all citizens of germany at that time were also given socialistic benefits

including women who are child bearing

its also pretty difficult to be a capitalist when your economy is nationalistic

what capital is there to maximize when u are trying to individualize the german economy

what power

he was already dictator of germany

but it wasnt

so that wasnt a requirement, he was idolized and the economy was booming, if he is the result of it then thats why the german people praised him

just like you see with russia and putin

idk seeing footage of the sheer amount of people praising him doesnt seem to be revisionism

so did several other nationalists and patriots

i mean u cant just use fallacies like that you have to attack the concept of national socialism itself

which is economically left wing is it not

but there is a seperation of economic and cultural

i dont get it

so the name just contradicts its own meaning by definition

whether or not hitler precisely used the concept of national socialism isnt really relevant but the actual meaning of it

in what way

define 'national socialism' then

so then two feet means three feet?

i mean thats kind of another fallacy u have to actually research it first before dismissing it like that

"1. The right to employment

The foundation for solving the social question is the realization of the right to employment, which can only happen through our job creation program. A law on employment will lay down the rights of the worker. Freedom for creative labor will be assured, freedom for capitalist exploitation abolished."

from the nsdap economic program

if communism worked in any case but a utopian society where it is an arbitrary concept in that regard id be a communist

thats not only definition i think

'scientfic definition'

what do you mean by this

socialistic economics is a measure i would take it

welfare is socialistic

taxes is not on the basis of socialism

a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
synonyms: leftism, welfarism; More

'welfarism'

freikorps a correct argument is about using objective reasoning so therefore subjective interest is fallacious in any argument

owned by who

the means of production just means the production industry i take it and that would be owned by specific individuals

but the welfare system is controlled by the government

which is voted in by the people in a democracy

ultimately being socialistic

lets see it

but that goes under the idea of putting in place a full 100% socialistic society

where everything is equally owned by everyone

but we all know that doesnt work (unless in a utopian society)

because 1: it is a primary human instinct to put themselves above everything else

and 2: most of them are smart enough to get in such economic power in the first place they know it wouldnt work

you cant just 'equally' give the wealth of the economy to everyone

there is too much exploitation involved

if a wage didnt exist it was either slavery or they were in a family

so what happens if one person doesnt work

and another person sees that person not working, getting free benefits, and then everyone stops working?

the society is a normal society with the concept of communism applied

if it is automation then it isnt communism because the people arent in control

'a machine' is

yea that would work the same

our current state of automation still requires people to work

the machines just wont handle things correctly if they dont have ppl working

ye then thats the same situation

someones still gotta flip the switches

and whoever does that is whoever can control the production

if it requires effort, then ppl will just choose 'not to do it'

if it doesnt require effort, people will just choose to 'take more for themselves'

plus as the other guy said someone will probably just start killing people out of boredom

but at a point of the second definition i put then it would have to be socialistic economy with no choice

because capitalism wont work in a society where there is no way to make money

its just the fact that it would be inherently more chaotic because people would have no work and no purpose

but how would you work

if the machines did everything

im saying in a society where the concept of working is completely demolished by the fact machines can do everything a human can

in that scenario capitalism cant exist, there would be chaos, and several other bullshit

in the part where it is like now (machines make things easier) then that still is based on reality

but then a machine would have to handle it

because people would just start killing each other for more shit than someone else

what would be their purpose by definition if they couldnt work so it would cause many problems

because if theyre not working

they have everything already

then the only thing that can come to mind is 'well i need some way of having currency so ill just have more shit than the other guy'

this is how currency is shown in america, by having more expensive shit, rather than having money

at least the rich man's way of showing who has more money without giving a number

capitalism produces capitalist society which is a basis of success and makes up the rich types of 'the 1%'

consumerism is the destruction caused by the result of over saturation of production

capitalism or socialism the source isnt relevant

i would say 'more stuff' if everything is equal, then it would be the quantity

would still require work

in normal society the only thing that works in a culturally diverse society is capitalism

because of the fact that the lower class incompatible with the standards of the culture the society is based upon will take advantage of socialistic benefits

i support national socialism and fascism

debat eme

and how is that

lol no

a political ideology does not discriminate upon race

that is only under the 3rd reich

this guy is right

seeems legit

when u say 'class privilege' u automatically imply that the main virtue of society is for equality

when that is not true

i dont like communism

left wing politics are applicable

modern left wing people are considered 'everything is equal' or these 'progressive' types meaning that progressiveness is the striving for global equality

which is just against all logic and nature

actual left wing politics are different

did i say leftism or modern leftism