Why does everyone wank over the loser factions of the Spanish Civil War?

Why does everyone wank over the losers of the American Civil War?

racist commies shitting on Moroccans again, ironic people call Falange racist yet they were all about unity of Spain and everyone in it.

Franco revitalized Spain, however depressed it is today it was significantly worse before and significantly better under Franco

same goes for Portugal though the Americans and Capitalists stripped it of its core territories overseas.

It's like leftists really don't have principles and rather just go back and forth according to the context and audience, and that they really have ulterior motives (revenge, envy, libido, etc.).

Lmao no

Is it better if it was Spanish rape squads?

Nowhere did they poster imply it was somehow worse because they were Moroccans.
What he implied was that conquering your nation with foreign forces is pretty fucked up for someone claiming "nationalism".

Filthy subhumans and daeshlike brigades, Franco did a good job removing these subhumans, but today they are ruling spain, which is shame. Spaniards never learn.

>today they are ruling spain,
?

>Spain was slightly not as economically successful because of Franco's fascism
Every socialist experiment was an economic catastrophe
>Economy is not everything!

Because they were cool.

>>Spain was slightly not as economically successful because of Franco's fascism
but it was successful?
though he did abandon his distaste for capitalism it was an economic miracle after the abject failure that was Spain prior.
Spain today has a very high quality of life, and unemployment was far lower under Franco

Slaves preaching their slave mentality.
and Communism is the biggest one of all.

I know I was impersonating a lying shitlib.

Anarchism is quite literally the exact opposite of slave mentality.

>implying there are non-lying shitlibs

Actually it is and you don't have a clue about the concept. Slave mentality means trying to ruin it for everybody else because you can't succeed, which is socialism and anarchism in a nutshell.

>implying Spain should exist
It's a meme country like Belgium

>hurr I like their propaganda
you do realize you are no different from those spooked by Franco's propaganda

W E W L A D

Except by installing anarchism you have succeeded, you are free, you have no masters and as such are no longer a slave.

You reject the authority of others over you, that is not the mentality of a slave. Accepting the claim that others are better and deserve to rule you, is bootlicking at its finest.

> you don't have a clue about the concept
If you're taking Nietzsche's concepts then it's usually called slave "morality" and not "mentality".

Yeah but I like this propaganda better.

it is a slave mentality, the desire of all slaves is to be "free" as if freedom will bring meaning to their empty lives.
Masters are creators of morality; slaves respond to master-morality with their slave morality. Unlike master morality which is sentiment, slave morality is based on re-sentiment; devaluing that which the master values and the slave does not have. As master morality originates in the strong, slave morality originates in the weak. Because slave morality is a reaction to oppression, it vilifies its oppressors. Slave morality is the inverse of master morality. As such, it is characterized by pessimism and cynicism. Slave morality is created in opposition to what master morality values as 'good'.
maybe some forms of Anarchism value the creators and aristocrats of the soul, but certainly not Anarcho-Communists who's only goal in life is to be an autonomous herd of sheep with no Shepard.

>Except by installing anarchism you have succeeded
Until even the smallest state near you comes and enslaves you because you have surrendered your centralized means of colecting taxes and spending on defense.
>You reject the authority
Anarchist don't. You confuse power and authority.
>If you're taking Nietzsche's concepts then it's usually called slave "morality" and not "mentality".
I suppose I was. But still.

Whiter.

>mfw I not only win the war, but I force the filthy communists and anarchists to rebuild the churches they destroyed.

I wonder if some of them converted. Dostoyevsky was an edgy socialist but he became a Christian monarchist in prison.

Some of them converted and were saved, I assume.

Many refused, no doubt, and are now writhing in hell with the rest of their "comrades" in true, infernal, equality.

>it is a slave mentality, the desire of all slaves is to be "free" as if freedom will bring meaning to their empty lives.
This is the great thing about freedom, it has no purpose or meaning. Just as life has no purpose or meaning.

But you are right, what Nietzsche would call slave morality does vilify its oppressors. And this is a good thing. When there's a boot on your neck you don't kiss it, you get rid of it. No matter how much "meaning" it brings or morality it shackles you with it is still fundamentally an obstacle to be removed. Just as always happened to the ruling class in all of history, they are removed with all their sentimentality and values with them.

And this is the way Nietzsche saw it would go, all the further towards nihilism and the total destruction of all prior values. And I say good riddance.

>Until even the smallest state near you comes and enslaves you because you have surrendered your centralized means of colecting taxes and spending on defense.
Well yeah, but this is getting into heavy what-iffery now.

>Anarchist don't. You confuse power and authority.
As I said in the rest of that sentence "you reject the authority of others to rule over you". Which anarchists do. The authority implied by ruling over someone (such as a state) is different to the justified authority of say being a doctor.

If I lived in Anarchist Catalonia I'd immediately move to America and try to make it big on the stock market. What would you do? Die for Caballero?

>implying Nietzsche was a nihilist
all it would lead to is a bigger heard of sheep ripe for the next Nomad who comes along to take over and create his own values to enforce on the herd.

idk I've never lived in anarchist Catalonia.

That's not what I was saying at all, I was saying Nietzsche opposed nihilism and as he feared nihilism has triumphed (as far as Nietzsche would be concerned anyway).

>all it would lead to is a bigger heard of sheep ripe for the next Nomad who comes along to take over and create his own values to enforce on the herd.
Yes, which is why the herd must be strong enough to resist any new masters.

a herd can never be strong, its nature as a herd means its always susceptible to domination.

>Yes, which is why the herd must be strong enough to resist any new masters.

Except it can, there are herds of wild animals since it's not exclusively applied to domesticated livestock.

Not to mention it's a metaphor anyway.

>Not to mention it's a metaphor anyway.
its not a metaphor, the herd mentality of societies leads to the collective degeneration of man into merely a utilitarian entiry. the innate jelousy and weakness of the slave masses leads to its own downfall and inevitable takeover by more powerful outsiders, either ideological outsiders who rise up above the herd, our "nomads" riding in to put the collective down. not that the mentality of the oppressor is not dangerous, but the mentality of the mass herd is far more destructive. all the herd has is a lust for revenge against the powerful and this leads to a society of mediocre minds weak and fragile against a powerful storm.

>Bombastic prose
>No argument
I see Nietzschean philosophy has not changed in almost 200 years.

whats the argument that a headless throng of slaves run by bureaucrats is inherently better?
not like every example of it hasn't failed tremendously, ESPECIALLY in the case of Spain.

>argument
All political ideologies are dictated by an underlying will, be it the will to impress sense, order, structure, meaning and form upon reality or the will to level and destroy so as to return to the archetypal mother's womb where all pain and struggle cease, or something in between. Arguments are mere rationalizations.

what is your argument for this?

>argument
All political ideologies are dictated...

You're forgetting about that giant cross he made them build

But I find both sides interesting.

I also find both sides equally shitty. Literally a no-win situation for Spain. At least I got a game out of it.

Makes my heart skip a beat.

t. greedy catalan kike

Communism=Bad
Fascism=Good
youtube.com/watch?v=GLs-AyeRlqM

>Franco
>Fascist

Nice meme, faggot.

Because Republican Spain would have been a peaceful quasi-leftist shithole rather then a violent reactionary one that happily slaughtered dissidents were it not for Franco.

So how can you be sure they were cool when you never lived in anarchist Catalonia?

They spent years suppressing the rights of Catholics before the war. You know, with the burning of churches and assassinations of priests.

More likely it would have been a USSR satellite state that happily slaughtered dissidents. After getting rid of the anarchists and non-stalinist commies of course.
After all, there's nothing that the left hates more than other leftists that ever so slightly stray from the true path.

>democrats
>liberals
???

true beauty

honestly, im sold. Franco is a 10/10 imo

Rooting for the underdog

Same reason yurupeeans that have fuck all to do with the south root for the confederacy...even if they don't particularly hate nigs.

Because it's edgier to call Franco "cool" & the people who frame public discourse prefer people who

>Spain. Exists due to conquest and union of crowns
>Belgium. Exists due to anglo wanting a beach on the mainland
Explain yourself

Daily reminder that the true losers of the war were the national syndicalists.

>fascism doesn't base its entire ideological structure on the notion of liberating The Humble Worker.
excelente post capo

>Implying the USSR could actually project it's authority all the way to Spain.

lol, at worst they would have been closer to Titoist.

What are you talking about? Anything short of radical egoism dehumanizes people to some extent or another by rendering them components of some collective or another. Fascism just reduces human beings to "citizens" of some arbitrary nation-state.

>Implying the USSR could actually project it's authority all the way to Spain.
What is Cuba?

>Republican Spain
>PEACEFUL

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

The only reasons herds work in the animal kingdom is because instinctively herd mentality is ingrained in them. Each animal in a herd from birth knows what they must do to survive: go with the herd. They have no complex tasks to complete and they don't require a constant line of communication.

Human civilization requires heavily on coordination and communication. And because of the complexity of technology, industry, and society most people have specialized roles unlike a herd. To coordinate these specialized people, resolve communication issues, and ultimately oversee the completion of a task there must be leader. However the more complex these tasks get, in other words the more advanced the technology, the more leaders you need to coordinate more specialized people. Back then in the feudal ages there wasn't an overreaching government like we have today, this is mostly because in order to achieve the average standard of living at the time they didn't need that many specialized peoples. Therefore the government was small because at the time that was all they needed to have.

Here's some basic rules:

More people = More need for coordination through communication = More administration

The only possible way to achieving the communist vision of herd independent hierarchies is to change the biology of humanity to have unlimited and instant communication with one another.

However given the current technological and moral constraints that isn't an option in the foreseeable future.

If we cannot change the very foundation of communication then we're stuck doing what we've always done and increase efforts to make administration more transparent, efficient, and purer. And have leaders that are intelligent, compassionate, and charismatic.

Rather than completely removing hierarchies, we should work to improve them.

(1/2)

Also rather than having the master morality of aristocrats/the bourgeois and the slave morality of the proletariat, there needs to be a new morality that encompasses an entire nation: a morality that views that giving/gaining strength as good, and losing/taking away strength as bad. A morality that encourages providing a viable and realistic path to individually obtainable financial security, education, and independence to every individual in a nation. All achieved through proper government planning and work.

The rich who take the strength away from the weak will be vilified, those who do not will be respected, and those who give strength to the weak will be commended.

(2/2)

Because muh granpa told them spaniard children how evil was Franco by banning their fedoras.

>Implying Stalin and the ethernal anglo would not push them to war with Mussolini's Italy

>Falange Spain wasn't peaceful

as I recall there were no wars and a smooth transition of power after his death.
if a few commies got free helicopter rides then what's the issue?

It's almost like an ideology's worth should be based on the net increase of happiness it gives to the most amount of people, rather than the subjective emasculation a human experiences.