#english (Discord ID: 308995540782284817) in /leftypol/ International, page 70
Security Advisory: Links in messages may lead to maliciously operated websites that could track your IP address and reveal your identity, or they may contain harmful files. The DiscordLeaks team does not check links and cannot make any statements about the safety of following these links.
Some ways to protect yourself are:
- Do not open files downloaded from links, and do not run any programs that try to download themselves to your computer.
- Use anonymization measures such as Tor Browser or a VPN.
If you are using the Privacy Badger or other privacy extensions, you may need to whitelist Discord and related domains in order for the images to load.
I know my shit
Have you even read MK
If that was the case, why did hitler allow blacks in his army?
Or anything by Dr pierce
Pure biological materialism
And here we go with the revisionism
Of course I read MK, infact I read the reich approved STALAG edition.
By my guess, you read the editions that were rewritten and editted nearly entirely by major publishing companies.
i read the murphy edition from 1939
sold by an nsbm record label
Wow, how trustworthy.
thats the real reason N"S" will never go anywhere
with the hollywood narrative
Is the reich approved stalag edition that was published in 1922 not trustworthy?
i'm sure it is
the murphy translation was co-opted with the nsdap as well
Was it a paper or PDF version?
So that means it was a republished newer version, meaning that it was open to edit's deletions, and rewirtes.
i was a hitlerite for years i know all about it
its not real socialism
and its not practical
And also, you just doxxed yourself.
too racially autistic
Personal location was preset....
Too late pal, I screenshotted it.
Of course, I hear this argument by both alt-rights, and socialists.
It is not marxist socialism, and was never designed to match it.
syndicalism is not marxist socialism but generally accepted as socialism
3rd way is arguably a form of socialism as well
I have not heard that claim.
no one believes that hitlerism is socialism but hitlerites themselves
and normies of course
Not in a marxist sense, for natsocs.
bakuninites are anti marxist and socialist
strasserites like myself are not marxists but socialist
juche as well
falangist italian fascists
hitlerism is not socialism
Falange was never socialist, mosley was never socialist , and neither was hitler.
And, what makes hitler not socialist?
the fact that all the real socialists were purged and exiled in the night of the long knives
What makes them real socialists?
and moseley wrote a book titled european socialism which was a call for a british take on syndicalism
workers owned the means of production
abolition of private property
abolition of wages
Wait a minute.
How do you know that is the real definition of socialism?
by anyone thats not some asshole berniecrat or a hitlerite
abolition of private property/workers own the means of production
So you don't know.
well you ask 10 people with 10 different political identies you'll get more than a handful of different answers
but to anyone who identifies as a socialist but not a hitlerite it will be along those lines
And how do you separate the true definition from them?
obviously the people who know their shit
And so do I, and I call myself a socialist.
Wow, google, what a good source.
and i bet you'd call syndicalism a jooish invention as well
you can't have private property and socialism at the same time
N"S" germany had private property
Nope, if I did, I would be calling the falange and franco jews.
How do you know that?
oh i've seeen it before
You don't know it?
franco wasn't a syndicalist he betrayed the falange
True, but the falange also supported franco at first, but this is an attempt to set me off track, so let's get back to the original topic.
Ask any none Hitlerist in this server if Hitler was a socialist everyone will tell you no
In the context that he is a leftist and marxist socialist before, but this is another attempt to derail the question, so let's go back.
How do you know that workers have to own the factories, in order for it to be socialist?
if they don't that means its private property and not socialist
How do you know?
You clearly don't, do you?
Sorel, Bakunin, Strasser, Codreanu
to name non marxists
Kim il Sung
Cordreanu believed in legionaireism, something I doubt you know anything about.
and yes a good friend of mine is a romanian fash
And, you are only giving me a list of non marxists, nothing that confirms your belief.
non marxists that would agree that private property is capitalist
you're grasping at straws
That is quite the generalization there.
And, I would disagree with you.
clerical fascism, italian, falange etc
were all derived from sorel
Sorel is what turned mussolini away from the reds
I don't think evola or mousillini even mentioned sorel in their interviews.
Mussolini went to Sorels funeral
Sorel approved of mussolini for his syndicalist views
Didn't hitler attend some of the RAF funerals?
Cultured Thug did a whole presentation on Sorel and his link to fascism
So in that case, woulden't he be fascist?
Sorel is often considered a proto-fascist
but he's a weird one he'd go back and forth from being an ansyn to natsyn
Okay? If he was ultimately considered a fascist and a national syndicalist, then why would you even cite him as a socialist?
because syndicalism is a form of socialism
>Falangists destroy CNT FAI
>Mousillini purges communists and anarchists
because they were'nt the same kind of socialists
By that definition, WW2 was leftist infighting.
and radically different views on social issues
Fascism is not a left or right worldview
Now hold on, there is no way that a socialist would be somebody like cordreanu, or mousillini, because, they fight for both their race, and nation, and an economy that benefits the NATION.
their economies were syndicalist
de facto socialism
So you call it socialist, but in reality it is just yours by claim?
its not marxist socialism
but its socialism
every great nationalist movement has had some socialist ideals if not a very socialist economy
every great socialist state has been somewhat nationalistic if not atleast patriotic
To the fascist state comes first but had syndicalist economies
So you then admit that national socialism IS socialism? You have no good reason to believe that socialism means that workers own everything, and afterall, the people you have provided have worked against you, because some allowed private production methods, meaning that national socialism has every reason to call itself socialism.
To the socialist the likes of Stalin, Mao, Kim il sung etc class came first but had very strong patriotism and nationalism
That is true.
Hitlerism is more akin to social democracy and is the forebearer of the current nordic model
Nordic countries used to be mildly ethnocentric as well
So while its not you're waspy capitalism
Its still capitalism
So in other words, you cocede that it is.
@Krieg#0336 I've always thought that Nazi Germany was a corporatist economy where the Government had a lot of influence over capitalist monopolies, nowhere near a social democracy ala Nordic countries. Also, on Mousillini being a National Syndicalist, from what I heard he abandond Syndicalism quite quickly. Correct me if I'm wrong, however.
And for the record, I would personally accept Strasserism as a form of socialism, albeit a bastard child of socialism and fascism.
Corpratism was more of a mousillini and pelley thing.
Any IWW member in here?
What is your reading list of Strasserism?
@Builderelf corporatism by definition is the organization of society based on collectives ie like in italy businesses of the same industry would be merged into one. They called it fascist syndicalism.
@Тхе Западни Србин#1770 https://revolutionarynationalsocialism.wordpress.com/
@Krieg#0336 But I thought the key thing of syndicalism was that it was owned by the workers, not the government?
Yeah, I’m in the IWW. I’m new though, just joined last month @stratagast
lulz yeah germany was basically a racist social democracy
mussolini was a staunch sorelianist
I disagree with that.
What do you mean by that?
If by mixed, you mean both government and owned properties with a common goal, then sure.
What relevance does this have?
@Builderelf I think that when people mention fascism, they usually get the idea of italy, and how it had some corpratism, but they forget, that italian fascism, national socialism, legionaireism, falange, and more, had many differences, with a common idea.
all of those except hitlerian NS yes
capitalism is to individual
communism to class
fascism to state
N"S" to race
Unless it is somewhere like vichy france where it was a german/italian occupied place, it would most likely have an independant system.
Okay, from what I see and what I'm researching right now, I could definetly see @Krieg#0336's arguement for Germany being a "racist social democracy". For instance:
-Taxation was high
-Government spending was through the roof
-Private business was allowed to operate
-Healthcare was a thing
-Keynes himself LIKED the Germany economy
-Pensions were even given out, apparently
However, I'm also seeing elements of totalitarianism in there. For instance, State-Run Trade Unions designed to squeeze out productivity in factories. Also, military spending took was as high as 32% of the budget-- that doesn't sound like a Social Democracy at all! Additionally, the reason that public projects such as job programs and industry protectionism seems to be mainly for the sake of increasing productivy of home industries, not for the sake of basic human rights, as it is in Nordic countries.
So in other words, I'd place Hitlerist economics as an Authoritarian-Right version of Social Democracy. Not quite corporatism, not quite social democracy, a strange kind of militaritic totalitarian welfare state.
@Krieg#0336 Fascism and national socialism do not believe in devolution of the class, which is something that communism and socialism want, but rather they want both the worker, and the owner, and the government cooperating for the benefit of the nation.
why yes, this is true. I know a fascist friend that claims that fascism calls for "Class Collaboration, not Class Warfare", so thats correct @Deleted User
well duh its easier to work together when one class isn't fucking the other
@Builderelf That is one of the biggest characteristics of national socialism, as well as the italian, romanian, spanish, and more, is that it cannot be mapped on a simple political scale that is determined by an alogorithm.
I would also agree that fascist economics has more diversity than people give it credit for.
fascism isn't an economic system more of a world view
Then again @Deleted User , thats because political compass tests are actually cancerous ways of viewing politics
closest thing to experiencing fascism in america would be like being in the military or a sports team
yeah, fascism has more roots in politics if anything. Probably why history classes don't cover it's economy very much and why fascist economics are so diverse.
i mean Mussolini called Stalin a fascist
@Builderelf Ah yes, according to MK, next leap, and a squires trial, a person needs to do what they are best at, and using that skill, they produce products and more, to benefit the state, or that is the very generalized and summarized version of it.
@Krieg#0336 Citation needed.
@Krieg#0336 big oof
but then again, my latest history classes have been a lot better
for instance, my current history teacher is W O K E af
I don't think that makes the course inhereintly better, however.
he legit knows what Mutualism, Anarcho-Syndicalism, Marx's Labor Theory of Value etc. are. I have NEVER seen a history teacher talk about any of that. He's pretty fricking lit.
hell, he's the sponsor for my socialist club
so overall a pretty cool dude
but I still think he covers a lot in his US history classes
I sure learned a lot.
Interesting, it seems that more predictions are coming true.
what predictions did you have?
Oh I was referring to GLR's and the elder's of zion's predictions.
Anyways, I seriously doubt that you will still cover that much within US history, granted you will learn some more info, but not *that* much more, since like previous classes, you will have to cover around 400-200 years of history in less than a year.
well, as far as America is concerned it can cover a lot. obviously I won't learn shit about, say, South Africa or something.
But I learned about some pretty major Labor Unions within the mid-late 19th century up to the early 20th century.
That isn't really much to go off of....
I mean yhea, there were labour unions..... haven't they always existed since the early industrial revolution?
well obviously, I just didn't know that the AFL or the Knight of Labor were a thing.
Specifically those labor unions.
but I see your point nonetheless, the American education system is in desperate need for reform.
If not a comeplete overhaul.
I'm just saying that it's not 100% terrible, because sometimes you get a good class (like my AP US history class)
I like it.
Then again, I am in a super funded school.
either way, hope you have a nice evevning.
See you mate.
anyone in voice channels
bruddas or comrades?
thats a mountian in asia
Fascism has never collapsed on itself like communism did to many countries
And has not ruined any countries
oy vey goyim
I mean the privileged relationship between Italy and Russia goes back to Mussolini and Stalins mutual respect
Italy only got dragged into the war because of an autistic Austrian apart from that they both saw the capitalist west as more of a threat than eachother
Then weirdly enough Himmler once praised Stalin and the Soviets over the Italians as the Italians weren't "revolutionary like the fuhrer"
He killed gorillions of his own people goy
yes,stalin did that
2 to 60 million wtf
@Krieg#0336 It's like the holocaust numbers now!
@Biermann#5625 hilarious and original meme
very original @Biermann#5625
@Krieg#0336 Population of Russia 120 million. 60 million killed. Population became 140 million. This is American mathematics mate.
even as an anarchist, I still think that the death toll under stalin is ridiculously exagerated
its more like 25 mil if you count from both famines AND from ww2, and even that is pretty exaggerated.
but population growth and population in general would've boomed under this period due to Stalins high amount of industrialization
for instance, before stalin life expectancy was around ~37 or so
it became like 60 something by the end of the reign