What's the best argument that can be made against the Nazis from the Right?

Nazis are egalitarian

Heh. How so? Their nationalism?
Also, is there anything for me to gain from reading Schmitt, as a reactionary?

@Charlemagne

Yeah, nazi nationalism was basically national egalitarianism

They failed. At least when we larp it's for a civilization that lasted like 2000 years or so.

they were big on equality of opportunity. Everyone gets sent to public education. High inheritance tax. Abolition of aristocratic privileges.

Inheritance tax is fucking gay

They were progressives. Believed in whig history. Hitler praised the Enlightenment revolution. Killed priests.

@Tome_Enthusiast Schmitt is ultra based. Every reactionary whether traditionalist, neo, or romantic should read him.

Do you have a off @Pseudo-Analysist

Pdf

I don't think so, let me check

I have his writings on war

War is based

> They failed. At least when we larp it's for a civilization that lasted like 2000 years or so.
@Skellington Bringing up the fact that they failed will only get you a lecture on the astronomical odds they were facing, and bringing up actions, like the Anschluss or the pursuit of pan-Germanism in general, that made the situation worse will only result in appeals to the Polish suppression of the East Germans and Hitler's repeated attempts to treatise with them and the other powers.

Though I agree. There are better models of civilization to ape.

also franco, also salazar. probably some others that i left out. after these fascist dictators die the countries just get assimilated into liberalism and use the fact they used to be fascist as a beating stick against them

@Pseudo-Analysist Discord hasn't been letting me download PDFs for whatever reason. Could you DM it to me so I can try again later?

@Skellington I agree, but he tries to use Franco as a bludgeon against me, since I prefer him to Hitler. As well as Dollfuss, though that one is harder for him to try and spin.

Almost as if the succession problem is the crippling weakness of the ideological equivalent of an emergency immune response. It's a hold until something better can be established, not an end of itself. Hence why the Austrians had the right idea.

The fascist dictators dieing and their countries going progressive is not really an good argument either. That could happen to any nation in the current world we live in. Monarchies by and large are just as pozzed these days. Plus someone could make the case for communism by pointing out the fact that the eastern bloc nations collapsed and became more nationalistic than all the more progressive western states.

Which my buddy does.

@Tome_Enthusiast The post-war narrative of Hitler as the ultimate evil is from the perspective of the Jews. That's where the left gets its moral legitimacy. However, Hitler was also bad for Germany and the rest of Europe. He put them in a war that they lost and made bad decisions for his own prestige and not the wellbeing of Germany.

From an ideological perspective, my opposition to National Socialism is that denies the imperfect nature of man. It tells people that they are the ubermench and that all their problems are the result of the JQ or some other outside force. It created egotistical and unbalanced individuals who ended up destroying the very thing they claim to be fighting for because they couldn't accept their own faults. Same can be said for NatSoc larpers today.

Also, the Third Reich was cringe and gay.

How cringey and gay though?

> The post-war narrative of Hitler as the ultimate evil is from the perspective of the Jews. That's where the left gets its moral legitimacy. However, Hitler was also bad for Germany and the rest of Europe. He put them in a war that they lost and made bad decisions for his own prestige and not the wellbeing of Germany.
>
> From an ideological perspective, my opposition to National Socialism is that denies the imperfect nature of man. It tells people that they are the ubermench and that all their problems are the result of the JQ or some other outside force. It created egotistical and unbalanced individuals who ended up destroying the very thing they claim to be fighting for because they couldn't accept their own faults. Same can be said for NatSoc larpers today.
@Endeavour Nice. Thank you.

Your better off arguing from an ideological and metaphyisical perspective tbh. If you argue from the historical perspective hes just going to be able to hand wave it away due to the post war consensus and the suppression of alternative perspectives about the second world war

Arguing 1. Germany was responsible for or started ww2
2. Germany wasnt put upon by other powers or outside forces
3. Anything around the holocaust
will get you no-where do to the controversy surrounding these perspectives in history and modern NatSocs falling on the revisonist side of the argument

@EYEFORKNOWLEDGE156 @Tome_Enthusiast @Techpriest of house Roundeye
I'd say from a cultural perspective, the Third Reich is also unappealing. Literature like War and Peace, Oliver Twist, or All Quite on the Western Front resonates with me far more than something like Triumph of the Will. Stories that actually portray the human condition are far better than propaganda that just tells you that you're an ubermench. Likewise I enjoy the aesthetic of Victorian Britain or even Imperial Germany far more than the Third Reich. I believe that its ideological problems manifest themselves artistically as well. That's why I just find NatSocs so unappealing.

From Brest to Vladivostok, the Hyperborean homeland will be reunited

*ironic esotericism*

@Endeavour culture has to be natural from the bottom up

Not manufactured like the third reich

no

you cant totally rely on plebs

top down is ok, just has to be based in reality

but make your arguments

Is culture not top down tho

Both top and bottom needs simply to be on a same trajectory BUT both have distinct roles to fulfill.