Capitalism and socialism are failed ideologies that both inevitably end with the over centralization of power and capital. Capitalism eventually ends with most of the wealth and power concentrated in the hands of a few wealthy corporate cocksuckers and socialism ends with power concentrated in the hands of a few bureaucrat faggots. Distributism is the only system that provides a viable alternative that doesn't end in the centralization of power. Distributism is an economic system where the means of production are as widely distributed as possible. This decentralization of production makes tyranny much more difficult as many small enterprises are more difficult to control than a few large ones. Have you taken the distributist pill /mlpol/?
/mlpol/ - My Little Politics
Archived thread
File (): FFF07AB1F3EBD1150B1F98951335EA00-73182.png (71.5 KB, 1649x1061, Triangle_of_economic_systems.png)
File (): C5781935AA933FCD7C479B557A6A28E1-378522.png (369.7 KB, 1024x615, twilight_took_the_red_pill__by_dervonnebenaan-d7abqu7.png)
File (): CFA8FA04CEA14CC4F351D0D621850394-2023548.png (1.9 MB, 1546x1931, unknown_4_21.png)
>>362835
>Capitalism eventually ends with most of the wealth and power concentrated in the hands of a few wealthy corporate
Corporatism is a fascist economic system. But lately corporatism and capitalism have been equated.
Socialism (and communism) still provides for a distribution system. Simply put, everything is only good in theory.
>Capitalism eventually ends with most of the wealth and power concentrated in the hands of a few wealthy corporate
Corporatism is a fascist economic system. But lately corporatism and capitalism have been equated.
Socialism (and communism) still provides for a distribution system. Simply put, everything is only good in theory.
>>362874
>Corporatism is a fascist economic system
Not according to the original definition of fascism which is any government the jews can't control, jews also call them "authoritarian regimes".
>Corporatism is a fascist economic system
Not according to the original definition of fascism which is any government the jews can't control, jews also call them "authoritarian regimes".
>>362835
Okay I'll bite, but how does this work? Any form of planned economy requires some sort of centralized power to ensure that everything is distributed correctly, so it seems like this system is defeating itself right out of the gate. In fact I'll go a step further and say that from how you've described it, this is basically a less extreme form of communism, and is likely to end just as badly for the same reasons.
Okay I'll bite, but how does this work? Any form of planned economy requires some sort of centralized power to ensure that everything is distributed correctly, so it seems like this system is defeating itself right out of the gate. In fact I'll go a step further and say that from how you've described it, this is basically a less extreme form of communism, and is likely to end just as badly for the same reasons.
>>362874
>Socialism (and communism) still provides for a distribution system.
Socialism and communism want to abolish private property, distributism wants to make as many people into property owners as possible.
>>362877
>Are you actually talking about syndicalism?
No, syndicalism wants labor unions to control the means of production. Under distributism people would actually own their property.
>>362878
>Okay I'll bite, but how does this work?
With wealth caps, small business subsidies, cottage scale industry, and property ownership as a human right.
>Any form of planned economy requires some sort of centralized power to ensure that everything is distributed correctly, so it seems like this system is defeating itself right out of the gate.
The economy would not be planned. The goal would be to prevent the centralization of the economy.
>this is basically a less extreme form of communism
There is no private property or business ownership under communism. Distributism encourages both.
>Socialism (and communism) still provides for a distribution system.
Socialism and communism want to abolish private property, distributism wants to make as many people into property owners as possible.
>>362877
>Are you actually talking about syndicalism?
No, syndicalism wants labor unions to control the means of production. Under distributism people would actually own their property.
>>362878
>Okay I'll bite, but how does this work?
With wealth caps, small business subsidies, cottage scale industry, and property ownership as a human right.
>Any form of planned economy requires some sort of centralized power to ensure that everything is distributed correctly, so it seems like this system is defeating itself right out of the gate.
The economy would not be planned. The goal would be to prevent the centralization of the economy.
>this is basically a less extreme form of communism
There is no private property or business ownership under communism. Distributism encourages both.
>>362894
>distributism wants to make as many people into property owners as possible
How? What's to prevent greedy people from consolidating property? Without state intervention (socialism, to an extent) to distribute said property, we'd just be back where we started.
>people would actually own their property
Enforced by what? What prevents the wealthy from buying up land and consolidating means of production for social control?
>With wealth caps
>small business subsidies
These are all forms of socialism, although not necessarily bad. I, for one, am in favor of progressive taxes that act like wealth caps, so if you're a hundred-billionaire gigajew you can pay more than some working class poorfag.
>property ownership as a human right
This sounds like a subversive "positive right", and I disagree with the terminology because I feel like it waters down what the concept of a human right is, but I vaguely agree with the principle.
>cottage scale industry
Wouldn't work for certain industries, like airliner manufacturing, steel production, power generation, and various other capital-intensive, vertically integrated industries.
>The economy would not be planned.
Then how are you enforcing all of the above things? Without regulation and enforcement, what's to stop people from Jews from buying up everything? What's to bring about this mass redistribution of wealth?
>distributism wants to make as many people into property owners as possible
How? What's to prevent greedy people from consolidating property? Without state intervention (socialism, to an extent) to distribute said property, we'd just be back where we started.
>people would actually own their property
Enforced by what? What prevents the wealthy from buying up land and consolidating means of production for social control?
>With wealth caps
>small business subsidies
These are all forms of socialism, although not necessarily bad. I, for one, am in favor of progressive taxes that act like wealth caps, so if you're a hundred-billionaire gigajew you can pay more than some working class poorfag.
>property ownership as a human right
This sounds like a subversive "positive right", and I disagree with the terminology because I feel like it waters down what the concept of a human right is, but I vaguely agree with the principle.
>cottage scale industry
Wouldn't work for certain industries, like airliner manufacturing, steel production, power generation, and various other capital-intensive, vertically integrated industries.
>The economy would not be planned.
Then how are you enforcing all of the above things? Without regulation and enforcement, what's to stop people from Jews from buying up everything? What's to bring about this mass redistribution of wealth?
>>362876
>the original definition of fascism which is any government the jews can't control
No it wasn't.
Fascism is a political ideology that emerged due to the threat of communism onset by the failures of capitalism in Europe, presented as a middle ground ideology and a third option between the two.
One of the main economic aspects of fascism is heavy use of corporatism: where industry remains private, but the government incorporates it into its causes, be it through direct regulation or through nationalist social ideology pressing conformance. In addition to hard power over private industry, the militancy and nationalism basically enables the government to effectively apply the bully pulpit to sectors of the economy to impose soft power.
>the original definition of fascism which is any government the jews can't control
No it wasn't.
Fascism is a political ideology that emerged due to the threat of communism onset by the failures of capitalism in Europe, presented as a middle ground ideology and a third option between the two.
One of the main economic aspects of fascism is heavy use of corporatism: where industry remains private, but the government incorporates it into its causes, be it through direct regulation or through nationalist social ideology pressing conformance. In addition to hard power over private industry, the militancy and nationalism basically enables the government to effectively apply the bully pulpit to sectors of the economy to impose soft power.
>>362835
>Distributism is an economic system where the means of production are as widely distributed as possible.
How would you do this? Would literally every person get their own government-mandated plot of land and shares in factory industry once they come of age?
>Distributism is an economic system where the means of production are as widely distributed as possible.
How would you do this? Would literally every person get their own government-mandated plot of land and shares in factory industry once they come of age?
dont be an autist and identify yourself with economic labels like "distributist". the difference between fascism and national socialism was that Hitler had more respect for religious and human values where Mussolini had more respect for state interventionism. the free market works fine, just abolish usury and income tax
>>362897
>How? What's to prevent greedy people from consolidating property? Without state intervention (socialism, to an extent) to distribute said property, we'd just be back where we started.
>Enforced by what? What prevents the wealthy from buying up land and consolidating means of production for social control?
There would be wealth and land caps. Yes this would involve use of the state.
>These are all forms of socialism
Socialism is the state ownership of the means of production. Socialism is not "when the government does stuff."
>Wouldn't work for certain industries, like airliner manufacturing, steel production, power generation, and various other capital-intensive, vertically integrated industries.
For those industries co-ops would be encouraged and subsidized.
>Then how are you enforcing all of the above things? Without regulation and enforcement, what's to stop people from Jews from buying up everything?
The state.
>What's to bring about this mass redistribution of wealth?
Minecraft
>>362899
How would you do this? Would literally every person get their own government-mandated plot of land and shares in factory industry once they come of age?
Probably a small house not a plot of land, but yes. Think 3d printers and a house not 3 acres and a cow.
>How? What's to prevent greedy people from consolidating property? Without state intervention (socialism, to an extent) to distribute said property, we'd just be back where we started.
>Enforced by what? What prevents the wealthy from buying up land and consolidating means of production for social control?
There would be wealth and land caps. Yes this would involve use of the state.
>These are all forms of socialism
Socialism is the state ownership of the means of production. Socialism is not "when the government does stuff."
>Wouldn't work for certain industries, like airliner manufacturing, steel production, power generation, and various other capital-intensive, vertically integrated industries.
For those industries co-ops would be encouraged and subsidized.
>Then how are you enforcing all of the above things? Without regulation and enforcement, what's to stop people from Jews from buying up everything?
The state.
>What's to bring about this mass redistribution of wealth?
Minecraft
>>362899
How would you do this? Would literally every person get their own government-mandated plot of land and shares in factory industry once they come of age?
Probably a small house not a plot of land, but yes. Think 3d printers and a house not 3 acres and a cow.
>>362894
>The economy would not be planned. The goal would be to prevent the centralization of the economy.
Right, but the issue I'm getting at is how exactly do you avoid centralization? There would need to be some kind of centralized control mechanism for this to work, particularly since you're suggesting wealth caps on large companies and subsidies for smaller ones. This whole idea would require a bureaucratic, centralized government to oversee the distribution of the economy. What exactly would prevent it from turning into the same kind of bloated, intrusive, authoritarian nanny state we have currently?
>The economy would not be planned. The goal would be to prevent the centralization of the economy.
Right, but the issue I'm getting at is how exactly do you avoid centralization? There would need to be some kind of centralized control mechanism for this to work, particularly since you're suggesting wealth caps on large companies and subsidies for smaller ones. This whole idea would require a bureaucratic, centralized government to oversee the distribution of the economy. What exactly would prevent it from turning into the same kind of bloated, intrusive, authoritarian nanny state we have currently?
>>362924
>Right, but the issue I'm getting at is how exactly do you avoid centralization?
By making people less dependent on government and mega corporations.
>There would need to be some kind of centralized control mechanism for this to work, particularly since you're suggesting wealth caps on large companies and subsidies for smaller ones. This whole idea would require a bureaucratic, centralized government to oversee the distribution of the economy.
It would require a government sure, but I don't see why that government would have to be heavily centralized. The government just has to prevent wealth hoarding and megacorporations from springing up.
>What exactly would prevent it from turning into the same kind of bloated, intrusive, authoritarian nanny state we have currently?
Distributism is an economic system not a form of government, distributism could function under an authoritarian state or more liberal state. But I think it would be difficult to maintain strict control of a population that can provide for themselves. Our government's power comes from the fact that so many people are dependent on them.
>Right, but the issue I'm getting at is how exactly do you avoid centralization?
By making people less dependent on government and mega corporations.
>There would need to be some kind of centralized control mechanism for this to work, particularly since you're suggesting wealth caps on large companies and subsidies for smaller ones. This whole idea would require a bureaucratic, centralized government to oversee the distribution of the economy.
It would require a government sure, but I don't see why that government would have to be heavily centralized. The government just has to prevent wealth hoarding and megacorporations from springing up.
>What exactly would prevent it from turning into the same kind of bloated, intrusive, authoritarian nanny state we have currently?
Distributism is an economic system not a form of government, distributism could function under an authoritarian state or more liberal state. But I think it would be difficult to maintain strict control of a population that can provide for themselves. Our government's power comes from the fact that so many people are dependent on them.
>>362948
>Enjoy your stagnate wages and sky high housing costs
Not quite. The equilibrium depends on a careful regulation.
While the libertarian model gives free reign to the jew, the commie model is also bad because is actually a monopoly.
>Enjoy your stagnate wages and sky high housing costs
Not quite. The equilibrium depends on a careful regulation.
While the libertarian model gives free reign to the jew, the commie model is also bad because is actually a monopoly.
>>362943
>It would require a government sure, but I don't see why that government would have to be heavily centralized.
A government capable of distributing land and resources on such a scale would need centralization.
>It would require a government sure, but I don't see why that government would have to be heavily centralized.
A government capable of distributing land and resources on such a scale would need centralization.
>>362995
Children and elders are weak, none of them qualify for sterilization. Stupid, and criminal individuals yes.
Children and elders are weak, none of them qualify for sterilization. Stupid, and criminal individuals yes.
>>362995
>>363025
Imo, I've yet to see any modern institution qualified to say who counts as 'weak'. The American eugenics movement was full of sickly inbred assholes using pseudoscience and corruption to excuse themselves from sterilization by saying simply being wealthy meant they were 'successful' and have poor white people sterilized for having mental health problems onset by the shitty society that they created. Of course, Jews evaded it entirely.
The government shouldn't have a day in how people fuck or build families. Just remove all the kikes and niggers, and then let people sort themselves out.
>>363025
Imo, I've yet to see any modern institution qualified to say who counts as 'weak'. The American eugenics movement was full of sickly inbred assholes using pseudoscience and corruption to excuse themselves from sterilization by saying simply being wealthy meant they were 'successful' and have poor white people sterilized for having mental health problems onset by the shitty society that they created. Of course, Jews evaded it entirely.
The government shouldn't have a day in how people fuck or build families. Just remove all the kikes and niggers, and then let people sort themselves out.
>>363033
Governments claim authority on the population by exercising a monopoly on violence. Said in other words, their authority is based on State terrorism. In this case, people are afraid of the employees.
On the other hand, an administration is subordinated to the population's will and its employees are afraid of their sovereign masters.
Governments claim authority on the population by exercising a monopoly on violence. Said in other words, their authority is based on State terrorism. In this case, people are afraid of the employees.
On the other hand, an administration is subordinated to the population's will and its employees are afraid of their sovereign masters.
>>362835
I just believe in meritocracy and call it a day. Literally be the gud-est at your job and no one will question you.
To be fair, I understand what you're trying to argue. I will also say that giving everyone every means pretty much results in capitalism anyway, cuz only a few people actually know how to use the means they are given, and they will take it off your incompetent hands.
I just believe in meritocracy and call it a day. Literally be the gud-est at your job and no one will question you.
To be fair, I understand what you're trying to argue. I will also say that giving everyone every means pretty much results in capitalism anyway, cuz only a few people actually know how to use the means they are given, and they will take it off your incompetent hands.
>>363035
That is not the definition of either word. You're drawing lines in the sand with no other meaning than your opinion.
That is not the definition of either word. You're drawing lines in the sand with no other meaning than your opinion.
>>363965
3d printers, CNC machines, and small scale foundries are all pretty easy to use if you aren't retarded.
3d printers, CNC machines, and small scale foundries are all pretty easy to use if you aren't retarded.
>>363977
>3d printers
You need to teach actual stupid people what a STL file is to begin with.
>CNC machines
Even worst than above. You have to teach actual imbecile people what coordinates and vectors are.
>small scale foundries
KEK
Add to all of the above how not to burn the shop and not getting poisoned by fumes.
>3d printers
You need to teach actual stupid people what a STL file is to begin with.
>CNC machines
Even worst than above. You have to teach actual imbecile people what coordinates and vectors are.
>small scale foundries
KEK
Add to all of the above how not to burn the shop and not getting poisoned by fumes.
>>363978
>You need to teach actual stupid people
>You have to teach actual imbecile people
so long as you AREN'T RETARDED read the post again.
>You need to teach actual stupid people
>You have to teach actual imbecile people
so long as you AREN'T RETARDED read the post again.
File (): 405F9B7F1B793876CCF6D8371155A217-422555.png (412.7 KB, 598x603, Faschismus-NationalSozialismus.png)
>>362904
>the difference between fascism and national socialism was that Hitler had more respect for religious and human values where Mussolini had more respect for state interventionism
Kinda, that's why Mussolini saw the state as an "End in itself", but Hitler saw it as an "Means to an end".
>the difference between fascism and national socialism was that Hitler had more respect for religious and human values where Mussolini had more respect for state interventionism
Kinda, that's why Mussolini saw the state as an "End in itself", but Hitler saw it as an "Means to an end".
38 replies | 4 files | 18 UUIDs | Archived