by ten, have complete faith in a single party to be able to control the wealth and limit any sort of economic inequality. There's no way to make that work, desu. Soviet Russia was the biggest experiment for this and it failed absolutely miserably. Not to mention this gives elites and evil men like Stalin a perfect opportunity to take over a country and gain a crazy amount of power, because for communism to work you need complete faith in a very controlling government.

The Soviet Union was the biggest case study in to whether or not we could have communism work. It didn't. Don't fall for the meme.

>economically communist
you might be a Strasserist, but the few that existed in natsoc Germany were purged pretty quickly. Natsoc wasn't serious about the "socialism", it was just a ruse to win support away from the labor unions. You autists keep falling for the meme.

>“’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

>Against the Mainstream: Nazi privatization in 1930's Germany (Germa Bel)
ub.edu/graap/EHR.pdf
>townhall.com/columnists/brucebartlett/2004/01/16/hitler_and_keynes
>jstor.org/stable/4401913?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
>mises.org/library/three-new-deals-why-nazis-and-fascists-loved-fdr
youtu.be/pKnFN8P21-0

Can anyone tell me my political ideology?

Anti-sjw
Anti-feminism
Anti-abortion
Anti-gay pride
Anti-immigration
Anti-Communist

I feel drawn to the right side of politics and conservatism, as the morality is something they lack on the left side.
I have an obsession with National Socialism and think they should have won WW2.
I think the world would be better off had they won.

I think Jews are evil,
I support Trump.
I support Assad and Putin.

I think everything should be nationalised, I don't like corporations and rich elites running the world.

I don't mind gay people or blacks, I just want people to act respectable, don't be too homo and don't be too niggerish, do that in private, away from people.

I wish that my country was great again, I would wish for a British Empire to be reborn if it were possible.


Fap to traps, I'm trying to stop. This is a degenerate world, so it's hard not to be degenerate since you're basically going against the grain and being counter-cultural. I personally hold a higher standard, I just fail at achieving that high standard for myself if you get what I mean.
I wish I was better and didn't be so filthy, it's my duty to try harder to be better though, it's just hard when you're surrounded by it, since degeneracy is normalized.
I wish for a society which was better, as then I could be better.

I kind of wish to be religious, I just don't think I can wrap my head around it though. I am still waiting for the final red pill on religion, though the more I mature, I'm almost 30 now, the more I see parallels in the real world to make me think Christianity has much truth to it, mostly corrupt politicians, corrupt media and degenerate idols being popular with masses, I see Satanism, which means Christianity must be real?
I dunno I guess.

How can a Strasserist hate traditionalism? Doesn't make sense.

I'm not a White Nationalist though. I don't support Slavs and Mediterraneans.

I guess I'd call myself a Western European Nationalist or something (excluding Spain and Portugal). Anglo-Saxons, the French (celts+germanic) and the Germanic people are those I target.

>I think Jews are evil,
>I support Putin.
pick one

>Putin’s Russia is Nearly as Anti-White as the Liberal West

youtube.com/watch?v=Gax7eg3E49k
youtube.com/watch?v=iI9rqx1iLsc
youtube.com/watch?v=-6nZ1Wfrx80

>It is also a widespread delusion among western White Nationalists that Russia is free of Jewish influence and is an antidote to the Jew-led New World Order. Firstly, at every opportunity, Putin pays homage to the official “holocaust” narrative promulgated by the Jews. On many occasions he said that the holocaust was the most abominable atrocity in history, and the Red Army put an end to this horror. Since the cult of victory in WWII and the glorification of the Soviet past are the main pillars of national identity in modern Russia, this implies that Russian identity and patriotism are not only not opposed to Jewish interests but, on the contrary, are directly in line with them.

>Secondly, anti-Semitism is very weak in Putin’s Russia, and Jews feel quite comfortable and welcome. Jewish life is flourishing at a level comparable only to the early aftermath of the Bolshevik Revolution. A popular Russian-Jewish crooner, Iosif Kobzon, said not so long ago that “Jews are currently experiencing a Renaissance in Russia.” Furthermore, before the presidential elections in 2012, the chairman of the Council of Russian Jews proclaimed his full support to Putin and expressed his confidence that all Jews in Russia will vote for him. He even said that he doesn’t know a single Jew in Russia who would be against Putin.

counter-currents.com/2014/03/white-nationalist-delusions-about-russia/

>How can a Strasserist hate traditionalism?
because Strasserists were actual fucking marxists hiding out inside natsoc. They werent tolerated for long, and got purged.

I still don't get why it's destined to fail. In my head, I'm making it work somehow. Is it incompetence from the people or am I missing something here.

As a principle, I'm against communism. It's just that I find it necessary for a nation to rise. IF we'd be able to figure our shit out with Capitalism, I'd gladly abandon my economically communist point. It's really just a means to an end, not an end in and of itself.

Anglo-Eternalism

Ok but I'm talking about the actual political ideology on paper, whether it was a ruse or not.

>economically communist
You want to work people to starvation so that you can receive your 50th tractor without an engine, only to rot in your barn because you can't use it?

This is literally my ideology, i think it's more or less Nat-Soc minus the whole freedom of speech stuff and the hardline communist economic theory. I think it's somewhere between the two.

Interestingly you'd find similar ideology amongst most traditional workers movements around the world.

I've heard of it being referred to as third position but I don't think there is a particular ideology that fits in with this description.

autism

>>I think Jews are evil,
>>I support Putin.
>pick one
Humans work on plethora of separate contexts. You assume there to only exist the racial context, and that, too, is separate from the national context. I pity you, it is possible that you may never know how grand existence is.
>American
But of course. Lurk more you retarded globe wrecker with cut genitals.

>"I'm economically communist

Because they just want to follow a unique political ideology without really taking it to heart, same as you see with a lot of neo-nazis as well, doesn't invalidate the whole ideology itself.

Yes you are missing something. The simple fact that Communism is a recipe for disaster.

>gives elites and one party power
>needs to be one party because for it to work the ideology MUST be agreed upon
>whole idea is to end economic inequality
>doesn't understand that without some economic inequality you can't have a functioning society
>people live in one class under the government
>government controls any and all production people are just forced to be submissive to the government
>therefore the population has no incentive to learn, economy doesn't need diversification, no means of profiteering, destined to fail
>forced industrialization makes population completely miserable

Look like I said, take the Soviet Union as a case study. They tried desperately to make it succeed. It just could not work and especially could not coexist with the Western world and democratic, capitalist nations. It quite literally failed because the U.S. was able to spend much more money on the military due to Reagans deregulated, profit driven economy. It broke the back of the Soviet Union that had no feasible way of keeping up for the rest of the world.

If an experiment fails and results in a crushed economy, death, and the fall of an entire nation of a global scale. We should accept its failure and look to better options. Not naively proclaim that it could be better.

>you assume blah blah
you project in really blatant fashion, but don't possess enough self awareness to catch yourself when you do it. None of what you said applies or makes sense to my post. Stop pretending your onmicient you LARPy fag.
>American OF COURSH
stfu you melodramatic fingol faggot

Do you have an example of a traditional workers movement?

>you project in really blatant fashion
No, you think that
>support Putin
Means supporting kikes and 100% of his actions. Russia is against EU, they can be used. They fund far right parties in European countries. Jews hate Russia and Russians, they have always done so. It doesn't matter how well they do in Russia or how much power they have in Russia, those two are always at war with each other. Why? Jews can't forgive.

You also think that Russia plays by the book and gives 1-track information.
rt.com/politics/putin-accuses-bolsheviks-treason-877/
youtube.com/watch?v=-pDtgWUtdUM
timesofisrael.com/putin-calls-goebbels-a-talented-man-at-meeting-with-rabbis/

You are like the retarded fedora who quotes Deuteronomy in an attempt to delegitimize Christians.

who here economic socialist but social conservative? what ideology is that?

Slav ideology

I simply meant with the situation regarding Syria and USA/NATO starting a war with Russia potentially. I'm not saying Putin is perfect, I'm saying that he's better than some.
I'm not saying he's the saviour of the white race.

My post wasn't really about Putin, I still need help finding my politic identity/ideology, I listed a few things from the top of my head, it might have upset something in you to see some things you believe contradict, sorry for that.

You don't even need to try it to dismiss it. Just like ancap.

yes, becaues improvements need investments to get off from the ground and the only one who is careful about spending money is the one who struggled to make them in the first place. the communist countries are filled with crazy government funded soviet projects that never worked because communist countries are run by idiots who put ideology before reality and end up ruining countries on broken dreams

>gives elites and one party power
Make it good people.

>needs to be one party because for it to work the ideology MUST be agreed upon
Why? Sounds like an irrelevant issue. That could be said of any other ideology.

>whole idea is to end economic inequality
Not for me. I don't want to end economic inequality. I want to end unnecessary poverty and suffering on economical grounds. I don't care if someone lives in better conditions than another due to his hard work. What I care about is that NO individual should be left to die without minimum care.

>doesn't understand that without some economic inequality you can't have a functioning society
Again. I don't care. I literally have no care whatsoever if someone is better than another. What I care about is that every individual has his basic needs met, governed and directed by the state itself, to ensure its continuity and legitimacy.

>people live in one class under the government
I don't care about "government". I don't see them as a separate entity. I see the government as nothing more than the same people of the same nation being in charge of the nation's interests, not their end as governments.

Let me give you an example..
Imagine your mother gives you candies to go distribute to your brothers and sisters..does that make you anymore superior than them? No. You just happen to have been picked to do the distribution. We can't have the entire nation into office.

>government controls any and all production people are just forced to be submissive to the government
Submissive to their own ideals, yes, since it's the people themselves who set the rules.

>therefore the population has no incentive to learn, economy doesn't need diversification, no means of profiteering, destined to fail
Why? How is there no incentive to learn? There's more incentive than ever...because you won't be judged by your salary, money, goods..you'll instead be judged by your ACTUAL work and proficiency. If that isn't glorifying.

Leave out freedom of speech and you got:

Nationaler Sozialismus (not Nationalsozialismus)
National Bolshevism
Juche

Nationalist communist. Cool guy

>Is it incompetence from the people
Yes and no. The problem with it is that it treats people as machines, trying to create an ant type society, where everyone does their part and the whole thing goes like a clock. But this can never work with humans.

Why can it never work.

Probably fascism.

>communist
>freedom of speech

off to the fun camp

>No, you think that
no, your post literally made no fucking sense, just some madman on the internet rambling at me like he thinks he's telepathic. You sound like some melodramatic 13 year old who roleplays on deviant art.

Why does it matter?

filteries.com/
do an analysis with this tool

It just means you haven't actually put any real thought into your beliefs because they are contradictory.

If you are both a socialist and a nationalist then you are a national socialist.