What's the difference between fascism, corporatism, nazism, socialism, and national socialism?

The world would be much happier if we could get women back in the kitchen where they belong
See how the world has crumbled after women got the vote and could get jobs

They are all useless buzzwords, like most idelogical/political words.

Instead of using -isms actually describe what you want to accomplish, where you want to take money from and where you want the money to go toward. Our political language now is so broken because people can only talk about ideologies and never about actions. VIrtually all political arguments these days boil down to "such and such isn't REALLY socialism/fascism" or "such and such is REALLY left-wing". Who cares whether an idea actually fits into some ill-define ideology.

But when you use your -ism you are actively describing what you want to accomplish, then you can go into deeper detail.

Progressivism has led to permanently rising taxes, debts, and public employment. It has led to the destruction of the gold standard and unparalleled paper-money inflation. Even the most fundamental private law provisions have been perverted by an unabating flood of legislation and regulation. Simultaneously, as regards civil society, the institutions of marriage and family have been increasingly weakened, the number of children has declined, and the rates of divorce, illegitimacy, single parenthood, singledom, and abortion have increased. Rather than rising with rising incomes, savings rates have been stagnating or even falling. In comparison to the nineteenth century, the cognitive prowess of the political and intellectual elites and the quality of public education have declined. And the rates of crime, structural unemployment, welfare dependency, parasitism, negligence, recklessness, incivility, psychopathy, and hedonism have increased.

kys and leave please

>t. butthurt libcuck

maybe /r/books is more you're speed, if you can't handle differing opinions.

Interesting, anything I could read to expand my knowledge on this? Evola?

So what's your alternative to progressivism? I read a neo-reactionary people on twitter say that they want to go back to having monarchies and stuff like that.

We need to go back to when women served their man, races were separate, and there were no capitalism. Feudal society with aristocracy. I would be one of the aristocrats, not the poor shitters

Not sure if you're the same guy that wrote this but

>The liberal concept of progress is flawed because it ignores political economy for nebulous notions like 'fairness' and 'representation'.

> Feudal society with aristocracy.

Sounds like you want to go back to a time with less fairness and representation than right now? How is that actually appealing? Or are you just meming

>what's your alternative to progressivism? I
Communism Now.

What good are 'fairness' and 'representation' if everyone is worse off on average except for a tiny minority of profiteers who are doing better than ever?

If you can't tell this bait gtfo

More likely than whom?

Can you prove to me that it would be better to be a peasant in a feudal society than an average person today?

Doesn't seem like bait though, I see so many neo reactionary people on Twitter that spout this stuff all day

Wouldn't that be considered progressivism?

>what's the difference between spook 1, spook 2, spook 3, spook 4 and spook 5
their names

nice meme m'property

Nice phantasm

THIS SO MUCH.

I feel nostalgic for the halcyon days of 2014-2016, when you could piss people off by LARPing as a /pol/lack, remember, there were lots of actual unironic /pol/lacks in here back in the days, sometimes they would tell me to shut up and stop being an embarrassment to the race and the movement. You could also 'blow people's minds' with just a cursory knowledge of Debord, SoS is normie tier by this point. Even more, I long for the innocence of pre-gamergate internet culture. Now everything's a mess, the separation between IRL and cyberworld is vanishing. The fatherland's lost forever. You can't recover lost time.

nice Hitler dubs

>fuck words

YEAH THIS SO MUCH!1!1!

...

Read the respective thinkers from each, Marx isn't too hard too understand the gist of, he's just very contradictory at times due to the epistemic break in his philosophy. I'd recommend Wage, Labor, and Capital, Critique of the Gotha Programme, the first volume of the German Ideology, and Anti-Duhring by Engels. After that you can read State and Revolution by Lenin, and you should have a good understanding of Classical Marxism, and Socialism. As for Fascism, you can read Musolini's "Doctrine of Fascism," and some of Sorel's work.
this isn't biased at all.

>debord is normie tier
what?

When sexually active people aren't doings sports, having dates, or watching netflix, they read Debord

That's why I have decided to become a post ironic fascist. Yes I know the alt right is kill by this point, but I feel compelled to make an existential statement, to make my very existence into an act of rebellion. i am fully aware of the total absurdity of my own beliefs, yet this only motivates me. There’s beauty in embracing absurdity. all ideologies are equally absurd, anyways. I will be the last fashy goy skinhead on earth, locked in a doomed battle to the death against ZOG. I aspire to emulate the exalted japanese remnants who kept on fighting for the divine emperor in the malarial jungles of indochina decades after Japan’s final capitulation. That is what I call Dignity. That is what I call Honor.

Not him, but do you not see the main point here? Some words cloud rather than clarify thought, especially ideological words.

but how is that even true, ideological words work to explain your thought process without having to going on a tanget about it

if I agree with fascism instead of explaining what my beliefs are I can just say I agree with fascism? I don't get how that clouds stuff up

if you're not exactly a fascist but you agree with a lot of principles you can say "I agree with fascism, however..."

...

Fascism, corporatism, and national socialism are just different names for the same strain of thinking.

Socialism is quite different.

I would recommend reading Noam Chomsky.

why did no one respond to this

I can't speak for Facism, Corporatism and Socialism. But as for Nazism and National Socialism, I'm a little more well versed.

If you wish to understand Nazism, I suggest reading as many materials written before 1945 as possible. Reading secondary sources of Nazism can be unfruitful for reasons of retrospective bias. Of course this isn't always true, there are some great secondary sources out there. You just need to learn to discern whether the author is genuinely trying to give information or trying to paint a picture of Nazis as cruel sadistic animals and Allies as the army imbued with God's grace.
As for primary sources I suggest:
Zweites Buch - Hitler
Mein Kamph - Hitler
Manifesto for the abolition of interest slavery - Gottfried Feder
All the speeches of Hitler
All the speeches of Goebbels
The Nazi-Sozi - Joseph Goebbels

As for National Socialism, I suggest George Lincoln Rockwell. Any of his speeches are a great start to get a fundamental understanding of National Socialism as a way of living as opposed to a political system. To understand National Socialism as separate from Nazism, you need to realise that Nazism is NatSoc as practiced by a particular government in the German context of 1933-1945. NatSoc is much broader, and the shape it'll assume would change in a political sense if you were to change the country and the time, as NatSoc relates to the needs of the people (and this is obviously a variable)

Thank you

socialism is workers owning the means of production. Its with the modifiers that it gets messy.