@Deleted User Tell me how they were owned only for profit then.

Because they were sold on markets

guys

with wage labor

i am oficially

blue pilled

on the JQ

help me

but are you redpilled on the AQ?

@Deleted User What?

i dont like isreal

the two prerequisites for profit

the JQ is shit
consider the AQ

but jews dont control banks

or politics

anglos do though

You’re lucky this discussion has diverged

Do an economics course in the meantime

plenty of videos on Youtube

@Deleted User What? According to the webster dictionary.... profit comes when earnings are greater than that of expendenture....

How the hell did you relate that to wage labor?

when you talk about profit but don't understand how it's made

@DA GOMMIE JOO Just told you how profit is madw.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/profit

@Deleted User Earnings are made through selling things on markets.
If you are selling things on a market, you have to make profit, which is done by the extraction of surplus value from labor. (wage labor system)

@Deleted User Not inherently so, but I see your point....

Go on.....

If you don’t know what the basic economic analysis of value is and don’t know what the labor theory of value is, don’t be making judgements on what Marxism is BTW

Do not diverge from what we are talking about.

Bottom Line, the difference between Nazism and neoliberal Capitalism, is that Nazism promotes a form of markets that are directed by the state. Nonetheless, because the function of Capital remains largely the same, and that the mechanism of profit, the exploitative core of Capitalism, is not changed either, none of the contradictions within Capitalism, are resolved. Thus Nazism is not a Third Position, but a new Version (of Capitalist structure)

Capitalism very much isn't practiced in the national socialist worldview, because it's economic model diverges from the meaning of capitalism, that being that all the business strives for, is to earn profit, while not caring about how it affects the nation or the people of the nation in the process.

In Capitalism people can believe production to be good for the nation, their opinions and actions aren’t worth anything if they don’t make profit, but still there is no economic difference between the two fundamental cases.
Most petty bourgeois produce for the good of their family, a concept fascists are fond of.

It stands

@Deleted User They can believe it, but in actuality, it dosen't, and I have already told you how national socialist economics aren't capitalistic in any sense.

i’ve explained to you why they are

And I explained to you why they still aren't.

through privatization, which is the end goal of Capitalism and especially laissez fair Capitalism, the bad, dysfunctional kind of Capitalism

Privatization isn't inherently capitalist, how many times do we have to go over this.

It is though

How is it?

Prove to me how it is without just saying "ET EZ THO!:

wow buddy I’m the one who argued for something, you’re the one going “privatization, the inherent function of Capitalism, is not Capitalist because I say so”

@Deleted User I showed you no longer than 10 minutes ago evidence from the merriam webster dictionary, that shows that because national socialist economics are not for profit only, they by definition are not capitalist.

Privatization carries with it the inherent need to make profit for yourself. If you privatize an industry, how do you expect that industry to perform production and sustain itself?
You can make the “it’s all for the state” argument in nationalized industries, but not in private ones. Because private ownership produces to sell, not to give away, like state owned production does

Oh what so now Capitalist nations that have a public sector are no longer Capitalist

Were you dropped?

@Deleted User Again, state comes first profit comes second, just because they have the state come first does not mean they cannot earn profit in the process.

Ahahahaha

Like I said before, we have no issue if people make profit off of privatization.

which is what we are talking about, Nazism is not anti capitalist

thanks for proving my point

Wrong, we hate capitalists.

What is a capitalist? Someone who owns privately. ahahaha how stupid are you

Nope, already showed you how that isn't the case.

I have no problem with private ownership, but hate those who own the privately owned means

Really funny how dismissive you have become, and how much you repeat yourself over and over again, is it because you are losing and want to throw anything at me?

Because it’s a fundamental point

Very easy to get

@Deleted User For the fifth time now, I already told you how privatization isn't inherently capitalist.

It is though

How is it?

Just because extents change, doesn’t mean you’ve created a new system

@Deleted User Do not diverge.

Tell me how it is.

A country, which has all the functions of Capital in place, protects private property, takes profit FROM private property, and in which private property became progressively more prominent with the augmented returns in capital, is not anti capitalist. I’m fucking sorry. It’s simply a country in which markets are directed by a state who nationalizes some, and privatizes MOST industry to coordinate its economy for warfare. End of story

We are not talking about the history of nations which are not relevant right now, we are talking about national socialist economics.

As said, many countries have a commanding state and areas of the economy that are public and thus don’t work for profit, yet they are still capitalist

As well as that, just because profit has been made does not make it capitalist

And which countries are those?

Communist china? Vietnam?

China today is so, minus the intensity of running your whole economy for war

And China isn’t socilais

socialist

Even the leader of china admit's that china is no longer socialist.

we agree on that

If it isn’t socialist, it’s capitalist and vice versa

No, no not really.

aka third positionism is a wet dream

If China’s not socialist anymore, then why not restore the Kuomintang? I’d fuckin’ nut if that happened <:bour:313709044957315082>

@Ｋ▲ＩＳＥＲ I wish.

I wish too.

a wet dream for people who want to act like private property is anything but Capitalisn

*m

Already told you how that wasn't the case for the seventh time now....

Eh, in my eyes Taiwan is still the legitimate government of China.

That’s just me.

you haven’t said shut

*shit

@yung Calm down there sassy pants, you're getting all riled up.

You said: privatization isn’t Capitalism because nAzi worldview sees state as priority

@yung You have not proven at all how it is indeed inherently capitalist.

which is A) not an argument, and B) completely irrelevant to the truth.

I thought the Nazis were against private property and all for all real-estate to be controlled by the state.

@Ｋ▲ＩＳＥＲ You thought wrong.

How so?

@Ｋ▲ＩＳＥＲ Check this whole conversation.

kk

Hm, I’ve gotcha now.

Thanks for the info my dood <:bour:313709044957315082>

If you privatize most industry, you are making most industry work for profit. This is fact and irrefutable, as private ownership is production named at selling, not giving away for free. It doesn’t matter if that profit is made by selling arms to the military complex or by simple sale of civilian commodities. If you are selling something, you are making profit from it, or at least trying to. Even if say certain sectors of production are made to benefit the state, it either means that the state is using private profit to finance itself, or that production is public, which there was in some aspect in Nazi Germany, as it was needed for the war effort.
Still capital returns increased, aka Capitalism rose, and most industry was privatized, meaning that most industry was run for profit of Business Owners. The whole narrative that the state came first maybe true in so far as private profit was used by the state, but it falls apart at the fact that Germany privatized more than nationalised.

Aka A State controlled market economy

Question.

which is still a market economy=Capitalist mode of production

What’s wrong with privatization for profit nowadays?

http://www.ub.edu/graap/nazi.pdf This is helpful

We’re kind of making a transition into automating our factory work as of right now, meaning less need for workers for manual labor.

exactly, and that would mean that privatizing would lead to usage of machinery for profit as opposed to common need

You still have to buy stuff, but there will be no need for your work anymore, making you not have money. Which is why automation is the ultimate contradiction of Capitalism

Wouldn’t automating your labor mean you wouldn’t have to pay for your workers, therefore adding to your overall profits, though?

Automation increases—> less jobs —> less people work and therefore have wages to buy stuff—> Automation increases—> full automation—> whole sectors become employed by automation only—> people don’t work anymore and don’t have money to buy stuff —> the private ownership of automation becomes useless because they produce stuff people can’t buy. Companies make no profit.

If all labor is automated, and no work is needed, you can’t have wage labor, and therefore profit.

It would rather quickly become a gift economy

Not all industries can utilize automation, however. There would still be need for human workers in some ways, but not on the level we’ve had for a while.

Yes it would be pretty irrelevant though, and robots are getting so advanced that it could be that even inventive, intellectual, work can be performed

Wouldn’t some new industries with human needs also pop up on the way as well?

Some I guess

It’s not like human labor would just flat-out disappear, after all.

Yes but most of it

with full automation

But It would lead to a shit ton of instability and unrest that would most likely lead to an easy transition to communism aided by automated labor that can be the source of the gift economy

@yung (thanks for taking over 10 minutes to respond) No fucking shit business would work for profit, but that need would come second to the nation, but it dosen't make it capitalist either, I have told you this all before that we are fine with people making a profit, but that need needs to come second to the state.

Just because you say it is for the nation doesn’t make it not capitalist. The problem is not where the profit lands, it’s that profit is made.

this is what you refuse to acknowledge

That is what makes it Capitalist

@yung In capitalism, profit comes first and foremost, in national socialism, it dosen't, is that simple enough for you?

How doesn’t it?

show me how it doesn’t

Show me one concrete economic practice that shows that private property in Germany put profit as a lesser priority when the only function of private property is making profit

lmao

@yung In national socialism, businesses focus on benefitting the state, before profit.

Ok show me

how

Okay, give me a moment.

this is done, ignoring that for war every nation works like that

Send me via DM i’m going to sleep as it’s 2 AM

Just know that Nazi Germany had a capitalist mode of production

nite

@yung Leaving just like that in the middle of an argument? Nice.

I’m sorry dude but it’s really late

I normally wouldn’t do this but I have to

And the debate is over. Anyone who believes that privatization is anti capitalist has lost the plot, sorry.

Yeeeeeeeeah, privatization is very Capitalist, that I can wholeheartedly agree with.

@Ｋ▲ＩＳＥＲ Nope.

ech

I honestly don’t see why it isn’t.

Owning land yourself instead of having it owned by the state is pretty Capitalist.

@Ｋ▲ＩＳＥＲ How so?

this is what you quote as proof

But it could also be Syndicalist or very libertarian Socialist, depends on your amount of faith in the state.

read the conclusion and tell me what it says. Tell me if it doesn’t say that economically Nazi Germany was a market economy directed by a state

However, in terms of the current mainstream economic views, private property and privatization is seen as a very Capitalist thing.

it just is

It’s not exclusive to Capitalism, but it’s certainly synonymous with it, is what I’m saying.

@yung Free markets are not inherently communist.

Even stalin had a small free market.

https://youtu.be/TfJYBd4Emew

Oy vey?

Does something not occur to you? West Berlin Mayor Brandt wails that half of the GDR, including the workers in the enterprise militia groups, is armed. What do you think of a concentration camp whose inmates have weapons in their hands?

@Kim's favorite central planner What?

@Kim's favorite central planner are you doing alright mate?

Ahhh this is beautiful

lit

fuck niggers

i am gone

rest in power

if anyone wants to own some kekastani right wing nerds DM me

@BabaBooey go away

We're gonna protest to the BBC against the Strikes against Syria
We're starting by emailing [email protected] with song requests for Bahar Al-Assad
If you can't make yourself do it, make song requests for civilians killed by coalition airstrikes
We're also sending requests to the BBC to cover the backlash to [email protected]
Please spread this
Also keep emails civil, this is a protest not a raid

@kaasci wait so socialists support a fascist dictator that with the help of another (putin, who spits on the dreams of socialists) that bombs and targets civilians with chem weapons? <:wokethonk:433936045042827265>

@BabaBooey 1. He's not a fascist
2. There is clear evidence he was not behind this
3. I don't support him it's an attention tactic

Its Putins imperialism using Assad as a puppet to commit atrocities in the name of capital

And if this shit show gets any worse we'll all die in a nuclear hellfire

@kaasci hes done it before the truth will come out , and right he just deploys fascists tactics

It literally was not him though

Russia wont risk a war with the Us over syria

paper tiger

targeting chemical weapons factories so children arent gassed is a righteous endeavor imo

Assad and russia will carpet bomb entire neighborhoods

Bet

United forever in friendship and labour,
Our mighty republics will ever endure.
The Great Soviet Union will live through the ages.
The dream of a people their fortress secure.
Long live our Soviet motherland,
Built by the people's mighty hand.
Long live our people, united and free.
Strong in our friendship tried by fire.
Long may our crimson flag inspire,
Shining in glory for all me

hello

hey

heelo

who wants to bang

Me want bang!!

I once argued with a guy who said that nature was naturally ancap and that we should genocide the poor through eugenics or something and seemed to imply that even after the people who work for the rich have all been mercilessly slaughtered then the rich will somehow remain rich and everyone will be happy because the "superior" people only exist. Is this Randian Objectivism?

@maostravelagent

@Deleted User "He supported the anarchist groups in cambodia, who in return promised support to him."
I looked up several internet articles discussing the Khmer Rouge and Pol Pot and have found nothing that mentions Pol Pot or the Khmer Rouge supporting Anarchism or having Anarchists within it. One snippet from a 1993 article mentions something resembling your claim but even then its set up to be just an accusation that was almost passively mentioned to begin with.

Also the one source that I found that mentions the accusation says that Chomsky objected the views of Democratic Kampuchea

https://www.jstor.org/stable/3992949?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Be glorious, our free Motherland,
A reliable stronghold of the peoples' friendship!
Banner of the Soviets, Banner of the people,
May it lead from victory to victory!

cancer

Afghanistan

<:bour:313709044957315082>

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_cv_DiNAz8

@Ｋ▲ＩＳＥＲ Yhea that turned out real well!

Communism sure was spread!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nHjFI9KRhM

Is anyone here an Anarchist?

No

NO nigga

I’m an Alabama nigger and I wanna be free

@💕❤.xxx.BOXXY_LOVES_YOU.xxx.❤💕 Hell to the NAACP.

dafuq

Get that nazi shit outta yer boys

Watch it

Pls

isn’t he in on the joke tho?

that’s what I’ve heard

It’s autism at its finest

the dude needs some help regardless

what the fuck are those moves

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTXGM01fXIc

@Zero Two is back yes

nazis have the big gay

daily reminder

@yung 😆

@Firefly you can’t make this shit up

I really want to know what he meant

Free markets means everyone gets a tent and a table

Did you not read the communist manifesto?

@HypeByron#3396 it was in an attempt to say Nazi Germany was anti capitalist, which is complete bullshit

Nazi Germany was state capitalism, and NatSoc as a principal is anti capitalist

nice joke

when praxis doesn’t matter because anti capitalist speeches

I've heard that this computer runs incredibly fast if you wear all black

It only runs on white power though

hmmmmm

@kaiser.#2816 Finally, a computer that only runs off of white power.

Or forced jew labour

Both are pretty good sources of energy

Jew labor is a nono.

kek

@DA GOMMIE JOO#7269 Ehh, it is more of an economic model when you think about it.

fair point but this guy's arguing that it's when people can make choices

and that profit motive has nothing to do with capitalism

*What?*

I'll post the thread in a second

Throw a dictionary at his head, because he clearly dosen't get it.

actually conflicted as to capitalism being an ideology

it’s not really an ideology, but some people treat it as it was