awesome video...container bombs are the new bomb vest,,,wait and see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTrBDJGySm0

>i can post some memes to insult you if you wish it

I DO WISH

@slack

"Clone factories would advance faster than computers. "@Firefly 👌 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1W1aT8IsDKg

Welcome to /leftypol/ a low-moderation channel. Feel yourself free here.

Zionism is not the same as NatSoc. The content of Nationalism depends on the character of the people. Supremacy is not implied. For example Tibetan Nationalism is different than Jewish Nationalism. Zionism is definitely imperialist, racist, religious, bigoted according to the mythology of the jewish character. It is also possible for a NatSoc society to have the opposite characteristics of this. Primarily National Socialism is concerned with raising the consciousness of the people according to a specific mythological character. This can vary greatly.

What is the result?

No, that's Fascism. NatSoc can be pacifist.

The struggle is spiritual, not necessarily violent. Fascism is concerned with preservation. NatSoc may not care. It seems like a contradiction, but self-destruction can be apart of a mythology.

In this way the spiritually pure are immune from failure. NatSoc is devotional. Fascism is much more rigid in its victory conditions.

Zionism isn't Fascist either. It is simply Jewish Nationalism.

To me, this is why Lunacharsky's God-Building is so interesting. It attempts to create a mythology for the state just like NatSoc does. Lunacharsky however does not use religion as an ends it self, but dialectically as apart of the progress of humanity. In many ways this formation is superior to a National Socialist's approach, because it is more concerned reality with greater emphasis on the objective. It balances the utility and focus of Fascism with the strong values and vision of National Socialism.

It holds that the higher state of humanity has no need for religion but also provides a pathway to get there.

assuming the state is capable of religioncraft

which is always a mistake

You could say the same about the state running a fully socialist system.

I do so often.

It certainly hasn't happened yet.

But what if the state was fully capable?

lmfao

>what if the state was fully capable?

my fukin sides m8

have you ever met a bureaucrat?

they wouldnt know logos if they were run over by narcissus' rock

it could never actually happen

Answer the question. If the state was fully capable, what would you think of socialism then?

Stagnant.

It seems an ideology only supported by suppressing other ideologies.

I.E. this dialectic garbage

Does the truth suppress falsehood?

Logos arises, there's no other way to put it.

Do we? Are you making a naturalistic fallacy?

n=1

hahaa

if pedantry wasnt a feature we wouldnt be speaking in marxist terms

of course the socialists are grammar nazis, they're all english majors scared of being unable to produce in modern global capitalist society

so instead of sorting themselves out they push this gay ass marxist-leninist garbage through the colleges

Returning to my question. What would be bad about a fully capable socialist state?

Absolute cultural and social stagnation

Which would cause this state to be overthrown by a superior external entity,.