Hitler was right, though.
New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
You must log in or sign up to comment
26 comments:
19
1 year ago
19 points
(+0
/
-0
/
+19Score on mirror
)
1 child
Permalink
Reply
Mirrored from scored.co
7
1 year ago
7 points
(+0
/
-0
/
+7Score on mirror
)
~~Far right~~ *very* right.
Permalink
Reply
Mirrored from scored.co
Trotskyites: Hitler was far left
Leninists: Hitler was far right
Me: Hitler was an acceptable centrist.
Leninists: Hitler was far right
Me: Hitler was an acceptable centrist.
Hitler cared about his people. An ethnically, culturally, spiritually homogenous people. In that setting a certain type of socialism can exist. Without it it cannot. So go home pajeet.
>Socialism doesn't work without nationalism.
This is an important point. There's some question if socialism can ever work (can any government be competent to make decisions that result in effective outcomes for millions of people?), but it definitely can't work in any kind of globalist system where people are free to take advantage of the perks without contributing to the costs. Socialism needs to be generational and every person whose parents didn't earn them a place in the society is a drain on the system.
This is an important point. There's some question if socialism can ever work (can any government be competent to make decisions that result in effective outcomes for millions of people?), but it definitely can't work in any kind of globalist system where people are free to take advantage of the perks without contributing to the costs. Socialism needs to be generational and every person whose parents didn't earn them a place in the society is a drain on the system.
Some of the problems with socialism is the inability to make accurate economic calculations and allocate resources appropriately.
There are no mechanisms within socialism or communism that beyond arbitrary measures.
Capitalism is fantastic at the allocation of resources since the end goal is fulfillment of consumer needs with profit measuring the success or failure of that fulfillment.
The problem however is there are no moral values to prevent the creation of immoral needs. (Sex dolls, porn, cloning, toxic vaccines, war machines, DEBT, etc)
So what can we do? Capitalism can create a robust economy but it requires participants that aren't exploiting the people or the nation.
There are no mechanisms within socialism or communism that beyond arbitrary measures.
Capitalism is fantastic at the allocation of resources since the end goal is fulfillment of consumer needs with profit measuring the success or failure of that fulfillment.
The problem however is there are no moral values to prevent the creation of immoral needs. (Sex dolls, porn, cloning, toxic vaccines, war machines, DEBT, etc)
So what can we do? Capitalism can create a robust economy but it requires participants that aren't exploiting the people or the nation.
You're just reciting the theories of (((von Mises))). They are only theories.
I've heard a million times about how the price mechanism drives efficiency, but that's not the whole truth.
In a capitalist economy where everyone thinks only of his own individual benefit there are other types of inefficiencies. Workers who do a job that can't be controlled will try to work as little as possible, demanding as much money as possible, and trying to make it hard for the company to replace them. This is especially true in a modern economy where we have lots of office workers and their individual output is hard to measure and control.
We can imagine that a communist country with a strong work ethic and social fabric will be more efficient than a capitalist economy in a broken individualistic society.
(((von Mises))) was thinking of industrial output. Times are different now.
I've heard a million times about how the price mechanism drives efficiency, but that's not the whole truth.
In a capitalist economy where everyone thinks only of his own individual benefit there are other types of inefficiencies. Workers who do a job that can't be controlled will try to work as little as possible, demanding as much money as possible, and trying to make it hard for the company to replace them. This is especially true in a modern economy where we have lots of office workers and their individual output is hard to measure and control.
We can imagine that a communist country with a strong work ethic and social fabric will be more efficient than a capitalist economy in a broken individualistic society.
(((von Mises))) was thinking of industrial output. Times are different now.
The price system contains information that drives efficiency. A sudden increase in the price a good can indicate a shortage which can aid in producer and consumer decisions.
If recite anything it is de Soto or Smith.
We can imagine whatever we like. But communism necessarily destroys social fabric and religion in order to bring about it's evil vision. And since work ethic will be down stream of whatever philosophical system has been erected in place of religion, work ethic becomes a philosophical slogan in communism and not a way of life.
If recite anything it is de Soto or Smith.
We can imagine whatever we like. But communism necessarily destroys social fabric and religion in order to bring about it's evil vision. And since work ethic will be down stream of whatever philosophical system has been erected in place of religion, work ethic becomes a philosophical slogan in communism and not a way of life.
The goal of capitalism is to make as much money as possible, and in many cases they have to fight regulations that can change rapidly as the color of the trolley shift between red and blue.
There's too much (((complex company structures))) nowadays, with brands being disposable. Stuff is made with (((planned obsolesce))) as companies need consoomers to consoom more product. And good products that last forever threaten that business model.
With socialism you can balance this properly, using 100% government owned private companies. I.e the company represent the government but the government only state the mission. A CEO is then hired to run the company from a long term perspective.
This leads to long lasting products, as it gives the nation a good reputation for making stuff that last forever. In the meantime the government will help the company to get export contracts so that they can sell more to a larger market instead of relying on fucking over local consoomers like they would in a capitalist system.
Combine that with a free market, were the government owned company gets no unfair advantages and you'll ensure actual competition too.
There's too much (((complex company structures))) nowadays, with brands being disposable. Stuff is made with (((planned obsolesce))) as companies need consoomers to consoom more product. And good products that last forever threaten that business model.
With socialism you can balance this properly, using 100% government owned private companies. I.e the company represent the government but the government only state the mission. A CEO is then hired to run the company from a long term perspective.
This leads to long lasting products, as it gives the nation a good reputation for making stuff that last forever. In the meantime the government will help the company to get export contracts so that they can sell more to a larger market instead of relying on fucking over local consoomers like they would in a capitalist system.
Combine that with a free market, were the government owned company gets no unfair advantages and you'll ensure actual competition too.
No. That isn't capitalism. That's the tiny hat perversion of capitalism.
The goal of capitalism is to serve the customer. The point in capitalism is to earn capital in order to re-invest that capital in your product to make it better, and cheaper for the customer because better and cheaper is good for the customer, which will earn you more capital which you can then send back into R%D to make it even better and even cheaper in am ever escalating process that ultimately leads to the highest quality goods and services at the cheapest price to make the common and everyday man's life as affordable and convenient as possible.
The pursuit isn't capital and the capital is never meant to be taken out and horded as profit. The pursuit is the customer and the customer then rewards you with capital. You make money on the way but it is ultimately supposed to be about an ever evolving better mousetrap.
The goal of capitalism is to serve the customer. The point in capitalism is to earn capital in order to re-invest that capital in your product to make it better, and cheaper for the customer because better and cheaper is good for the customer, which will earn you more capital which you can then send back into R%D to make it even better and even cheaper in am ever escalating process that ultimately leads to the highest quality goods and services at the cheapest price to make the common and everyday man's life as affordable and convenient as possible.
The pursuit isn't capital and the capital is never meant to be taken out and horded as profit. The pursuit is the customer and the customer then rewards you with capital. You make money on the way but it is ultimately supposed to be about an ever evolving better mousetrap.
You're gonna need national capitalism then, as long as jews and bugmen are allowed to compete anything you invent they will steal and make a cheap copy off. Hence all innovation stops, you go bankrupt and (((they))) get a monopoly producing shit.
Capitalism still needs protection against (((exploits))). But nobody talks about that because (((they))) want everyone to fight over irrelevant semantics like capitalism vs communism vs socialism. It doesn't matter what system is used, as long as jews and bugmen are not allowed to manage any business, and all non-Whites are exterminated from society.
Capitalism still needs protection against (((exploits))). But nobody talks about that because (((they))) want everyone to fight over irrelevant semantics like capitalism vs communism vs socialism. It doesn't matter what system is used, as long as jews and bugmen are not allowed to manage any business, and all non-Whites are exterminated from society.
I find it odd that we used to have long lasting products in America. I understand the desire for planned obsolescence. When you are only thinking three months ahead to your next quarterly report, sales have to be up.
Greed has to be the motivator. What happened to honor? Is it because every company wants a fat IPO? Why does every company need to go public?
Greed has to be the motivator. What happened to honor? Is it because every company wants a fat IPO? Why does every company need to go public?
> There's some question if socialism can ever work (can any government be competent to make decisions that result in effective outcomes for millions of people?)
You must understand that "socialism" in National Socialism has nothing to do with the Marxist socialism.
Hitler basically *invented* privatization, and the German economy was driven by private economic activity and large private corporations. The government was not deciding the economic activity. It was simply ensuring that nobody could exploit the rest of the community, for example with unfair wages or pollution. They had laws to protect workers etc. but it was still a free market economy.
You must understand that "socialism" in National Socialism has nothing to do with the Marxist socialism.
Hitler basically *invented* privatization, and the German economy was driven by private economic activity and large private corporations. The government was not deciding the economic activity. It was simply ensuring that nobody could exploit the rest of the community, for example with unfair wages or pollution. They had laws to protect workers etc. but it was still a free market economy.
Right wing means at the right hand of Jesus where the subjects give ultimate fealty to the King.
As a Dictator with the final word, Hitler could not have been further to the right.
Left asserts that parliament has the last word, not The King.
Hitler's actual words about "true socialism" can be found in a 1923 interview with George Sylvester Viereck. Here are Hitler's key statements on socialism from that interview:
> Socialism is the science of dealing with the common weal. Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists. Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality, and unlike Marxism, it is patriotic. We might have called ourselves the Liberal Party. We chose to call ourselves the National Socialists. We are not internationalists. Our socialism is national. We demand the fulfilment of the just claims of the productive classes by the state on the basis of race solidarity. To us state and race are one.
As a Dictator with the final word, Hitler could not have been further to the right.
Left asserts that parliament has the last word, not The King.
Hitler's actual words about "true socialism" can be found in a 1923 interview with George Sylvester Viereck. Here are Hitler's key statements on socialism from that interview:
> Socialism is the science of dealing with the common weal. Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists. Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality, and unlike Marxism, it is patriotic. We might have called ourselves the Liberal Party. We chose to call ourselves the National Socialists. We are not internationalists. Our socialism is national. We demand the fulfilment of the just claims of the productive classes by the state on the basis of race solidarity. To us state and race are one.
> Also, Socialism was conceived by the Europeans
No it wasn't. It was created by jews. It's just a generous interpretation in which the malevolent jewish intent is left out, so that it makes sense.
But I assure you, continually handing welfare money to people can ruin them mentally, and also cause bad incentives. People believe UBI (Universal Basic Income) becomes necessary due to advancements in automation. Aside from damaging the economy, it would cause tremendous amount of damage. Genocide is a vastly better option than that. UBI would be a major step towards more horrors beyond your comprehension.
> Socialism doesn't work without nationalism.
Everything can "work." Temporarily at least, and with varying amounts of corruption, injustice, oppression, suffering, exploitation. Think of the worst system that existed - because it existed, it *can* work. Even if it genocides the population. Even if it enslaves the population. Even if it's an race based oligarchy (we currently have that). Even UBI.
> Stop Jewish lies
There are countless jewish lies about so much. But I try. I cannot even hint in YouTube comments that "there is a tribe that may not be named" or even insinuate the jew indirectly. My comments get shadow-removed algorithmically. I fucking hate jews and collaborators so much.
No it wasn't. It was created by jews. It's just a generous interpretation in which the malevolent jewish intent is left out, so that it makes sense.
But I assure you, continually handing welfare money to people can ruin them mentally, and also cause bad incentives. People believe UBI (Universal Basic Income) becomes necessary due to advancements in automation. Aside from damaging the economy, it would cause tremendous amount of damage. Genocide is a vastly better option than that. UBI would be a major step towards more horrors beyond your comprehension.
> Socialism doesn't work without nationalism.
Everything can "work." Temporarily at least, and with varying amounts of corruption, injustice, oppression, suffering, exploitation. Think of the worst system that existed - because it existed, it *can* work. Even if it genocides the population. Even if it enslaves the population. Even if it's an race based oligarchy (we currently have that). Even UBI.
> Stop Jewish lies
There are countless jewish lies about so much. But I try. I cannot even hint in YouTube comments that "there is a tribe that may not be named" or even insinuate the jew indirectly. My comments get shadow-removed algorithmically. I fucking hate jews and collaborators so much.
Right / Left is about equality.
Hitler was against equality in the strongest possible terms, therefore he is far right.
That's also why nationalism in general is considered right wing.
Hitler was against equality in the strongest possible terms, therefore he is far right.
That's also why nationalism in general is considered right wing.
While I don’t disagree, your post is all assertion. Do you have any fascist literature for us to read?
Fascist or National Socialist?
For the latter, there's the collected writings of Gottfried Feder, Hitler's primary inspiration in terms of economic policy.
https://archive.org/details/federcollectedwritings
For the short version, go over the term "Zinsknechtschaft", and the 25 point program of the NSDAP.
For the latter, there's the collected writings of Gottfried Feder, Hitler's primary inspiration in terms of economic policy.
https://archive.org/details/federcollectedwritings
For the short version, go over the term "Zinsknechtschaft", and the 25 point program of the NSDAP.
Models are exactly that. A model. Trying to simplify all political ideologies into a one-dimensional line works superficially, but it fails under reasonable scrutiny. Even trying a two-dimensional graph will still fail because it is a model. Models are about simplifying.
This is also why many can claim National Socialism is both far left and far right. It simply doesn't work like that in reality.
This is also why many can claim National Socialism is both far left and far right. It simply doesn't work like that in reality.
Toast message