Message from @HonorVirtutisPraemium
Discord ID: 276127529431990273
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
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?