And yes, I do mean that private property should and always should exist.

Let people compete for workers aristocracy position

I would argue otherwise, as I believe that if you removed the juden behind it who used the system to manipulate governments and people, and modified it so that they could never exist again, then you could have it work more for the benefit of humanity.

Nothing exist always even stars

?

I do mean that private property should and always should exist.

1. People become successful in free market
2. Work towards their own interests
3. Personal interest conflict with public interest
IT WAS THE JEWS

Really?

I don't know what you are getting at, even if you are shit posting.

@Deleted User Red Power means that technically, nothing lasts forever, not even private property. He's just being autistic.

@Chopin#0138 If you take notice almost all owners of extremely large corporations, tend to either fall under jewish decent, this combined with the fact that they often manipulate governments and populations to their will IE: george soros funding islamic terror groups and antifa.

Though I also believe that in the free market, people should be stopped when their interests in the company begin to overlap the interest of the state, and should be shut down.

>shut it down

(That or when they begin to manipulate or oppress people with their company)

I'm afraid you cannot have both. Either free market and personal interest wins, or the state and social interest wins. There is no inbetween because they are contradictory aims. But that's fine, you can pretend otherwise

Hmm....

I do believe that people should have free will, but not to the extent where they believe they are above the state and begin to manipulate the world to their will.

People should have free will, but not to the extent where they harm the state.

It's a conflict of interest. You want all good things and no bad things. But there is contradiction here. You are too optimistic.

That's my impression.

Hmm.

Can you elaborate on that?

Thanks for the chat. It is always interesting to talk with different people.

I can try.

The basic critique is that personal and public interest are two contradictory aims. Private and public property. They cannot co-exist together without coming in direct conflict.

That is true, which is why I believe that it may be possible to manipulate the free market into serving public interest, while not completely removing private property.

But the free market doesn't want to be manipulated.

Which is why you must control it with an iron grasp.

In an attempt to make the free market 'unfree', a state will become authoritarian and need to control all transactions intensely. It will get to a point where it is just turn socialist and make all property public. That way the public interest is served and the constant battle is over, which is really impossible to win.

If you still think it could work, you should think more deeply at what such an authoritarian state would look like that tries to control a 'free market' so intensely that no individual financial interests are allowed to develop.

Hmm.

Now ultiminately I do not want the state destroying all public property or killing off personal interest, I just want the international jewery to come to an end.

Jews are created by class and imperialism (in Israel). Without private property there are no jews.

Quite merchant in yourself fool.

Kill the inner one

But then you destroy personal property and personal interests, effectively hurting the majority more rather than the juden.

Personal property is ok

Huh? A giant fist of the proletariat can crush any imperial juden.

Personal vs private property is important distinction.

Then what is the point of destroying personal interest and private property when you can smash then with a very strong government?

Because the very strong government must be socialist or else the hydra will just grow another head.

How can you be sure of that?

Why must it be socialist and nothing else?

To kill any chance of capitalism starting again. Do not leave it to hope.

Cutting the weed over and over vs. just pulling out the root

And is socialism the only way of preventing it from starting again?

Why can't national interest combine with this along with the interest of the people in order to prevent it?

It can. 'Socialism in One Country'. it is called. It creates a national beachhead from which to launch revolution into all other countries of the world.

But then there is also national socialism, which promotes right wing beliefs along with destroying juden controlled capitalism.

If it is socialist, why does it allow private property?

Because it exists mostly to serve national interests.

That's the jew lie right there.

How so?

We just discussed why private property is the root of creating financial interests that are in contradiction with the state.

Which I did not agree with, but continue.

What? How else can capitalism exist without private property? It is the primary prerequisite.

It can't... for the most part, which is why I want not a capitalistic economy, but a free market that is not under control by the juden who manipulate it.

It's all the same thing. Free market requires private property. It is fundamentally contradictory to public interests. We're finished here.

If you say so.....

?serverinfo

If private property did not create financial interests at odds with the state, then why would the state have to intervene ever? There is a clear contradiction here that is not resolved. Why? Because Fascism is the guard dog of the bourgeoisie and you are accepting its ideology.

Without Hitler there would be no Israel. You are not seeing this?

socialism could only ever work in an extremely small nation anyways, so this argument is kind of pointless

debate*

Was USSR a small nation?

it failed

remember

also, thats communism

@Panaffles you don't know what perestroika is

>Stalin
>defeats 80% of Wehrmacht
>failed
OK boss.

it ended pretty quickly ol

@Firefly

I very much doubt that israel would still not exist without hitler, but anyways, it seems that humans will always clash with the state no matter what, the only way it would not is if the state was a magic utopia that made all happy under it's ideology, sadly no matter how many times you read the communist manifesto it will never turn out that way.

@Deleted User im talking about a stable nation where the majority of people arent starving lol

sure it might have been good for a few, but for the entire population it wasnt very good at al

all*

@Panaffles
>starving nation
>defeats 80% of Wehrmacht
Are Slavs superhuman?

youre only focusing on one event. are you even listening to what im saying

<:caring:312066184948350976>

youre also disregarding the fact that the USSR nearly lost to the Nazis...

@Chopin#0138 >USSR
>Millions died from starvation in an attempt to industrialize
>Country is still masively outdated
>Manages to defeat hitler in the coming war
>Ends up in a competition with the US that in the end causes the country go fall apart and cause the disbanding of the union
>IT STILL WORKED THOUGH

It did.

>first man into space

There are reasons why it collapse. Most because they deStalinised

lol

Stalinization was causing genocides and mass starvations, if they wanted to keep image they had to stop eventually.

@Panaffles you mister have to focus on another event. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perestroika

Im not really familiar with the event. Ill read up on it

ive only heard about it a few times

Who care about image when you're a superpower

chopin, you do recognize that millions and millions of people died because of genocide and starvation, right?

Whatever the number is, it didn't seem to slow them down.

that isnt a good thing

You are going to have to care about image when there is another country that is ready to launch nuclear missiles at your country for any reason at any time.

Genocides and starvations would not help.

yeah, the cold war was mostly based on image overall tbh

@Panaffles billions been eaten by comrade Stalin right?