Message from @Deleted User
Discord ID: 330210802013569024
You have to build the wall (to keep them in).
Then that is why the state must build confidence in it's population.
If it must become an authoritarian state to do so, then so be it.
Yes, and its confidence is completely decided by catering to the whims of the population, which is a losing battle.
You have to have an iron fist, and show the way, even if they do not like it.
Then that is what the government must do.
This is why I believe in a very strong government, because it will show the population the correct way, even if it is a rude awakening.
Personal interests like profit work against a strong government. Which is way it must move towards socialism, so no one can claim personal interests in profits. They must commit themselves to the state for full compliance and productivity.
It may not be clear now, but when shit hits the fan, it becomes the only way forward.
And then what happens when things calm down?
Things calm down when global capitalism is destroyed. The world population is educated. And then there is no more need for the state. But then the free market will not return, because man has learned to live without exploitation.
And why can't profit be beneficial to the state if done correctly?
Profit starts the cycle all over again.
There can be no profit. Ever.
Like I said, the free market I have in mind will be modified not to produce explotiation of the people, but to genuinely distribute not just essential resources, but also luxuries that people will get using currency.
Free market implies private ownership, which leads to competition, which leads to accrue of capital.
And to acquire resources, the population would use and do whatever they needed to, then would sell them to somewhere else where they may be perfected then sold again to be distributed.
All property must be publically owned.
How do you reasonably expect humans not to compete with each other?
Humans compete is other ways, not personal interest.
Like I said, the free market would also be used to distribute luxuries that a company would produce then sell.
Very similarly to our own, but would be modified not to produce corporations or monopolies that manipulate populations to their will.
There is a fundamental problem here. I guess we cannot continue.
Free market without capitalism is an oxymoron. It can only be used as a stop-gap in some instances of need.
And yes, I do mean that private property should and always should exist.
Let people compete for workers aristocracy position
I would argue otherwise, as I believe that if you removed the juden behind it who used the system to manipulate governments and people, and modified it so that they could never exist again, then you could have it work more for the benefit of humanity.
Nothing exist always even stars
?
I do mean that private property should and always should exist.
1. People become successful in free market
2. Work towards their own interests
3. Personal interest conflict with public interest
IT WAS THE JEWS
Really?
I don't know what you are getting at, even if you are shit posting.
@Deleted User Red Power means that technically, nothing lasts forever, not even private property. He's just being autistic.
@Chopin#0138 If you take notice almost all owners of extremely large corporations, tend to either fall under jewish decent, this combined with the fact that they often manipulate governments and populations to their will IE: george soros funding islamic terror groups and antifa.
Though I also believe that in the free market, people should be stopped when their interests in the company begin to overlap the interest of the state, and should be shut down.
>shut it down
(That or when they begin to manipulate or oppress people with their company)
I'm afraid you cannot have both. Either free market and personal interest wins, or the state and social interest wins. There is no inbetween because they are contradictory aims. But that's fine, you can pretend otherwise