Message from @h͛e͛n͛l͛o͛™₂₀₁₈
Discord ID: 466929059897802772
but that's fari
fair
I don't think you engage it intellectually honestly. A lot of people don't. But we disagree on what is happening in the system as it. It is often viewed from the wrong framework to defeat it. But I can come back another time if you wish to debate this further.
sure
National socialism is gibmedats for ypipo
I try to remain consistent, let me know if I don't next time we talk
nazbol and strasserism aren't even communist
strasserism only supports the workers owning half the enterprise
We disagree on some things which I'm sure naturally leads to perceived intellectual dishonesty. But there were also several of you to keep track of and just me on my side. I've no intention to mischaracterize if you are indeed debating in good faith. I was also in a bit of a rush at the time. I'll bring it back up later if you like.
I'm not really in the business of proselytizing for NatSoc as people mostly make up their mind on their own, and they often have some annoying misconceptions I'm not really keen to battle against. They will know and understand what they want a lot of times. This conversation just sorta happened. Debates are nice, but it's kinda pointless. CivNats/Libertarians aren't likely to relate with the notions of NatSoc. @Deleted User
natsoc is a system of pragmatism for the spiritual vanguard of the race
when it comes to politics
to ascribe an economic system to the worldview/philosophy is dangerous and dishonest
the first political rendition of national socialism, the NSDAP, followed very open market policies that collaborated with labor, giving precedent to social corporatism and social markets in general
even if they ended up going a different route than the original NSDAP labor and capital collaboration
@Deleted User you don't know what socialism is
@everyone 🔖 Daily Question
Are people entitled to any “human rights”? If so, which ones?
The right to free speech and the right to bear arms.
What about the other 8 amendments in the bill of rights
+the parts about the 1st you didn’t mention
Depends on what framework you are working under. I'd say no. Might makes right.
also u mum gay
The right to live and freedom of speech should be considered Human Rights
oh sorry i read the question wrong
Everything else stems from these two rights.
thanks
Well not exactly stem, but are products of
I’d agree
>semantics
might makes right
human rights are a meme
Human have very few "rights" of them they are all god gifted and granted unable to be taken by the goverment. These rights include the right to assemble peacfully bare (Any) arms, and to speak with out prosicution.
Human rights are whatever humans can eek out
Human rights don't exist lel
Any rights that do "exist" are artificial and created by humans who feel it's their right
wow the larp just gave me cancer
god did not say that people could bear (not bare) arms
it's just a good idea