>>365971>What is so abusive about natsoc?
It's the exact same thing as Socialism. It's even in the damn name.>What's even the argument?
The argument is that things are not going to be "fixed", as is insisted, by removing Kikes from the equation. Corruption is still going to occur.>Are you assuming the government is just going to inexorably continue growing until freedom is dead?
Until people put a stop to it, yes.>Are you under the impression that's what happened in Nazi Germany? Go ahead, elaborate.
The invasion into Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Belgium, Russia, and the Baltics are the most blatant examples of this.>In what basis do you claim this is what natsoc's believe?
On the basis that said Socialists said that they learned and used said tactics from their Socialist enemies, and proceeded to apply them. Hitler outright stated it in Mein Kampf
.>In what basis do you claim that?
The fact that EVERY piece of Nazi literature goes on about how the "Aryans" never did anything wrong, and it's always "Da Juice" is the reason why we no longer have paradise.>Something that can only work assuming people will magically stop being self-interested assholes
No, free markets work because
of self-interest. I have a skill that someone else wants for a project, and they have an item that I want. I exchange my labor for said item, and he gets the completed product of my labor. Both of us win because we appealed to each other's self-interest.>Well, you seem to think that a group of individualists would magically stop being selfish and thus prevent the rise of corporations that would ultimately diminish their freedom.
It's not magical, it's the company outright telling people to get fucked if they don't like it. And, surprise, people don't take kindly to being told to go pound salt.>They could've done the same with the state.
Not when they're killed or locked up for expressing dissatisfaction with the state. Or constantly told how "evil" they are for not falling for every sob story that comes along.>Gun ownership was a thing in Nazi Germany.
Yeah, and "gun ownership" is a thing in West Taiwan: https://infogalactic.com/info/Firearm_ownership_law_in_China
Doesn't matter if it's restrictive, it does exist.>You just tossed whiteness, the patriarchy and kikes into the same group without justification.
Because it's the same story, just a different "villain".>One is a group that has historically fucked with western civilization and continues to do so.
Removing the Kikes from the equation, can you seriously not think of any of other group, in ALL
of history, that repeatedly fucked with European civilizations?>What is even your point? Do I have to choose between kikes and them?
The point is that there's ALWAYS
someone tying to skin you alive. Therefore, following the logic of Socialists, something must "always" be done because, God forbid, there be another solution that exists that doesn't come from the government.>If you think organizing against jewry is playing into their game
How are you organizing? Are you refusing to play their games and making it possible for you to exit/survive the system if there's a collapse, or are you doing the exact same thing they do (Seeking to subvert the system and making it discriminatory against them)?>>365981>He's just here to get attention and piss people off.
You are the ones who lost your minds when someone expressed that Socialism and Socialism are the same thing.>If he was genuine, he'd make his case in a thread where it's at least somewhat relevant
were the ones who derailed the thread to center it all upon my post.>>365985
Then, in case you missed, here's the reason why I'm even asking the question. The guy is declaring that we need a "Socialist Revolution" for the purposes of "community solidarity, education, family values, national pride and encouragement". The only problem is that NONE
of this requires the government to get involved in order to accomplish it. If he cares so much about community solidarity, then why doesn't he talk to people in his own community or become interested in activities that other people are doing? If he cares so much about education, then why doesn't he take it upon himself to help people who are looking for better methods of education? If he cares so much about family values, does he actually spend time with his family and try to build a connection with them? If he cares so much about national pride and encouragement, does he actually take the time trying showing people the pride that he for in his country and encouraging people to be proud of where they live?
But, then again, actually doing any of this yourself defeats the entire purpose of Socialism, in any and all forms, because it shows that the government is not the solution.