@Vril-Gesellschaft I'm not talking about volkish identity I'm talking about that succession process

hitler wasn't the first volkisch guy

why OKC

Succession is simpler than in monarchies. The Fuhrer simply appoints his successor and its bound by law.

Tornadoes, hail storms, microbursts, Derechos, you name it @thrill_house

then you'll end up with Stalin

why do you want to live in an area that isn't 90% or more white

There's less chance of conflict for power, because unlike in a hereditary monarchy where several sons or lords may contest for power, in a dictatorship the dictator's chosen candidate becomes leader.

I’m saying *if I had to*

And it has a more meritocratic element and element of continuity

dictator's choose shitty candidates

look at Lenin -> Stalin

because a hereditary monarchy can have a successive king who's retarded

or who's not ideologically even a monarchist

Stalin more or less stole the throne from under Lenin at the last second

@agag false equivalency

communism =/= ns

the axiomatic presuppositions in ns are entirely different

Lenin saw Stalin’s real colors at the last second

we are idealistic racialists and we don't reject God

Trotsky was the true successor

communists are materialistic empiricists

and utilitarians

the point is about appointed successors not about drawing a connection between Commies and Nazis

the two systems don't lead to the same conclusions because of those distinctions

you're horseshoe theory fagging now

ns =/= communism because they shared some authoritarian elements

authoritarianism existed in hereditary monarchies which were theocratic almost

they were not like communism

He’s talking about successors potatobrain not ideology = ideology

that is not an argument

I know you dumb fag teenager reactionary

I am trying to explain that the succession is entirely different because of the ns axioms.

And the epistemology of rejecting enlightenment rationalism, utilitarianism etc.

NS were not utilitarians or these super efficient robot people like movies show them as, they are idealists.

They were not pragmatists either

Hitler fundamentally rejects pragmatism

people are people regardless of ideology, I'm sure Lenin thought that Stalin was an "idealistic Marxist" that "doesn't reject global revolution."

even with completely different standards you will end up with successors who go back on their previous behavior

ok, but if you take that argument to its logical conclusion, in the plutocratic shadow elite version the "people who are people" who become tyrants through the weaknesses of capitalist democracies are harder to then overthrow

Power corrupts the very minute it’s given