gonna try to get some rest

beatings also helps

yes

ill be leaving for a bit

i might join back

alright, @everyone gonna be posting a two part documentary about the Yugoslav Wars if you care to watch

check <#422430603401625600>

nice

capitalism though was the causation of its blossoming, into an ugly weed

@Deleted User Three Principles is too vague to be a strict doctrine, more a set of slogans like 'Equality, Liberty, and Fraternity' than anything else. The fact both Mao and Chiang Kai-shek claimed to be upholding and fighting for the Three Principles testifies to this argument.

Gadaffi is 4th Pos

which is based

deadass

Strasser advocated for class war in the favor of the proletariat, wanted to abolish most if not all private property from what I remember. Imo this puts Strasser closer to Marxism-Leninism, at least economically, than Hitler's program which was based off Italian Fascism which favored class collaboration and unity.

I don't believe in abolishing private property, but maybe land, like georgism

Imo private property should exist but it should server the interests of the polity as a whole.

Georgism is good too.

Well yeah, as long as it serves the family as well, for private stuff, I like distributism

My ideology is a mix of distributism, integralism, and feasible antiequilibrium market socialism

which allows for all forms of business to exsist, but gives guilds or syndicates most power, and breaks up large private companies

Yeah guilds/syndicates are great but without the state they'd just end up fighting amongst one another for capital or resources imo

This argument is what caused the syndicalists of the 19th and early 20th century to lose any chance of popularity

https://discord.gg/VFCeYa8

@Negan well yeah i meant national ones

When there's profit involved, nations cease to matter

Marxist interpretations of history are too narrow and heavily prone to confirmation bias

Confirmation bias is a problem in every interpretation.

And to not account cultural specifics is plain stupid

Some historians like those following the tradition of Leopold von Ranke strive for objectivity, utter and absolute objectivity is probably impossible though. However, the issue here is that not all schools of historical thought are subject to the same degree of confirmation bias. Marxists look at history already with a point they're trying to prove before even reading anything, rather than get to the truth, that is to find and twist historical sources to validate and justify their class conflict theory.

This isn't to say though that Marxist historians don't contribute to the field of history at all.

Class conflict as Marx described it was relevant only at the end of 19 century. It still exists , but changed significantly. Race is an issue relevant only to USA and RSA now.

Cultural conflict is relevant anywhere.

I don't really believe in class conflict because economics isn't the foundation of the world

Certainly a house, car and steady meals are an important part of a lemming's calculus

but people are fundamentally tribal and prefer people who look and act like them

I think Georgism was part of the KMT idelogy

Three Principles is only part of my ideology, Social Nationalism and Clerical Fascism the other parts

and EcoFascism