What are your argument's against National Socialism Veeky Forums?

destroyed europe

Here it comes boys
the liberal-jewish part of Veeky Forums!

Judeohitlerism had nothing to do with real National socialism aka Strasserism.

You seem to be quite stupid my friend seeing how you don't make any distinction between authentic, real national socialism and "nazism" which is a zionist coined word you fucking idiot.

>the nazis literally started WWII and made lots of bussinessmen proft from it

Dude Arbeit mach Frei lmao

It asserts the notion that Europeans have a right to exist, which is wrong and evil. Thank god we liberated Europe back then, we'd never have the diverse immigration we have now if we didn't remove that evil from Europe by bombing it all flat, and handing a third of the entire world to communism.

>Unironically posting Nazi propaganda in 2017

aka "Im a fucking good for nothing socialist swine"
Hitler took the concept and made it better.

it's the best ideology out there but most of the people who advocate for it are mentally handicapped racists and war hawks who betray the reasonable ones whenever they reach power and sell out the people in favor of their shitty racist/imperial ambitions

>Unironically still not being awake to the jewish question in 2017

wrong
Britain declared war on Germany first thus starting the whole debacle on the west
Your warhawk Churchill won't hide forever kike

Is selling Germany to American Jews and completely ruining industry´s capability of participating in war "making something better"?

Do Americans still think Churchill was prime minister in 1939?

not an argument

Are we talking about the same country?

>DAH JEWZ!

wow, really articulate. Way to prove me wrong about nothing but retarded edgy teenagers believing in this shit

>they arent TRUE national socialist!

just stop, you have the same stupid boring and shallow beliefs as them, you just dont like the nazi punk image. And thats what its all about anyway, image.

national capitalism is completely incoherent as an ideology. nationalism's all about doing what's best for the nation instead of arbitrary special interests or overstretching resources by pretending to embody global justice, but national capitalists advocate continuing to allow the nation's people to suffer for the sake of useless fucks like capitalists.

capitalism is inherently a liberal, globalist, sociopathic ideology; you can't have both it and nationalism in the same place

Do you retards actually think that anyone that isn't a neonazi is a jew? Do you think 99% of the world are jews?

Do libcuck still think churchill wasn't the one who advocated for war in may of 1940?
I said britain first but seeing how they just wanted out of the war after Dunkirk we can safely say thousands of brits died because of your favourite warhawk. If say halifax became prime minister we could be living in a better world.

Instead of responding with "lel neonazi stormfags don't even understand the ideology therefore there is no ideology" why doesn't someone try to rebut this

>just stop, you have the same stupid boring and shallow beliefs as them, you just dont like the nazi punk image. And thats what its all about anyway, image.

Way to prove my point, idiot libcuck

Congratulations on proving that fascists are dumb as hell.
>following an ideology where you subject yourself to collectivism and one authoritarian person
Fascists are beta manlets who can't look after themselves and need a stong bull who dictates their everyday life because they can't handle self-responsibility. They are the epitome of cucks.

It's like a retarded and weak variation of communism.

And Communism sucks enough on itself.

>what is Standard Oil Co. Inc. - IG Farben coopertion
>what is Jewish financial support of NSDAP
>what is Hitler´s Zionism

>Britain declared war on Germany

yeah, After they invaded Poland. Way to always conveniently forget this

>Your warhawk Churchill won't hide forever kike

It was Neville Chamberlain who did it since he was the PM at the time. Way to prove once again that stormfags are historically illiterate idiots spouting memes.

the people posting that sort of shit are the racists and war hawks I mention in it's such a shame that those fucks mean that everyone else forgets to consider

>>what is Hitler´s Zionism

a meme idiots (you) make up because you not only have no idea about Hitler, but not even an inkling of what zionism is.

I didn't remember strasserists acting this stupid in other threads.

>wanting to create Jewish state isnt Zionism

>Not knowing that it was an fbi underocver agent who advocated that zionist friendship the most back in 1930's

Btw Hitler himself confirmed that he got influenced by the kikes, in Mein Kampf he wrote how "Young, well educated volunteers" learned him his political stances, those people were 60% Jewish in List´s regiment.
Iam Fascist

Hitler didnt want to do that. Thanks, once again, for proving my point that you guys have no idea what the fuck you are talking about

Soooo a Monarchy?

Because it's a hillariously dumb "argument".

>Many states say they exist for the betterment of it's citizens, but only a handful of them are
>Betterment is a relative term
>The moral justification of state is to enforce morals and thus ensure order

>talk shit about nazis and fascists
>"fucking Jews get out reeee"
Why are nazis and fascists so easily triggered and why is everything Jewish?

Thats not really unique to national socialism

HAHAH I CALLED HIM A STORMFAG ONCE AGAIN HAHAHAH AM I A GOOD GOY ALREADY MASTER SHEKELMEINSTER?
Why didn't he declared war on the soviets aswell then? hm? Way to conveniently forget this.

>repeat stormfront propaganda
>get this triggered when someone call you a stormfag

>stop pointing out how this is just some failed abortion of reactionary bullshit by a bunch of stupid and angry teenagers and respond to this meaningless rhetoric as if it means anything!

you guys really are the most faggy "muh feels" oriented people ever.

>fbi
Interesting, i thought that "Federal" in its name has something to do with that it operates on US soil, i didnt knew FBA was CIA in denial.
Get better memes for your argument kike

>leaving out the argument part of the rebuttal.
k

>give me undeniable proofs that eating feces is wrong and give me only sources that only I deem credible

>get proven wrong

>get triggered

If you dont want to be called a stormfag, then stop repeating stormfag lies. Lies that you KNOW are lies, you pathological dipshit.

Why do stormfags always come back with "le Jew" argument when they're being called out?

Socialism assumes all people are fair and kind. This is why it fails.

Capitalism "capitalizes" on the fact they arnt. Thats why socialism sucks in comparison

>I promise its a lie goy!

Because I'm not the person you were arguing with. I've read this discussion a million times and I'm not getting involved in trying to get information through a thick stormfag skull again.

>le jews meme
Really.

>Many states say they exist for the betterment of it's citizens, but only a handful of them are
That's not a failure of the concept.
>Betterment is a relative term
Up is a relative term, that doesn't mean anything.
>The moral justification of state is to enforce morals and thus ensure order
Are you implying that other states don't enforce the morals of a culture?

It stands in opposition to globalism which runs rampant through the world today.

...

>getting btfo
>running away

...

It is. Notice how ALL you have to fall back on is "muh jews!"

lol you got proven wrong and have nothing to say. Go back to jerking off to SS march videos you power fantasy child. How fucking stupid do you have to be to not realize it was Chamberlain who was the PM? Or that it was Chamberlain who declared war on Germany? Or that Germany invaded Poland on September 1?

youtube.com/watch?v=rtJ_zbz1NyY

See how the first post doesn't have a (you) but the second does? Now back to your echochamber.

With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilised men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilised societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.

nice argument brainlet

The aid which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as part of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered, in the manner previously indicated, more tender and more widely diffused. Nor could we check our sympathy, if so urged by hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature. The surgeon may harden himself whilst performing an operation, for he knows that he is acting for the good of his patient; but if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with a certain and great present evil. Hence we must bear without complaining the undoubtedly bad effects of the weak surviving and propagating their kind; but there appears to be at least one check in steady action, namely the weaker and inferior members of society not marrying so freely as the sound; and this check might be indefinitely increased, though this is more to be hoped for than expected, by the weak in body or mind refraining from marriage.

Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man

Yes, in a manner of speaking. if you haven't noticed the overlap between fascist movements and reactionaries/monarchists you're oblivious.

That said, people absolutely have the right to overthrow their governments if their governments happen to become self-interested (that is existing for the sake of the government, not the nation). It's thoroughly possible to have a fascist nation that doesn't operate with a monarchy IMO, as long as it doesn't have the range of its acceptable policies bounded by some force out of reach of the will of the people.

Statement 1 is definitely a concern, which is why the people must have the means to revolt
Statement 2 is completely irrelevant
Statement 3 is an imperialist thought; if accepted, the only legitimate form of government would itself be an absolute imperialistic dictatorship

Capitalism denies the nation's people resources in favor of handing them to a group of elites
Socialist movements are very close to being correct but most of them are hawkish, interfere with the people's rights to revolt (arms, speech, democracy), and act on favor of the people of other nations when their own people are suffering

How is meaningless shit like "betterment of people" an argument? How come all you have is extremely vague rhetoric about nothing? How come you can NEVER argue any specifics ever? How come all you have is cheap appeals to emotion?

>That's not a failure of the concept.
No it just means it's part of pretty much all of regimes, thus entirely irrelevant thing to mention.

>Up is a relative term, that doesn't mean anything.
Totalitarianism, suppressing academic institutions and arts is not "betterment" in my opinion. If I should spell it out for you.

>Are you implying that other states don't enforce the morals of a culture?
Nope, just defining the moral justification for a state as it is in western world.

Yes because Democracy is so much better than having a leader who cares for you! I am so clever! I hope my campus reads these progressive ideas!

You were factually wrong about Britain starting the war and are so uneducated that you thought it was Churchill who declared war.

>cares for you

Is that why Hitler ordered Berlin to be bombed to shit and wanted all Germans to be dragged down to hell with him by forcing them to fight to the death when he knew they were going to lose?

Stop being such an emotional woman you fatherless cuck.

Why give them a mean to revolt but not a mean to elect? Also, not that user but "Statement 3 is an imperialist thought; if accepted, the only legitimate form of government would itself be an absolute imperialistic dictatorship" is not a valid argument against the statement (if it was even meant to be).

How is meaningless shit like "free trade" an argument? How come all you have is extremely vague rhetoric about nothing? How come you can NEVER argue any specifics ever? How come all you have is cheap appeals to emotion?

How is meaningless shit like "international solidarity" an argument? How come all you have is extremely vague rhetoric about nothing? How come you can NEVER argue any specifics ever? How come all you have is cheap appeals to emotion?

Fascist parties are the only ones actually willing to deliberate on matters instead of intentionally turning off their minds and insisting on absolute standards no matter the cost.

>Hitler did infact not care for the german people

>How come all you have is cheap appeals to emotion?
>he types, while generating an extremely cheap and very nonspecific appeal to emotion to justify his fascism

Honestly, it's like pottery. muh sides

Oh look, more utterly meaningless rhetoric. You literally just repeated yourself. You arent even arguing about anything, theres literally no fucking point in your post.

>Fascist parties are the only ones actually willing to deliberate on matters instead of intentionally turning off their minds and insisting on absolute standards no matter the cost.

utterly retarded meaningless garbage. How so? Give me specific examples

Arguing the definition of betterment is pedantic at best. It obviously means that, since the resources of the nation belong to the people of the nation, the state should exist to ensure that those resources are used to improve their quality of life.

>choosing someone doesn't guarantee that he cares about you
>having an arbitrary leader magically does

>y-you just dont get it, he loves me in a different way!

best part is that you arent even german, youre just some lost and stupid cuck who is desperate for some alpha male figure to guide you by the hand.

He cared so much about Germans he sent 4.3 million of Germany's finest to go die in the frozen permafrost of Moscow and Stalingrad for an autistic world domination scheme.

Truly, nothing but care about his race, coming from that man!

Democracy is based on self-responsibility because every citizen has a certain amount of political power you dumbass.
Look how every kraut after WW2 went full "We were just following our Führer!" while having Europe destroyed.

This is my museum. It is difficult to associate these horrors with the proud civilizations that created them. Sparta, Rome, the Knights of Europe, the samurai. They worshipped strength, because it is strength that makes all other values possible. Nothing survives without it. Who knows what delicate wonders have died out of the world for want of the strength to survive.

Because it is inherently aggressive and cannot be tempered into fine society like monarchy can

what the fuck are you even talking about.
I only pointed out that he was a real leader.
A leader of the people.
Someone every nation shoud have.
>to go die
I am not even going further seeing how you put in the favourite jewish "world domination" meme

>launch a political campaign
>get asked what you plan to do
>"I will work for the betterment of the people"
>"sure, but what will you do specifically, every politician claims that"
>"sorry, that's a pedantic question"

An ideology that heavily relies on one strong charismatic leader lasts only one lifetime.

You ain't nothing but a hound dog
Crying all the time
You ain't nothing but a hound dog
Crying all the time
Well, you ain't never caught a rabbit
And you ain't no friend of mine

It's ridiculous, allowing everyone to be free and equal gives you a lot more manpower from which you can grow an economy and support the sciences. And the nation, in a world of peace or similar-minded nations, will survive.

Trading allows you to acquire otherwise unobtainable goods with compromise that affects you as least as possible, and without the demographic and economic catastrophies cause by war.

And good diplomatic relations with the entire world allows you to stay protected and have leverage in economy or foreign diplomacy. See: Switzerland.

Therefore totalitarian ultranationalist warmongering is not only morally wrong, but objectively counterproductive.

>I only pointed out that he was a real leader.

no, you didnt. You didnt point out one thing, you just sarcastically posted "Hitler did infact not care for the german people"

Again, more vague nonsense from you guys. What proof do you have? Nothing. I garuntee you will post some proapganda speech of him saying some shit about "I love muh people" as if it means anything compared to his actions of leading his people into death and destruction all for the accomplishments of his dreams.

Just go join Scientology or something already you lost beta. Its clear thats what you want.

Because a constitutional monarchy is the true answer.

>having an arbitrary leader magically does
Well if he was a national socialist yeah

To gild refined gold, to paint the lily, to throw a perfume on the violet, to smooth the ice, or add another hue unto the rainbow, or with taper-light to seek the beauteous eye of heaven to garnish, is wasteful and ridiculous excess.

Every day I am sad that National Socialism lost.

I have none. It is a good form of non-degenerate government.

Election is an example of a "right to revolt", and something I don't have anything against.

I wasn't saying that Statement 3 was invalid; it's perfectly possible to take it as correct, but if you do you're saying that an absolute set of morals does exist which means it's your duty to enforce them on all people, which results in the absolute imperialist dictatorship I mentioned.

If you say that the duty of governments is to "enforce morals" rather than better their people, then I can concoct completely absurd situations where it's obvious to any thinking person that the moral in question should be ignored and yet you're forced to let it be.

Let's say you're a socialist. Suppose all of the world's crops die except for precisely enough for those within a specific geographic region. Do you allow those within that specific geographic region to feed themselves and allow everyone else to die or do you devise some arbitrary criterion for what makes a person more worthy to live and go to war against that geographic region to steal their food and deliver it to whoever it is you've chosen?

Let's say you're a capitalist. Some guy invents perpetual motion, thereby infinite energy. Do you steal his idea from him and feed the world or do you let him deny people his energy just because he has the "right" to it?

Also, every fascist government there's ever been has been retarded and I don't like any of them.

>J00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000s gib (You)s

Here's your 2nd

Adolf Hitler loved Germany as he loved Stefanie Rabatsch.

...