DESPITE MANY STRONG CAPITALIST ELEMENTS

@-A I TEND TO AGREE ON THE ARISTOCRATS

PEOPLE FORGET HOW MUCH REALLY BAD STUFF THEY AVOIDED

HOW LIMITED THEIR POWER HAS BEEN FOR THE PAST THOUSAND YEARS

AND

THE GREATER TRAGEDIES BROUGHT ON BY DEMOCRACY

The redistribution of income through make-work programs at a minimum.

The difference from socialism being that ends were not acquired by happenstance according to illusory circumstance but instead through means, means of work.

Makenworombevr worksm

Make work never works.

Look at China now.

So many of the soe

Can't compete

With Vietnam or kora.

Korea

Or the usa

The zaitbatsu and chaebols beat them

As they want money

Not totalitarian guanxi

It might have been at a minimum but that was just because the Nazis were more sane than the Weimar Republic and the liberalism that was ubiquitous throughout most of the rest of the world. They also glorified the single mother, made "corn syrup" like incentives and write offs for their farmers, went on a massive anti-smoking campaign and while I understand why, scapegoated the Jews. Socialism is socialism, no matter how lite it is. The Nazis had their points, are much more sympathetic than what shitlibs want you to think and even weren't as savage as they want you to think. However, the overall system was a mistake. Hitler didn't even want to be the Fuhrer, as a matter of fact. They should have restored their Kaizer.

Nazis were socialism

It's in the name

yup

Sozialismus.

They to toughen it up like a lesbian with dad jeans and a buzzcut

But still weren't even the most functional totalitarian state

In Europe

Economically

The Nazis picked Socialism as part of their name at the behest of Rudolf Jung, who knew it to be of propagandist use in attracting voters among other things.

Taking control of the economic life was not intended to enrich the people, it was intended to subjugate them to the state after which point they could be re-modeled into a blooded-ideal.

The Soviets had the advantage of noelt being broke
As fuck build apartments out of real concrete and not with straw?

National Socialism is only 'Socialism' in the Austrian sense.

It's a the same thing

It's the same shit man

Racial paradise socialist workers paradise.

Same crap

Different names.

Different imagined favored people

The idea was never to empower the workers.

The goal was to take their livelihoods - their work and the only form of life in Liberalism - and use that as a means to reform them into whatever was pleased.

No the point of communism is not to empower the people.

If Liberalism has made the economic all that matters in life then subjugating the economic allows you to put life under your control.

National Socialism/Fascism, I'm saying.

Read why Lenin thought he was democratic

I am not discussing Socialism.

Leninist democracy

Facsism is not Socialism 😐

Is Bolshevism

It is communism by another name.

In practice.

Mate.

It's really not.

Whee it has lasted.

There are huge differences.

You're under the fallacy they viewed Liberals under: all things are economic.

There are very few differenxxea.

Very few? Are you serious?

Yea

Define that or at least justify it.

Communist and Fascist economies tend not to last very long.

This does not justify your statement and it again falls into the economics-only trap.

They mostly resort to the same shit.

What same shit?

After they collapse

What collapse?

They all have collapsed

Did *any* Fascist economy collapse, or did the state itself?

None has lasted.

Mate, you are not justifying your points.

You said Communism and Fascism have very few differences. How?

And, I oblige you to not act a Liberal in defining your reasoning.

@HonorVirtutisPraemium Also in the sense of wealth redistribution, distritbutionist values (which aren't really that confaltable and were quite ancient in European common law) and culturally liberal ideas that relaxed certain values for the sake of making more Germans. Further, the word socialism was also used to differentiate Germany from Russia and its communism. They liked the general idea of larger government to replace the Kaizer AND Weimar and they liked the idea of a safety net due to a weak economy.

You two were arguing faster than I could type...maybe I shouldn't get involved?

@-A The end goal was the creation of the Organic, not the Totalitarian. National Socialism was a scheme to remodel the nation, not a goal in and of itself.

Again, I oblige reading more.

The same with communicsm.

....

Oh, really? The goal of Communism was to create an Organic state a la idealised-Rome?

Well! I wonder why Marx never wrote that.

That does not change the fact that they used the word socialism and used socialist mechanisms for their restoration of Germany.

I wonder why Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, and numerous others never wrote as much either.

@-A They did not use Socialist mechanisms unless you are using the Austrian definition of Socialism (cf. Hayek; Mises; Friedman; Rothbard)

There is no organic Roman state

@Death Strike's Bat Hence what I said.

House of Hohenzollern wen't into a war on mere hope they would win, a war that they knew ment their end

They followed Austrian agression ignoring the fact that Russian Empire is the only power in Euope that had both ambition and willingness to preserve the old order

They did not think the rest of Europe saw what the did in the Franco Prussian war

You gotta do what you gotta do. Romania did the same thing, they just got a more humane result.

Unfalsifiable claims.

Not really, Russian Emperor was for peace from very beginning

,.,........

@HonorVirtutisPraemium So are you saying that my own list of policies would be considered less-than-socialist by Monarchists, Marxists/Trotskyites/Lenninists, mainstream economists and/or more in depth historians of economics?

I am saying that Socialism differs from the solely economic and degenerate definitions of the Austrian school.

@TheEnlightenedShepherd I was talkign about WWII but okay.

Identity > policies

Relegating life to the economic sphere is a result of degeneration.

Rofl

Yeah tell that to Diocletian

@-A WW II was perhaps even greater folly

They had to start wwii