A state is simply way more effective at this.

Nationalism requires a state

Okay.

I'm not an Anarchist anyway.

I wonder how Kurds would fit with this.

They're nationalist and pretty leftist, from the Kurds of Turkey to the rather anti-statist Kurds of Syria who filrted with though of Bookchin an ex-anarchist. They also never really had a state.

@Anglican Skimmed through the wikipedia article on national syndicalism, and what I got was a few paragraphs about the origin, and a poorly sourced 2-3 paragraph section, which did mostly beating around the bush and did not give a conclusive definition of national syndicalism, so I cannot make much of an opinion about it.

All that I can say, is that it seems like the bastard child of syndicalism.

It's my ideology; it has nothing to do with how it's officially seen by the wiki.

I'm not a tolitarian. Firstly.

It's literally just a melding of syndicalist economics into a fascist society adn state.

Apparently it is anti marxist, which I find hard to believe.

Dude...

YOu're being retarded.

Marxism is international and atheist.

NATIONAL SYNDICALISM IS A FORM OF FASCISM

Marxism isn't atheist

Just marx saw religion as something that will fade away eventually

And yes, Syndicalism is a form of socialism,.

But it came before Marx and is a market economic system.

Marx didn't invent communism

He never outlined how a communist society would function

Hold on, I need to restart my computer, linux is being a nigger

Yet it is a combination of fascism and sydnicalism, and it is a form of socialism, woulden't that mean that the belief itself is a product of marxism?

🤔

@olev Marx hated religion.

No.

Marxism is not all forms of socialism.

Marx didn't invent socialism

Again

Marxism isn't even a political ideology

There is a reason why we specifically make a distinction between Marxian Socialists (Leninists and such) and non-Marxian Socialists (Syndicalits, Mutualists, Market Socialists, etc)

And even if Marxian thought lead to the evolution of Nationaist thought from his teachings, the good ones

The distinction shouldn't be Marx vs. Non-Marx

would that not be seen as renewing?

It should be market vs. non-market

All are based upon social ownership and oppose capitalism

But non-market socialism seeks to abolish money and the class system

It's like how Christianity went from an exclusive, Jewish religion to the saving light to the globe.

Is it not admirable to see these ideals be taken to form even better ones? To better the folk?

Or is the simple word socialist triggering for you/