so it's possible to counteract saving demand theory with propaganda and has been proven

All the while holding to an authoritarian dictatorship power structure in order to avoid coups of the market by plutocrats from abroad.

Why would this authoritarian government be any more trustworthy than any other?

(for brainlets deflation causes prices of goods to be lower, which increases living standard for consumer but decreases consumption of goods for firms in typical fiat economies)

https://youtu.be/WL9BHDEf0dI

Well it depends on the type of authoritarian govt. I believe if the initial binding laws (similar to 25 tenets of ndsap) hold to the volkish principle of equating state with race and vice versa, you effectively "deal in" the citizenry to be a part of the greater governmental body.

Thus you break the dialectical tension between state - citizen

Isn’t that begging the question of why we would need a government.
They’re all over the place.

yes, fiat economy fags will call deflation a bad thing especially if done quickly, this is because their worthless system is based on interest rate expectations from central banks

@Rusty we need a govt because without it plutocrats grab power via market forces without regulation

in order to have strong laws you need the sword if you will to cut heads when people defy the order

so, i have something else to say, but on the note above, i think this would be interesting to look into:

https://pro.paradigmletters.org/p/awn_sdrblockchainv2_0418/LAWNV213/?rm=1&h=true

It's essentially an ad, but the conspiracy theory behind it makes sense to me at least.

How would a piece of paper bind the government to anything if you give it the power to do what you want it to do?

Because if you define the state as race, everyone becomes the govt. Thus the state doesn't react with hostility to the subject.

Everyone effectively becomes some aspect of the govt. A quasi nationalization while retaining property rights.

That is fucking retarded.

why

It's a legal definition dude, it doesn't mean literally everyone is a govt worker

ultimately, creating 'races' in the first place was a mistake.

if your society is built upon volkish principle and the ascendancy principle of race, you can't get away with tyranny

If you define the state as a race, is it anarchist, or is there a state?

in the long run, we'd be a better species if we just got rid of the classification

also I would retain second amendment type rights, as one would need the measn to kill any tyrant

@Aero nonsense, focusing and specialization is how you get ahead in the world, amassing the world's genetic garbage into one nation creates a shithole like Brazil

Also I find the speciation of races as "humanity" tenuous at best given genetic variation

You can't do what you want to do if you let the people keep their guns.

indeed, which is another failsafe

>implying brazil is garbage because of its genetic makeup instead of the travesty that was the toppling of the monarchy

toppling of monarchy was part of it, allowing millions of low tier people to live there contributed more

States can't implement eugenics, only dysgenics.

incorrect, eugenics can be implemented, and in relatively non invasive ways

you don't need to gas the defectives, that doesn't even work due to gene drift in mean reversion

capitalism and liberal ideals are dysgenic though

Capitalism is peak eugenics.

wrong

while i admit, i LOLed at that... i still don't think we really have enough research to prove that eugenics is really a thing.

i'm all for children all growing up in a loving environment which encourages education and hard work. If we study multiple 'races' with these same environments, we'd have better data.

It encourages genetic defectives who are immoral to gain more money. People who are evil who break or bend laws and cut corners manage to grab more wealth.

@Aero homogeneity is non negotiable

being 'evil' is subjective and changes with the times.

subjectivity doesn't exist, what exists is a gradation of understanding of truth

? O.o truth changes from person to person. facts do not