We both loathe Marxists.
the right is united against the left, we'll settle the whole authoritarian vs libertarian thing later, but as it stands liberals and commies are too terrible and have too much influence an alliance of sorts is a necessity
What is your goal exactly?
>>82081>Libertarians hate being told what to do.>Fascist hate being told what to do by kikes.>Libertarians hate being taxed to support public projects they don't want>Fascits hate having their shit redistributed to niggers.>Libertarians hate going to war over interventionist bullshit>Fascists hate going to war for Israel>libertarians care about preserving freedom of speech>Fascists despise SJWs telling them what they can and can't say about niggers>Libertarians hate having "progressive" agendas shoved down their throats>Fascists care about preserving their traditions and opposing the spread of degeneracy
tl;dr: The Jews/commies are currently in/gaining control, and both factions oppose their kikery and the spread of social/economic Marxism.
Or at least, that's what I've gathered (I'm somewhere between the two).
To better understand how Nationalists/Fascists/National Socialists view coexisting with Libertarians. Also to understand why exactly this natural state of coexistence is the trend online. Is the hatred of communists all that binds us, and if the communists were crushed, would we be then at each other's throats?
I'm not sure myself, but being mutual reactionaries seems to be part of it.>if the communists were crushed
We've got quite a bit of physical removal to do before that happens. By the time we get done with that, circumstances will be very, very different; the few larpers that were only into it as reactionaries might even reconsider their ideologies.
>>82084>would we be then at each other's throats?
Only if you violate the NAP and force me to unleash my recreational nuclear weapons.
Because, not matter our differences and disagreements on how things should be run, we both still love our country and hate what (((those people))) are doing with it. For a IRL example, look at the Spanish Civil War; even after the right won, they never backstabbed each other as hard as the commies did to the anarchists during the war.
I feel like the ideological differences are mostly superficial and that the two sides can get along better than one might think. From what I understand the "socialism" in National Socialism is about the state being primarily concerned with the Nation as a whole, and while they may put concerns of the general population ahead of the concerns of wealthy individuals, they don't want to redistribute wealth or micromanage the economy in the way that regular Socialists do.
Practices like globalism and probably monopolies to some extent would likely not be allowed by a NatSoc government on the grounds that they are harmful to the nation, but I get the impression that beyond that NatSoc anons more or less believe in the same general free market principles that Libertarians and AnCaps do. I don't get the impression that NatSoc favors high taxes or large government bureaucracies either. If there is likely to be any conflict at all, it will probably be over things like drug use and sexual morals, and both of those issues could probably be resolved with reasonable compromise.
Libertarians have traditionally supported open borders on the assumption that it would lead to less restricted trade and therefore greater prosperity, but I think more and more of them are beginning to see the reality, that it just leads to a huge migration of essentially lawless savages into more prosperous countries, who have no interest in working or participating in the economy at all. The best way to have a free society that requires little or no supervision of individual citizens by the state is to have a nation state with clearly defined borders, where civilized people who share the same culture and values live and work without fear of crime or harassment.
The problem is that libertarians can't stand up to crazed leftist. I like libertarianism, but if the lefties don't play nice there is no point in promoting more freedoms. Plus some libertarians are just closet leftists.
>>82116>some libertarians are just closet leftists
can confirm. I have a friend who is basically an SJW who calls herself "libertarian," I get the impression a lot of leftists adopt the term or call themselves "independent" because joining a mainstream political party or ideology would chafe their snowflake sensibilities.
Because the issues we disagree on rarely come up, and when they do we're able to make concessions.>>82115>believe in the same general free market principles that Libertarians and AnCaps do.
I think this is where you are wrong. There key issues which both groups would disagree on; stimulus vs. laissez faire, job creation vs. recession/faith in business cycle, and so on. But I will agree as a fascist about unneeded regulation that punishes consumers, rather I'll leave that hands at the vocational corporatist system or have the government act when need be. There's for intervention and interaction within the fascist economy, and it can go whichever direction the populous wants. However, if a fascist disagrees on the importance of job creation and increasing purchasing power, then they are no fascist to me, and merely don the label. Which I fear many do.
'Cuz they incorporate the same ideas at different levels of expression. Libertarianism focuses on permitting the individual to achieve their highest expression, where Natsoc/fascism does so on a community/national level. In a sense, both trend toward the same goal just by slightly different means.
Shared objection to democracy, egalitarianism, central banking, multiculturalism, mass migration, neocon foreign policy, globalism, and the intellectual, academic, corporate, media, and political elites.
So this is what it truly means to be a "radical centrist": focusing right on the source of evil.
It was Kushner.
He seems like an all-around kike to me, desu…
I remember hearing he has ties to Soros, so he has to go.
Because libertarians and fascists think that people who disagree with them are wrong. Communists and liberals think that people who disagree with them are evil. You can be friends with someone you disagree with. You cannot be friends with someone who thinks you are evil.
Because both have common ground at the bottom right of the ideological quadrangle. And together occupy the 3 quads which are not where the bulk normies are at, which is the top left.
When the bulk rotate to the top right, the Libs will align with the Left against the Fascists.
Because Libertarians know that Fascism is reactionary and will crumble once it has overstayed its welcome while Communism is created out of a drive to enslave the world under a single system.
Fascism is compatible with many political systems, even utopic ones like in Starship troopers, while Communism has one goal and one goal only and is bound to centralized all powerfull and cruel government serving nobody but themselves and the "idea" of communism, hence if done right it can be enforced indefintely due to its evilness in nature (See 1984).
tl;dr: Fascism wants to serve the people while Communism serves itself as ideology.