ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2017 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Saturday, August 19, 2017

The economic socialism of Nazi Germany

These observations - they can really only be considered "arguments" by the ignorant - are not new, but date back to the 1940 publication of Human Action, when Ludwig von Mises not only acknowledged the differences between Russian socialism and German socialism, both of which predated Hitler and the Nazi Party, but explicates them with his customary attention to relevant detail.

It's particularly informative in light of the fact that Mises identified German socialism with Hindenberg, not Hitler. And it's somewhat remarkable that the defenders of the false and ahistorical notion that the National Socialists were of the Right attempt to dismiss the whole subject as mere "economics", when economics is merely the more scientific-sounding title for "political economy", and the entire foundation for all socialisms is, and has always been, economic in nature.
There are two patterns for the realization of socialism.

The first pattern (we may call it the Lenin or the Russian pattern) is purely bureaucratic. All plants, shops, and farms are formally nationalized (verstaatlicht); they are departments of the government operated by civil servants. Every unit of the apparatus of production stands in the same relation to the superior central organization as does a local post office to the office of the postmaster general.

The second pattern (we may call it the Hindenburg or German pattern) nominally and seemingly preserves private ownership of the means of production and keeps the appearance of ordinary markets, prices, wages, and interest rates. There are, however, no longer entrepreneurs, but only shop managers (Betriebsführer in the terminology of the Nazi legislation). These shop managers are seemingly instrumental in the conduct of the enterprises entrusted to them; they buy and sell, hire and discharge workers and remunerate their services, contract debts and pay interest and amortization. But in all their activities they are bound to obey unconditionally the orders issued by the government's supreme office of production management.

This office (The Reichswirtschaftsministerium in Nazi Germany) tells the shop managers what and how to produce, at what prices and from whom to buy, at what prices and to whom to sell. It assigns every worker to his job and fixes his wages. It decrees to whom and on what terms the capitalists must entrust their funds. Market exchange is merely a sham. All the wages, prices, and interest rates are fixed by the government; they are wages, prices, and interest rates in appearance only; in fact they are merely quantitative terms in the government's orders determining each citizen's job, income, consumption, and standard of living. The government directs all production activities. The shop managers are subject to the government, not the consumers' demand and the market's price structure. This is socialism under the outward guise of the terminology of capitalism. Some labels of the capitalistic market economy are retained, but they signify something entirely different from what they mean in the market economy.
Note that the Reichswirtschaftsministerium, originally Reichswirtschaftsamt, was the German Government's Ministry of National Economy, and was established in 1917, two years prior to the creation of the German Worker's Party, the predecessor of the National Socialist German Worker's Party. The ministry was abolished in 1945.

What will likely strike the reader as ominous about this is the fact that the digitalization and bureaucratization of American corporatism is increasingly reminiscent of this German pattern of socialism that was adopted by the National Socialists in lieu of the Russian model. It's also worth noting that just as the German political battle of the 1930s was fought between the Russian and German socialisms, the Chinese civil war of the 1940s was fought between Chinese and German socialisms. National socialism was a different socialism than the international socialism of the Marxists, but it was a competing socialism that was neither conceived nor defined by Adolf Hitler.

But since Mises is seldom read by anyone today, being much too difficult for the average individual, his observations are often forgotten. Which, no doubt, is why George Reisman attempted to spell the concept out more slowly for the benefit of those incapable of deciphering Mises's words 12 years ago.
My purpose today is to make just two main points: (1) To show why Nazi Germany was a socialist state, not a capitalist one. And (2) to show why socialism, understood as an economic system based on government ownership of the means of production, positively requires a totalitarian dictatorship.

The identification of Nazi Germany as a socialist state was one of the many great contributions of Ludwig von Mises.

When one remembers that the word "Nazi" was an abbreviation for "der Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiters Partei — in English translation: the National Socialist German Workers' Party — Mises's identification might not appear all that noteworthy. For what should one expect the economic system of a country ruled by a party with "socialist" in its name to be but socialism?

Nevertheless, apart from Mises and his readers, practically no one thinks of Nazi Germany as a socialist state. It is far more common to believe that it represented a form of capitalism, which is what the Communists and all other Marxists have claimed....

De facto government ownership of the means of production, as Mises termed it, was logically implied by such fundamental collectivist principles embraced by the Nazis as that the common good comes before the private good and the individual exists as a means to the ends of the State. If the individual is a means to the ends of the State, so too, of course, is his property. Just as he is owned by the State, his property is also owned by the State.

But what specifically established de facto socialism in Nazi Germany was the introduction of price and wage controls in 1936. These were imposed in response to the inflation of the money supply carried out by the regime from the time of its coming to power in early 1933. The Nazi regime inflated the money supply as the means of financing the vast increase in government spending required by its programs of public works, subsidies, and rearmament. The price and wage controls were imposed in response to the rise in prices that began to result from the inflation.

The effect of the combination of inflation and price and wage controls is shortages, that is, a situation in which the quantities of goods people attempt to buy exceed the quantities available for sale.

Shortages, in turn, result in economic chaos. It's not only that consumers who show up in stores early in the day are in a position to buy up all the stocks of goods and leave customers who arrive later, with nothing — a situation to which governments typically respond by imposing rationing. Shortages result in chaos throughout the economic system. They introduce randomness in the distribution of supplies between geographical areas, in the allocation of a factor of production among its different products, in the allocation of labor and capital among the different branches of the economic system.

In the face of the combination of price controls and shortages, the effect of a decrease in the supply of an item is not, as it would be in a free market, to raise its price and increase its profitability, thereby operating to stop the decrease in supply, or reverse it if it has gone too far. Price control prohibits the rise in price and thus the increase in profitability. At the same time, the shortages caused by price controls prevent increases in supply from reducing price and profitability. When there is a shortage, the effect of an increase in supply is merely a reduction in the severity of the shortage. Only when the shortage is totally eliminated does an increase in supply necessitate a decrease in price and bring about a decrease in profitability.

As a result, the combination of price controls and shortages makes possible random movements of supply without any effect on price and profitability. In this situation, the production of the most trivial and unimportant goods, even pet rocks, can be expanded at the expense of the production of the most urgently needed and important goods, such as life-saving medicines, with no effect on the price or profitability of either good. Price controls would prevent the production of the medicines from becoming more profitable as their supply decreased, while a shortage even of pet rocks prevented their production from becoming less profitable as their supply increased.

As Mises showed, to cope with such unintended effects of its price controls, the government must either abolish the price controls or add further measures, namely, precisely the control over what is produced, in what quantity, by what methods, and to whom it is distributed, which I referred to earlier. The combination of price controls with this further set of controls constitutes the de facto socialization of the economic system. For it means that the government then exercises all of the substantive powers of ownership.

This was the socialism instituted by the Nazis. And Mises calls it socialism on the German or Nazi pattern, in contrast to the more obvious socialism of the Soviets, which he calls socialism on the Russian or Bolshevik pattern.

Of course, socialism does not end the chaos caused by the destruction of the price system. It perpetuates it. And if it is introduced without the prior existence of price controls, its effect is to inaugurate that very chaos. This is because socialism is not actually a positive economic system. It is merely the negation of capitalism and its price system. As such, the essential nature of socialism is one and the same as the economic chaos resulting from the destruction of the price system by price and wage controls. (I want to point out that Bolshevik-style socialism's imposition of a system of production quotas, with incentives everywhere to exceed the quotas, is a sure formula for universal shortages, just as exist under all around price and wage controls.)

At most, socialism merely changes the direction of the chaos. The government's control over production may make possible a greater production of some goods of special importance to itself, but it does so only at the expense of wreaking havoc throughout the rest of the economic system. This is because the government has no way of knowing the effects on the rest of the economic system of its securing the production of the goods to which it attaches special importance.

The requirements of enforcing a system of price and wage controls shed major light on the totalitarian nature of socialism — most obviously, of course, on that of the German or Nazi variant of socialism, but also on that of Soviet-style socialism as well.

Labels: , ,

215 Comments:

1 – 200 of 215 Newer› Newest»
Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 8:22 AM  

Excellent articles. I've been particularly wanting something like the second one for some time now. Thanks.

Blogger Stilicho August 19, 2017 8:33 AM  

TLDR: Soviet socialism put commisars in charge of business, fascist socialism made businessmen become commissars.

Anonymous glosoli August 19, 2017 8:36 AM  

Hungary appears to be working toward a newer version of German National Socialism, where certain key industries (media, banking, utilities) have been re-nationalised, and of course nationalism is rising there. Russia and China are moving that way too, but from the opposite starting point.

I still expect to see the Fed and the other major central banks launch yet more huge QEs as we approach the next downturn and use the money to buy into big corporations. Not full ownership, but a strategic stake, around 30-40%. The merger of state and big business, always likely to be the final destination for capitalism.

The money-men want to own and control it all. I hope I'm wrong.

Blogger Bob Ramar August 19, 2017 8:44 AM  

Thank you for these articles! Now, how to get the '16 Points' publicized in a more widespread manner? Do you happen to know anybody who works at Breitbart?

Anonymous Avalanche August 19, 2017 8:45 AM  

(Way) OT, but interesting? Bloomberg printed that:
"China's average adult male sperm count (measured by the number of sperm per milliliter)_ dropped from 100 million in the early 1970s to as low as 20 million in 2012, according to Yanghong Huang, senior fellow at the CFR."

(Fertility treatments, both in China, and in Oz and US, are expected to reach $1.5 billion by 2022 from $670 million in 2016.)

Anonymous Teapartydoc August 19, 2017 8:50 AM  

This shows how a nation's political economy and ways of doing things is more entrenched and permanent than who runs it. In The Old Regime and the Revolution Tocqueville shows that the same form of bureaucracy and even to a great extent the same people were running France prior to, during and after the revolution through king, constituent assembly, legislative assembly, directory, and Napoleon and beyond. The Nazis took hold of the reins of government in the thirties, but it was in its essentials the same government as before. Eventually they were able to increase the amount of control they had over things. One should note that the assassination of Ernst Rohm kept the system from going even further left. In Inside the Third Reich one gets a hint of the relative paralysis of the economy that increased direction caused. In it Albert Speer laments the fact that armaments production never reached the peak it did in the first world war.

Anonymous johnc August 19, 2017 8:50 AM  

Maybe I'm off here but my perception of modern American politics is that the "Become Ungovernable" crowd is what is seen as far left, and therefore the opposing side -- the far right -- would be fascism.

In terms of economics, anarcho-communism would be considered far left, and state or private ownership of business would be on the right.

Anonymous James August 19, 2017 8:53 AM  

So i am here today because voxday was blocked at work, it was blocked on the plane and then in the airport. All it took was a connection between voxday and nazi and started. It will grow because of the way the various rating algorithms work. When it hits google list it will be effectively done becuse thier list is used by many.

You can take all day here and argue about how the nazis are closer to the left than the right and thus its incorrect to call the alt right nazis. Its all academic despite being true and meaningless. When the rhetoric grew to nazis, jews and white nationalism the alt right was done.

If you want to move things in you direction you need to focus/frame your arguements around justice.. fight against globalism, fight against quotas, fight against all discrimination including reverse descrimination...fight against illegal immigration and fight for immigration quotas based on whats best for the economy.

Fight for Jesus, fight for christianity... follow the example of Christ. . Dont go to events dressed like a crusader, dress in sack cloth. Dont bring your ARs, bring bibles and crosses. Dont shout, pray in unison, in public out loud. Sing hymns...teaki touches.. try candles.

This is nationalism that will win elections and result in real change.

Anonymous I'm Not a Fascist. But My Sons Are. August 19, 2017 8:56 AM  

how to get the '16 Points' publicized in a more widespread manner?

In a non-spammy and relevant manner, link to them in the comments sections of other blogs/websites.

E.g.:

...but that's not what the Alt-Right is. Vox Day, as one example, provides an intelligent abstract here: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2016/08/what-alt-right-is.html

Etc.

Anonymous Godfrey August 19, 2017 8:57 AM  

Terms like "Racist" and Nazi" are used by the establishment to keep whites compliant and servile. The terms are a tactic to keep whites controlled. Doubt me?

Question the Federal Reserve and suddenly you're "anti-Semitic". Complain about Neo-Con wars?...ditto. Don't like Obamacare? "Racist"!

It's all part of the greater establishment strategy of divide and rule.

People, across races, begin to complain about police brutality? Suddenly BLM is created, funded and the issue becomes black vs white.

Pissed off about immigration and your drastically dropping standard of living? "Poof"... suddenly confederate statues are the issue of the day.

Keep the plebs fighting among themselves and their eyes are off the corrupt crony wealth Globalists, right?

Don't allow yourself to be distracted. Don't be conned into wasting energy and resources attacking decoys.

Always... ALWAYS keep your eyes on the ball.

Blogger Wynn Lloyd August 19, 2017 8:58 AM  

I know you're talking about something significant, but I've thought about leaving printed copies at random locations at my university. I'd probably get accused of a "bias incident" if caught so I'd like to avoid that. The trick would be to pick the most strategic locations that would also allow to go unnoticed.

Blogger Wynn Lloyd August 19, 2017 9:00 AM  

At least it's not just us,though infertility shouldn't be wished on anyone. I like the Chinese myself. Certainly the Chinese women I've known.

Blogger VD August 19, 2017 9:05 AM  

I also suggest using the term Alternative Right, which has always meant exactly the same thing as Alt Right. Nearly all the translations use that term anyhow. It is the ideas that matter, not the so-called "brand", and the clarity of Alternative Right is more useful now than the brevity of Alt Right.

The whole point of the Alternative description is that it is a Right that is not conservative, neocon, Republican, or Conservative. It is a Right that presently lacks much formal representation across the West.

Blogger Bob Ramar August 19, 2017 9:07 AM  

#7 John you have it 'almost' right. Think of politics in an economic sense like it is a spectrum. On the left side you have 'government owns everything'. That is Communism. On the right side of the spectrum you have 'no government' or individuals own everything. This is anarchy. Starting on the left and going right you have: Pure communism, Marxist-Leninist communism, National Socialism, Fascism, Social Democracy (Western Europe today), Democratic Republicanism , Representative Republicanism (US government as envisioned by the founders), Pure Democracy, City-States, Tribalism, Anarchy.

Blogger Daniel August 19, 2017 9:07 AM  

As an argentinian, watching from far away, i can't believe how fast all this is happening

Anonymous Godfrey August 19, 2017 9:09 AM  

The real enemy are the globalists.

They're screwing everybody. Are you black, brown, white, or yellow? It doesn't matter. The bankers are screwing you.

And if you think cultural genocide, massive migration, and ultimately massive depopulation is just for whites, then you're a fool. The Globalists are waging war on the entire planet and you may be next.

Blogger Bob Ramar August 19, 2017 9:10 AM  

The Democrat Party is pursuing a 'National Socialist' agenda; the Republican Party is pursuing a 'Fascist' agenda. So, in this framework it is accurate for Democrats to call Republicans 'Fascists'. They are accurately describing the political philosophy of their opponents.

Anonymous Looking Glass August 19, 2017 9:17 AM  

@16 Godfrey

There's an interesting discussion about the early stages of Globalism actually caused the Boxer Rebellion in China and the fall of the Qing Dynasty, which ended that version of the Empire. We really should consider just calling Globalism an extension of the Great Powers period, but moved from Empires to Corporate Empires.

Nothing new under the sun, eh?

Blogger Mr.MantraMan August 19, 2017 9:21 AM  

I've always liked the word and concept "Freedom" but that sidelines our precious intellectuals and theologians, we luv essays.

Anonymous Anonymous August 19, 2017 9:41 AM  

My view is that we have a hybrid between the collectivist systems - Gramscian-style marxism for social control and fascism for the economic model. What they call financial capitalism isn't in anyway capitalism, since the global banking cartel fix all prices, particularly the price of money, and have the unfettered monopoly on the creation and issuance of currency and credit, aka counterfeiting.

Blogger Sam August 19, 2017 9:43 AM  

---
And it's somewhat remarkable that the defenders of the false and ahistorical notion that the National Socialists were of the Right attempt to dismiss the whole subject as mere "economics", when economics is merely the more scientific-sounding title for "political economy", and the entire foundation for all socialisms is, and has always been, economic in nature.
---

The focus on economics makes modern China to the left of the United States which is nonsensical.

The dichotomy also breaks down with state capitalist states like in East Asia. You can have states with low levels of regulation but unlimited scope for government interference (South Korea) and ones where the government directs the country through its control of the financial industry (Japan).

Nazi Germany is best thought of belonging to that category- Wages of Destruction gives a great overview, but I'll give the short version. The Nazi economy was geared around maximizing military output, starting in 1933. All other considerations were secondary. It was a permanent wartime economy. Controls were necessary because while the Nazis could print as much money as they wanted (and use financial tricks to hide it), they had a limited amount of foreign currency and so had to determine who got to import what.

Anonymous Godfrey August 19, 2017 9:46 AM  

Oh wait... I'm sure Mises was a "Nazi" too. Now he may have fled for his life from Austria when the National SOCIALISTS took over, but... but by today's standards he was a "Nazi", right? I mean... a... just about everybody is a "Nazi" now, right?

Mother Teresa was a "Nazi" too right? Well... I mean... she a... opposed abortion and euthanasia, right? That makes her a "Nazi" too I think.

Blogger Dos Voltz August 19, 2017 9:47 AM  

I remember reading Mises way back in the day, along with Hayek, Rothbard, and Rand. Thanks for the reminder, Vox, I do like this distinction between the various forms of dominant socialisms.

And it reminds me of one of my main gripes with Rand. She always described such a mechanistic and rigid view of capitalism, but what we had in the USA (and what she had missed) was capitalism operating within a framework dominated by Christian principles.

I used to think of it this way: In the movie "It's a Wonderful Life" it could have been said that both George Bailey and Old Man Potter were "capitalists." But they conducted their business affairs in very different ways, most notably, that George Bailey cared very much for and about the people in his community. Potter cared only about the bottom line.

We used to be a country of mostly George Baileys. Cared about quality of our products, and quality of our communities. Now, after Nafta and globalists and corporate raiders, we would rather gut companies and communities, pare things down to nothing, give the people dope, instead of hope.

We are living old man Potter's version of capitalism. The Christian principles that reinforced and supported our American version of capitalism, like flying buttresses of a cathedral, have been removed.

Anonymous Ahenobarbus August 19, 2017 9:50 AM  

Vox, I agree that National Socialists and ”Nazis”, whether trolls or sincere, should NOT be a part of the Alt-Right or the Right.

They don't belong on our side because they are useless at best and harmful at worst. We don't want them and we don't need them. It's as simple as that.

But discussing whether or not National Socialism is left or right is basically splitting hairs. A waste of time. The left-right spectrum is relative and dependent on historical context.

It does not matter what is "really" left or right, what matters is what we want and how to get it.

What intelligent people such as you need to do is figure out a way forward, so we can start winning again, because we're losing.

Blogger Dos Voltz August 19, 2017 9:59 AM  

I don't think we are losing. We are in the middle of a melee.

"Danger and deliverance make their advances together and it is only the last push, in which one or the other takes the lead." (Thomas Paine - The Crisis 1777)

Blogger Johnny August 19, 2017 9:59 AM  

When the communists first took over in Russia the economy was around eighty percent rural, and a large part of the rural economy was dominated by villages that were often run as communes. People had their own housing, but with some frequency the land would be held collectively and a great many decisions were made by the community, not the individual.

Initially the communists attempted to control the market with price fixing, but it went so badly that a large black market developed that was officially illegal but unofficially tolerated. Thus the initial system was commune communities selling into a mostly free capitalist market that was officially illegal.

Because little or no progress was made on the productive front and perhaps because Stalin was by nature a tyrant, the decision was made to collectivize the rural people into much larger communities that were run by the government in essentially all respects. On a functional level the average Russian ended up with less freedom than a surf in feudal Europe. Heavy duty oppression became the rule of the day with murder commonly used to get rid of inconvenient people.

In the urban areas progress after WWI was very slow under the communists. Stalin fixed that primarily by extracting a very high level of sacrifice from the individual Russian. Control of the population in the "worker's paradise" was by secret police, murder, and the threat of long jail sentences in what were really slave labor camps.

Officially everything was controlled by government bureaus. Unofficially Soviet communism fostered a major criminal element. It was a kind of ruthless black market where political and secret police connections were necessary to accomplish things. Because all this was secret I don't think it was ever been well documented, but it does account for why things went so badly when Yeltsin unleashed the forces of a free market. With a major criminal element in place the early efforts at capitalism produced what was often a kind of gangsterism which is only gradually being overcome. The 1990's were a very rough period for the Russians.

Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 10:00 AM  

"What intelligent people such as you need to do is figure out a way forward, so we can start winning again, because we're losing."

Have you considered the rhetorical benefit of "Nazis are leftists"?

Anonymous johnc August 19, 2017 10:01 AM  

@16

So when are Antifa / Black Bloc and the Alt-Right going to put aside the smaller differences and join forces?

(I can't believe how ridiculous that sounds... but on the other hand...........)

Anonymous Koanic August 19, 2017 10:02 AM  

If socialism is merely the negation of the price system, then surely Keynesianism is socialism, for it is the negation of the price system as it applies to the monetary interest rate. Therefore the USSA is a socialist country, but it is socialized towards globalist and anti-American ends, rather than nationalist and pro-American ones. Therefore to make the USA nationalist and pro-white, without altering its overall degree of socialism, would make it a national socialist country.

The Mises Institute would seem to agree that the difference between Keynesianism and Socialism is largely one of branding.

No one can dispute that Nazis who support Hindenberg socialism are leftists. The question is whether American neo-Nazis actually do so. Or whether they would be content simply to apply corrective state control to converged institutions, but keep the USA's overall degree of socialism the same, or even reduce it by dismantling most of the welfare state and reducing taxes.

If the American "National Socialists" want to make the USA more capitalist, then surely they belong to the Right.

But who should we ask? The actual number of self-identified American Nazis must be tiny. I suspect that when most fly that flag, they are saying "White power" with the same intensity as American prison gangs, not "Hindenberg socialism". From what I've read, American "Nazis" will happily live under whatever economic or political system gets rid of the nonwhites. I cannot imagine anyone getting knifed over the distinction between Marxian and German socialisms that was so important to the original Nazis.

Nazi, nigger, spic, kike: these are racial slurs.

Anonymous Shappy August 19, 2017 10:11 AM  

Attempting to drive home the case that Nazi's are leftists is noble, in an academic sense. But as long as the Alt Right continues to make the case that society ought to be organized based on skin color and genetics the Alt Right will be stuck with it's mainstream association with Nazis...historically and economically fair or not.

You lost the battle you are trying to fight about an hour after the Charlottesville march ended because the Alt Right had no mechanism to push back against the narrative. And you still don't. The reason the Alt Right has no such mechanism is because all but the most socially regressive believe the Alt Right have a point.

Good luck

Blogger Johnny August 19, 2017 10:19 AM  

I am unfamiliar with how socalist the German economy was. As for Hitler, he didn't like capitalism and had some tendency to think of it a a Jewish institution, which was true to an extent in the very early eras in that they were often the money lenders and the international traders in Northern Europe.

But for Hitler economics was a back burner issue. What he wanted was control of the population on a cultural level: control of the churches, control of the print and broadcast media, control of the schools, And they had a secret police that monitored the population and wrongfull opinions could get people in trouble. Plus he got involved in how children were raised and had his Hitler Youth program. The apparent reason for all this control was to acclimate the Germans into being a militarist society, which in turn was necessary for the Germans to be come the master race, and along the way obtain "living space" in the east.

A side flow in all this was that Hitler had an idea of an idyllic German past made up of rural communities. Thus along with industrial development, he was starting to set up rural German settlements in the conquered areas of Eastern Europe. Room was made for the Germans by relocating local populations, and sometimes diminishing numbers through starvation. Aside from the race element and different ultimate goals, by means it was the same sort of thing that Stalin was doing.

Blogger Bodo Staron August 19, 2017 10:22 AM  

Thank you! Further reading would be "The Vampire Economy" by Günter Reimann (free EBook can be found doing a search).

Also Adam Tooze wrote a book called "Economy of destruction" (Die Ökonomie der Zerstörung).

The NS trolls still don't get the arguments though that the system was unsustainable. They think especially the system of the MEFO bills was some kind of monetary magic. They mostly come with the argument that Hitler found some great way to create money without the big, bad bankers.

Blogger bw August 19, 2017 10:32 AM  

The reason the Alt Right has no such mechanism is because

...the wealthiest people in the world used their Network to implement Marxist communism and socialism - not on themselves, mind you - on the peoples of the West.
You Didn't Build That.

Anonymous noxious windy August 19, 2017 10:35 AM  

Hitler's economics and war strategy were bottom tier. The guy was methed up out of his mind during the later years and had an actual occultist lunatic, Himmler, at the reins of his secret police the entire time. The thing he did that shook the entire world was name the Jew. This and only this is the reason he is and will be remembered. Among Hitler's worst decisions were devaluing his own currency enough to require new ones (the modern Nazi loves to say that Hitler fought the banks; HE WAS THE BANK), trying to fight the Russian winter, squandering the advantage of his initially superior Stuka dive bombers, etc. The list goes on.

Blogger Johnny August 19, 2017 10:36 AM  

Originally socialism was control of the means of production. The term sometimes got expanded into control of all property, and on occasion commune living would be called a form of socialism.

Attempts to implement pure socialism have turned out so badly that in countries that a competently run, the tendency has been to increase government control through elaborate government rules. This retains private property and a degree of free enterprise, but all operating under the heavy hand of government. By my lights this would most sensibly be called crony capitalism, but the word socialism has gotten expanded and is now used to describe the crony capitalist system.

Abstractly one could imagine the benefits of government control and private enterprise being combined, but alas more frequently the downsides of both systems are mixed together. As it is necessary to be wealthy to influence government, the system tends to benefit large scale enterprise and the very wealthy minority. As the system is currently implemented in the United States, it has managed to enrich the rich, stagnate middle class incomes, promote a more powerful more corrupt government, and promote globalism because it is the natural operating environment for a very large company.

Anonymous glosoli August 19, 2017 10:38 AM  

@Koanic,

I don't think capitalism is on the right. My view changed when I read this piece (and others at the same blog):

https://policytensor.com/2012/09/15/a-natural-history-of-capitalism/

'This is the zone of the anti-market–what we today call Big Business–the real home of Capitalism.'

Blogger Pteronarcyd August 19, 2017 10:42 AM  

https://freedom4america.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/linear-political-spectrum-parties-3a.jpg?w=450&zoom=2

Fascist and Communists fighting each other is analogous to Crips and Bloods fighting each other -- two criminal gangs positioning for dominance.

Blogger ((( bob kek mando ))) - ( You are Welcome ... to go back to the hell hole you came from ) August 19, 2017 10:43 AM  

i suspect that shooting at the Alt-Retard is mostly counter productive.

not because Nazis "aren't Left" ( they are ), and not because they don't deserve to be shot at ( they do ), but because it distracts *us* from accomplishing productive activities.

we have plenty of icons that we CAN use at a rally. are you looking to have a good time? Pepe and the flag of Kekistan. Heartiste's ASCII dick. Shadilay, my brothers.

are you a little more serious? take a flag of Vienna or Charles Martel or Kaziglu Bey. we have PLENTY of symbols available, there is no need to create more. Deus Vult!

we have PLENTY of ideology to (re-)adopt, it merely requires some examination of history to find them.

and it's more important for US to move forward than it is to place emphasis on dragging the ( mostly non-existent ) Hitler LARPers back.

more useful would be to lump the Lamestream news media and Nazis together ... because they're both so stupid they think "Socialist Workers Party" is Right.

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey August 19, 2017 10:43 AM  

"Terms like "Racist" and Nazi" are used by the establishment to keep whites compliant and servile. The terms are a tactic to keep whites controlled."

Of course. Which makes it interesting that Vox chooses to fall in with the establishment tactic of attempting to characterize all nationalists as ebil not-sees. Could just be a lolbertarian relapse, though.

Blogger Jack Burroughs August 19, 2017 10:45 AM  

Wasn't it the whole point of National Socialism that it was a hybrid of Left and Right?

Yes, it was economically Left wing. But it was Right wing in its radically essentialist view of race, and its hierarchical vision of an organically integrated society of different human types.

To compress the distinction, maybe we could say that the National Socialists were economically Left wing, and *metaphysically* Right Wing. And it's the Nazi's metaphysics that horrifies the Left, not their economics.

Moreover, it seems that the Left wing economics of the Nazis actually worked, at least in some important respects. Perhaps that is a superficial judgment. But whatever the shortcomings of price and wage controls, the Nazis do seem to have pulled off something of an economic miracle in just a few years.

Vox, do you think these points have any merit?



Anonymous PAC August 19, 2017 10:45 AM  

Do you want to "save" the white race, act and think by the 14 words, or do you want to be "of the Right"? (Side note: defining the right on a western-wide scale is more than a little problematic.)

Blogger Serge_Tomiko August 19, 2017 10:49 AM  

"Hitler's economics and war strategy were bottom tier."

Let's see, a country the size of Texas with twice the population but with no oil was able to fight the ENTIRE WORLD for almost 6 years and nearly won.

You libertarians. Smoking too much dope.

Anonymous Koanic August 19, 2017 10:53 AM  

Nobody is saying that people waving Confederate flags want to bring back the African-slave based plantation economy with low tariffs on cotton exports.

So why say people waving Nazi flags want to bring back Hindenburg socialism?

It's racial, not economic.

Blogger Christopher Chantrill August 19, 2017 10:55 AM  

The point about the price system is that it enables humans to negotiate the production and distribution of goods and services WITHOUT FORCE.

And that is an astonishing and remarkable thing.

The other thing is that the "price system" is not a system at all, but an emergent phenomenon.

Anonymous 5343 Kinds of Deplorable August 19, 2017 10:56 AM  

"What intelligent people such as you need to do is figure out a way forward, so we can start winning again, because we're losing."

It certainly appears that way to people who get their information from traditional media, doesn't it? But we're actually way further ahead than we were a year ago. It's not even comparable.

Blogger Mountain Man August 19, 2017 11:00 AM  

Serge T.,you are truly too short for this ride. Despite the heaping portion, of word salad aside, you proved nothing. In fact it exposed how ignorant you really are about the topic of money, politics and the effects of Hitlers disastrous policies on the German economy and people.

Blogger dc.sunsets August 19, 2017 11:01 AM  

Only very bright AND open-minded people can grasp the inevitable consequences of planned economies. Certainly most Ph.D. economists lack such ability.

From Mises we know that only a (free, by definition) market can coordinate the billions of momentarily available pieces of information necessary to coordinate economic production across the board.

We know from Hoppe that "democracy" produces rule by those who behave like renters, who have no concern for the long run value of the polity they control, and that monarchy (due to hereditary succession & the fact that the common man cannot aspire to get control of the state coercive apparatus) alone yields a state likely to be farsighted & relatively limited.

And we know from Etienne de la Boetie that all states benign or tyrannical rest always on popular support, and if the people are enslaved it's because they (or at least a plurality of them) CHOOSE slavery.

Given the relative rarity of the ability to see these unassailable axioms, expecting da peepo to rally to the banner of wise sociopolitical stewardship is a BELLY LAUGH.

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey August 19, 2017 11:02 AM  

"I don't think capitalism is on the right. My view changed when I read this piece (and others at the same blog)"

Bingo. International finance capitalism is hardly a force on the side of tradition, nation, etc. How many major corporations engaged in a conspiracy in restraint of trade against NC in an attempt to force them to allow men to use the women's bathrooms? What has been the role of corporations in promoting feminism? "Anti-racism?"

A good insight from notorious commie Noam Chomsky:

"See, capitalism is not fundamentally racist -- it can exploit racism for its purposes, but racism isn't built into it. Capitalism basically wants people to be interchangable cogs, and differences among them, such as on the basis of race, usually are not functional... Over the long term, you can expect capitalism to be anti-racist -- just because its anti-human. And race is in fact a human characterstic -- there's no reason why it should be a negative characteristic, but it is a human characteristic. So therefore identifications based on race interfere with the basic ideal that people should be available just as consumers and producers, interchangable cogs who will purchase all the junk that's produced -- that's their ultimate function, and any other properties they might have are kind of irrelevent, and usually a nuisance."

He's not wrong. Is there a better alternative to capitalism? Of course not. But is the deification of unrestrained capitalism likely to sustain a healthy society? Only lolbertarians (and, to an extent, neoliberals) believe that. The economy exists to serve the nation, not the other way around.

Anonymous Koanic August 19, 2017 11:04 AM  

> Is there a better alternative to capitalism?

You'll find it in the Bible.

Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 11:06 AM  

All these Nazis defending Socialism.

What a shocker.

Blogger dc.sunsets August 19, 2017 11:07 AM  

Jack, your comment only makes sense if you associate Left with globalism (internationalism) and Right with nationalism (which is not synonymous with the nation in "nation-state.")

Today's corporatist rapine by globalists belies this construction.

Globalists today aren't leftist beneath the surface PR. They're literally organized crime on a global scale, buying politicians and using state military assets as their hired muscle.

Their only ideology is wealth & power, and treating the rest of us like the world is their brothel.

Blogger Lucas Evans August 19, 2017 11:12 AM  

We had a brief stint as "National Socialists" during the war economy of WW2. Rationing, price controls, all that. Produced a lot a material for the allies.

Nazi Germany was politically right-wing and economically left-wing.

In a political sense, there was no pretense of "equality," there was only traditional Prussian hierarchy. German history was celebrated and gun laws were relaxed. There was no need for "class-struggle" or "cultural revolution," most Germans enthusiastically embraced National Socialism.

Economically it was one of the best managed socialist systems the world has ever seen. I don't know if it was sustainable, but it managed to drastically increase the standard of living of the average German, while building one of the greatest militaries ever. You need a special kind of selfless, hardworking, high-trust population to make a system like National Socialism work. Hitler's version was only compatible with the volkish Germanic peoples.

Anonymous noxious windy August 19, 2017 11:12 AM  

That speaks to the discipline and ability of the German soldier and of the industriousness of the German people in spite of their leadership's terrible decisions. The arms they used were financed by fraudulently issued MEFO bills (debt-financed) and by forcing German businesses to buy war ordnance on their balance sheets. It's also false that the Germans had no oil. They had conquered several Eastern European oil and gas fields and even developed synthetic products. However ,they left the oil fields and synthetic plants unprotected by an offense-oriented Luftwaffe and they were destroyed by Allied air raids. The Germans never managed to create a defensive fighter and relied on modified Messerschmitt 110s from WWI to fight our Mustangs.

Blogger Gary Eden August 19, 2017 11:12 AM  

You yourself pointed out that socialism was less destructive than feminist capitalism. It would be an improvement over the current situation by your standard.

Part of the problem is that capitalism got us where we are today. It doesn't take into account the common good. Only profit matters and so it inevitably destroys itself and descends into corruption and monopoly.

The immigration issue is a good example. It was more profitable to hire illegals or send production overseas. Fine if you're the first one; once everyone does it tragedy of the commons kicks in and it destroys the people.

It doesn't matter how much you assault NAZI's or point out they're the real socialists. Unless you are anti-white you will be considered a racist NAZI.

No one joins the NAZI's because they care about their economic platform; its because they're the only ones willing to stand and fight for white interests.

I'm not a NAZI, its a distraction and too many are infiltrators. But this issue is a big nothing burger.

You are a big part of Alt-Tech yet you have barely covered the ongoing Internet censorship campaign. The only post I saw was basically used to make a point about NAZI's being socialist.

The anti-nazi thing is distracting you from more effective matters. This Internet censorship campaign is an overreach by the left that will cause more to move to our side that disavowing NAZIs ever will.

Blogger Johnny August 19, 2017 11:15 AM  

Serge_Tomiko wrote:When the United Nations was formed in 1944, they didn't discuss anything else besides exchange rate policy. The World Bank and International Monetary Fund were the only organizations created at the founding.

A hundred years ago, more or less, the United States was involved in Dollar Diplomacy. The method was to loan money to weak governments with poor credit ratings, and with that we had them by the short hairs. If they didn't make good on the loan, their bad credit would prevent them from borrowing anywhere else, and with the economic uncertainty the local economy would tank. Combine that with the general trade policies of the US and the possibility that the Marines might show up, and the borrowed money gave the US a lot of leverage with the local governments. And of course the policy required a lot of cooperation between whoever lent the money, be it public or private, and the US political machine. This cooperation was corrupting because it was unofficial. Favors and handouts and things going back and forth.

It is more than exchange rate policy, it is also credit and the willingness to back debt. What I wonder about is to what extent the World Bank and International Monetary Fund are just a new form of Dollar Diplomacy done by more subtle means.

As for borrowing abroad, except for rare situations of unusual stress, most populations would be better off if their governments never borrowed abroad. Typically the money is badly spent and it has the potential of turning every social upheaval into a currency crises.

Anonymous glosoli August 19, 2017 11:16 AM  

Personally, I am not fan of the term alt-right, or alternative right.

I would prefer 'The True Right', with a logo of the crusader cross, or a standard cross. If we don't rally around our faith, we'll struggle, and also we'll end up in the same mess even if we win.

We need to add a ban to usury to the 16 points too, the love of money is the root of all evil. Those who create it via usurious terms need to....be stopped.

Blogger dc.sunsets August 19, 2017 11:17 AM  

Capitalism is properly defined as an economy where the means of production are privately owned AND MANAGED, and economic transactions occur in a market where prices are DISCOVERED, not dictated.

While there are plenty of areas where externalized costs are of great concern (open borders create such serious external costs, and pollution is another) anyone who posits an alternative to private property & market-clearing price discovery is too stupid & ignorant to have a say.

A world that fully embraces alternatives to basic capitalist, market-based economics is a world of crushing poverty, abject misery, saturated in filth and about 6.5 billion fewer souls.

Go back to the 14th century if you prefer. But leave me out of your Peoples Temple adventure.

Blogger Bodo Staron August 19, 2017 11:18 AM  

Serge_Tomiko wrote:

No, dumbass. Adolf Hitler acknowledged the reality of money. It is a political tool no different than any other. It is a unit of account of political authority.

The libertarian delusion you believe has always been about obscuring the political aspect of money so that international banking interests can operate with impunity. Domestically, most are confused like yourself. You never think about exchange rates, and since you don't understand that money is political, so to do you not understand the political nature of exchange rate policy.



Yada Yada another Alt-Retard.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/40431387?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Translated to the late 20th century the Income per capita in Germany in 1935 was at around 4500 Dollar. If you were to compare this, the "Third Reich" was in the same league of South Africa, Iran or Tunesia. The living standard in the US at the time as double than that in Germany!

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey August 19, 2017 11:19 AM  

"The other thing is that the "price system" is not a system at all, but an emergent phenomenon."

On a broader scale, one could make an argument that almost all successful social structures are, if not emergent, at least organic, not really designed. The current leftist mania for utopian, top-down central planning in areas of social institutions and culture is very much analogous to the earlier fad of centrally-planned economies. Both attempt to replace traditions and structures that have arisen organically, and that self-organize at the local level, with attempts to impose external design. A failure of comprehension? Or simply hubris?

Blogger SJ August 19, 2017 11:19 AM  

Stop concern trolling. If you want something to happen go do it.

Blogger dc.sunsets August 19, 2017 11:22 AM  

Lucan Evans, go real a little Robert Higgs.

If you think America was a nice place of decent living standards under War Socialism, or Germany was all giggles under NS, you're extremely ill-informed.

The difference between America in 1937 and America in 1944 was zero, except for the lives and treasure lost in nauseating quantity.

Blogger Gary Eden August 19, 2017 11:22 AM  

Koanic wrote:> Is there a better alternative to capitalism?

You'll find it in the Bible.


People read into the Bible whatever they want to believe; I've seen it used to justify everything from Capitalism to Socialism.

So whats your 'Bible based' alternative?

Is there anyone who goes to the scriptures with no presuppositions in order to develop economic principles from it? As opposed to using it to justify their preconceived notions. Link?

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey August 19, 2017 11:24 AM  

"Today's corporatist rapine by globalists belies this construction."

Glad to see that you acknowledge that unrestrained international finance capitalism is hardly a "conservative" force.

Blogger Bodo Staron August 19, 2017 11:24 AM  

Serge_Tomiko wrote:"Hitler's economics and war strategy were bottom tier."

Let's see, a country the size of Texas with twice the population but with no oil was able to fight the ENTIRE WORLD for almost 6 years and nearly won.

You libertarians. Smoking too much dope.


Yeah, about that "no oil". How did they do it?
https://www.gabyweber.com/dwnld/artikel/eichmann/ingles/secret_pact_standard_oil.pdf

You need to learn about the dialectic political process.

I hope VD will also look at this. With the fighting going on between certain groups like "Antifa" and "AltRetards" I sometimes fear that a lot of this is manufactured.

We got Globalism as a result of the fight "West" vs "Nazis" and then "Communists".

Blogger dc.sunsets August 19, 2017 11:25 AM  

Francis, hence my continued observations that all successful systems are organic.

All Utopian systems are simply versions of the Gnostic Heresy.

There's nothing new under the sun. Every "bright idea" has been tried, probably a dozen times. People learn NOTHING from history.

Blogger Bodo Staron August 19, 2017 11:27 AM  

The people here also have a lot of stuff in English (so I don't need to translate from my German sources). They cover the MEFO trickery and other topics. "Vampire economy" was really a great title.

https://www.quora.com/How-did-Hitler-finance-his-war-Where-did-he-find-so-much-oil-to-run-his-vehicles

Anonymous Koanic August 19, 2017 11:27 AM  

> So whats your 'Bible based' alternative?

It's described in detail in the Old Testament. Jubilees. No usury to countrymen. Mitigated slavery. Inalienable rural land inheritance. A hereditary priesthood receiving tithes.

It's not ambiguous. It's just ignored. People think they can design something better than God did. So far they haven't. Just bigger.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 11:28 AM  

Meanwhile Confederate monuments are being torn down and defaced across the country.

Anonymous Johnny Mayonnaise August 19, 2017 11:28 AM  

@24

Discussing whether or not National Socialism is left or right is basically splitting hairs. A waste of time.

What intelligent people such as you need to do is figure out a way forward, so we can start winning again, because we're losing.


So you're critical of Vox's approach, yet in the next breath you ask for his assistance?

Why don't you come up with "a way forward" yourself? Let us all know when you do.

Blogger R Doom August 19, 2017 11:29 AM  

>>But since Mises is seldom read by anyone today, being much too difficult for the average individual,<<

This. Even when I write advanced technical documents, I write my explanations for someone I don't think is particularly bright (2 SD, as Vox would say). It definitely affects my writing style.

So then I pick up Mises...and I can't help but notice he's using the style I use when I'm trying to make it very, very, simple.

And he's still a frickin' hard read. He was obviously brilliant, because he thought an "idiot" was someone with an IQ or 130 or so.

Blogger Serge_Tomiko August 19, 2017 11:30 AM  

"Serge T.,you are truly too short for this ride. Despite the heaping portion, of word salad aside, you proved nothing. In fact it exposed how ignorant you really are about the topic of money, politics and the effects of Hitlers disastrous policies on the German economy and people."

Explain:

1) How is money created?
2) Do loans create deposits? Or deposits create loans?
3) What is the purpose of sovereign debt?
4) How exactly are exchange rates determined? If you claim the market, detail the market participants.
5) Why do sovereign governments impose taxes?
6) Are fiscal deficits good or bad?
7) What is your opinion of the Triffin Paradox?

You're of course too deluded to answer any of these questions correctly, but I'll let you take a shot at it. Some of these are easier than others. Feel free to skip ones you can't answer relatively quickly.

Blogger dc.sunsets August 19, 2017 11:31 AM  

We got the last 90 years because Wilson made the world "safe for democracy."

Would WW1 have ended in stalemate, would the Bolsheviks have won, would the Nazis have arisen without a treaty of Versailles, if Lee had adopted guerrilla warfare instead of meeting an industrial power on open battlefields, leading to a successful secession?

I love counterfactual reasoning.

Blogger Gary Eden August 19, 2017 11:31 AM  

Johnny wrote:
A hundred years ago, more or less, the United States was involved in Dollar Diplomacy. The method was to loan money to weak governments with poor credit ratings, and with that we had them by the short hairs.


Nice strategy if you want an empire. But alt-right being omni-nationalist isn't interested in empire.

I agree with the other commentator above that we need to dump usury. There is a good reason God prohibited it in the OT and so did Christians for 1500 years.

Our current economic system is broken and is destroying us. The AltRight needs to develop an economic program of our own.

Why already know socialism is an economic failure. So what would be a better system Vox? Amoung the AltRight you're best qualified and situated to suggest one.

Blogger Serge_Tomiko August 19, 2017 11:32 AM  

"And he's still a frickin' hard read. He was obviously brilliant, because he thought an "idiot" was someone with an IQ or 130 or so."

The appeal of Mises is his ideas are so ridiculous, only a simple person can believe them. Or an ideologue.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 11:33 AM  

De facto government ownership of the means of production, as Mises termed it, was logically implied by such fundamental collectivist principles embraced by the Nazis as that the common good comes before the private good and the individual exists as a means to the ends of the State.

The correct formulation of collectivism is this: the individual good comes first, and what is best for the individual is to love his neighbor.

Anonymous hoots August 19, 2017 11:34 AM  

Starting wednesday this week, voxday.blogspot.com and its mirrors were labeled by Forcepoint as Intolerant, which in their lingo is synonymous with "racist". I suspected it was the Fake Right meme you posted, but upon further reflection I don't think this is likely to be corrected. "Intolerance" is the label that keeps me (and millions of others) from visiting Heartiste, and now this blog, at work. At least with Heartiste I can sort of understand, as he posts some borderline NSFW stuff occasionally. But VP? Give me a break.

Anonymous Koanic August 19, 2017 11:35 AM  

Well, finally an archaic Nazi or two showed up. Beer Hall economists.

It's guys like this that give Nazis a bad name.

Blogger Gary Eden August 19, 2017 11:36 AM  

Koanic wrote:> So whats your 'Bible based' alternative?

It's described in detail in the Old Testament. Jubilees. No usury to countrymen. Mitigated slavery. Inalienable rural land inheritance. A hereditary priesthood receiving tithes.

It's not ambiguous. It's just ignored. People think they can design something better than God did. So far they haven't. Just bigger.


Very good. Needs more fleshing out but a good start.

My only quibble is God replaced the OT with the NT and in doing so did away with tithing and the priesthood.

Christianity's attempts to resurrect it only ever led to corruption and sin.

Blogger Grandpa Lampshade August 19, 2017 11:38 AM  

Vox......
I'm really curious as to your thoughts on economic models as we move forward. I know you think about this sort of thing a lot (as do I) and I'm really curious as to what you think would be the best economic model moving forward.
As for me, I think we need to try to create something "new". I put new in quotations because I'm actually thinking in terms of taking pieces of different systems and trying to piece something together to create something that would actually be functional. However I'm just not well versed enough in economics to say "It should look like this!"
Now some would say that the problem is we need more pure capitalism but I tend to look at things as being the result of time passing and evolution. For example: when someone says "We need to get back to what the Founders put together" it strikes me as being the same as a late stage cancer patient saying "I just need to get back to where I was when I had that first cigarette." In other words, what the Founders established, regardless of their intentions led us to where we are today. Same with economics, while it is obvious that today's corporatism isn't the free market capitalism that the country once enjoyed (or at least envisioned), it seems to me that the capitalism we once had has naturally led us to the corporatism that we have today.
I don't want to recreate Nazi Germany (I think the term "Nazi" is used by lots of people in a rhetorical sense anyway) but at the same time we have a situation now (which Tucker Carlson recently pointed out) where large tech companies such as Google essentially have a monopoly on the flow of information and ideas on the internet. One would have to be living under a rock to not be aware of the peril that the financial sector has placed not just the United States but the global economy. Wall street basically sets trade policy as well as immigration policy based on what's good for corporate profits. The only way I see braking these entities' stranglehold is with government power. However the pure free market libertarian or even conservative type would scream bloody murder about interfering in the free market capitalism.
I hope I've worded this in a way that makes sense. The bottom line is I'm trying to visualize what a new system taking pieces of different systems that have worked in the past (even if you are talking about going back to what ancient kings tried) would look like. Knowing that economics is something that is very much in your area of expertise I would really like to hear your thoughts on this.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 11:38 AM  

R Doom wrote:>>But since Mises is seldom read by anyone today, being much too difficult for the average individual,<<

This. Even when I write advanced technical documents, I write my explanations for someone I don't think is particularly bright (2 SD, as Vox would say). It definitely affects my writing style.

So then I pick up Mises...and I can't help but notice he's using the style I use when I'm trying to make it very, very, simple.

And he's still a frickin' hard read. He was obviously brilliant, because he thought an "idiot" was someone with an IQ or 130 or so.


If you're interested, this is called plainstyle. Plainstyle is best style.

Anonymous W. August 19, 2017 11:38 AM  

Vox Day and Jonah Goldberg, bosom buddies at last.

Blogger Serge_Tomiko August 19, 2017 11:39 AM  

"Yeah, about that "no oil". How did they do it?"

Your text is too long for me to read. World War II was about exchange rates and natural resources. Oil was one of the major ones.

When the UN was founded, it was argued that competitive devaluation (i.e. too much money printing as libertardians would say) on the part of exporting countries like Germany and Japan were the reasons for the war. The way the UN would maintain peace would be to forever prevent that from happening again.

Anonymous hoots August 19, 2017 11:39 AM  

It would be interesting to hear how blog traffic is being affected by this crackdown.

Blogger Gary Eden August 19, 2017 11:40 AM  

Lets not forget family law, that has great effect on the economy.

In the OT the family was the basic economic unit with the Patriarchal father in absolute control. Women strictly subjugated to him, and all property and children irrevocably owned by him.

Restoring that will be pivotal to restoring the west. Feminism and the extreme atomization of the individual had damaged our society.

Anonymous Koanic August 19, 2017 11:42 AM  

> My only quibble is God replaced the OT with the NT

Some parts became optional, some obsolete. God gave a demo on nation-building. Ignore at your peril.

The Catholic church is as based on the Bible as the Pharisees were. Both prefer their "traditions of men".

Anonymous Anonymous August 19, 2017 11:43 AM  

Hindenburg socialism existed long before any such thing as a political left existed.

Hindenburg socialism is the traditional folkway of Brandenburg, just as "Rights of Englishmen" are a traditional folkway of the Anglo-Saxon peoples.

By Mises definitions, the Great Elector was a socialist. Will anyone dare argue the Great Elector was a leftist? That devout Christian, fervent nationalist, and stubborn defender of ancient political and economic traditions, was a leftist? If so, the term "leftist" loses all meaning.

Three very important points:

1. Not everyone labelled a "socialist" by the Austrian School is a leftist, much less an actual socialist in the Babuefist or Marxist sense.

2. The Austrian School, like all classical liberals and libertarians, most certainly *are* leftists. They are the original leftists, the small government leftists of Brissot and the Girondists, memorialized in Victor Hugo's novel 93 - the book which first lured Stalin to the left. Ayn Rand's objectivists are the extreme manifestation of this type of leftism.
Their attempt to universalize Anglo-Saxon folkways, while stripping them of the national pride and Christian religion which give them substance, has been a disaster. The French Girondists and the Russian Constitutional Democrats made the mistake of despising the political and economic traditions of their own nations. That is why they were able to tear down the old order, but not able to build a solid new order. This failure lead to the destructive tyranny of the Hebertists and the Bolsheviks, which in turn led to the genocide of the French in Haiti at the hands of the Blacks and the genocide of the Cossacks at the hands of the Jews.

3. Like Marxist economics, Austrian economics is an ideology, not a science. If the beautiful models don't match reality, the models are not changed. Instead, it is ugly reality which is ignored. This makes Austrian economics a poor fit for the Alt-Right, whose strength is respect for reality - racial reality, sexual reality etc.

4. A pragmatic approach to economics is a defining characteristic of the true right. Conversely, a dogmatic approach to economics is a defining characteristic of certain old leftist sects such as classical liberals and Marxists, just as a dogmatic approach to race and sex is the defining characteristic of today's left.

Anonymous glosoli August 19, 2017 11:52 AM  

@DC Sunsets,

'basic capitalist, market-based economics'

Capitalism succeeds not because of market-based competition, but because capitalists are able to buy influence. They gain favours from governments, and reward the pols with nice consultancy jobs.
They seek open borders, to lower their labour costs, and they seek to avoid paying taxes.

Capitalism is not in any way virtuous, even the products it produces are crap. Food for example, these days it's full of stuff that is literally poisoning us, because it's cheaper, and because *they* literally want to poison us! And stuff produced in China is tat, when compared to the quality stuff that was produced in the West (and still is to some degree in Germany).

You have highlighted that a return to more local markets might mean that we see: 'a world of crushing poverty, abject misery, saturated in filth and about 6.5 billion fewer souls.'

Is today's world full of abject joy? Is today's world built on a century-long debt bubble not full of growing poverty? And we still haven't seen them burst that bubble yet? Why do you think that food production would plummet such that 6.5 billion souls would starve if capitalism as it has been for the past couple hundred years was replaced by a free market locally? Nations would still trade, but corporations would not ride roughshod over the globe.

I guarantee you that capitalism will eat itself eventually, and we'll end up in the same mess you describe anyway. Capitalism is evil, a monster with an insatiable appetite, that will destroy humanity if allowed to. Remember, the *capitalists* want it all, all of us as slaves, and they own everything. We're not that far away.

Blogger Gary Eden August 19, 2017 11:59 AM  

Koanic wrote:> My only quibble is God replaced the OT with the NT

Some parts became optional, some obsolete. God gave a demo on nation-building. Ignore at your peril.

The Catholic church is as based on the Bible as the Pharisees were. Both prefer their "traditions of men".


Very true.

If you look at the NT, church rolls such as apostles and elders were funded. But by Christians directly in private of their free will.

The only things organized by the body corporate were supporting local widows/poor and gathering funds for taking to apostles/tragedy victims a long way off.

But there was no mingling of church and civic government. No taxes for the church. No mandatory tithing. Nor was there the lofty buildings, budgets and salaries that infect the American church today.

Blogger Cloom Glue August 19, 2017 11:59 AM  

Gary Eden wrote:Koanic wrote:> So whats your 'Bible based' alternative?

It's described in detail in the Old Testament. Jubilees. No usury to countrymen. Mitigated slavery. Inalienable rural land inheritance. A hereditary priesthood receiving tithes.

It's not ambiguous. It's just ignored. People think they can design something better than God did. So far they haven't. Just bigger.


Very good. Needs more fleshing out but a good start.

My only quibble is God replaced the OT with the NT and in doing so did away with tithing and the priesthood.

Christianity's attempts to resurrect it only ever led to corruption and sin.



Here is a new testament example of Jesus rebuking the Judas Iscariot diabolical "common good", which I read here today, this week and I heard in the debate.

Ann Barnhardt:

First of all, Jesus says, “Let her alone.” (Sinite illam.)

Judas has appointed himself the arbiter of wealth and asset distribution and has decided that Mary’s flask of ointment (or the cash value thereof) should have gone to the poor. And Jesus says, “Let her alone.”

It is hers to do with as she (and her family) sees fit, and they have seen fit to use it to anoint their beloved Jesus.

Judas, sit down and shut your proto-Marxist piehole.

http://www.barnhardt.biz/2015/07/16/jesus-christ-economist-with-handy-visual-aids-and-a-video-appendix/

Anonymous PAC August 19, 2017 12:00 PM  

I go by Heinrich Pesch's definition: capitalism is state-sponsored usury.

Anonymous Incurvatus August 19, 2017 12:00 PM  

Put them anywhere and let the outrage draw the publicity for you.

Anonymous Incurvatus August 19, 2017 12:05 PM  

"... Here's a definition that was published by Native American Vox Day 12 months ago, before the agitation by Fake News began...”

Blogger Gary Eden August 19, 2017 12:13 PM  

@Cloom Glue

Ignoring the common good is what got us the immigration mess. It must be taken into account one way or another.

Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 12:13 PM  

Ohhhh.

They not only don't understand what socialism is, they also don't understand what capitalism is.

And the final piece falls into place.

Blogger Cloom Glue August 19, 2017 12:25 PM  

Gary Eden wrote:@Cloom Glue

Ignoring the common good is what got us the immigration mess. It must be taken into account one way or another.


You can define "common good" to mean anything you want, and move the goal posts with it, to any topic. That is a diabolical aspect of simple phrases.

The will of God is good, and so is the fruit of obeying the ten commandments, no lying (contracts), no stealing (private property), and more than those two, of course.

Blogger pyrrhus August 19, 2017 12:26 PM  

Reisman's explanation of the effects of destroying the price system is truly beautiful in its simplicity...I'm going to use that...

Blogger Sam August 19, 2017 12:28 PM  

@68
"It's described in detail in the Old Testament. Jubilees. No usury to countrymen. Mitigated slavery. Inalienable rural land inheritance. A hereditary priesthood receiving tithes.

It's not ambiguous. It's just ignored. People think they can design something better than God did. So far they haven't. Just bigger."

The industrial revolution certainly changed the game. I don't think you can run an industrial economy without borrowing money.

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey August 19, 2017 12:29 PM  

There is something of a "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" quality to this whole debate. It reminds me somewhat of leftists claiming that neoliberalism is "right wing" because muh capitalism. The Left-Right dichotomy is, of course, a compression of multiple axes into a single dimension. So in an important sense, there is no answer.

Those who have been steeped for too long in the toxic waters of lolbertarianism tend to have difficulty perceiving any of these axes other than 1. market vs. planned economy, 2. hyperindividualism vs. collectivism, and 3. Hedonism/ NAP / "dude, weed, bro"/ "If it feels good, do it" vs. "oppression." Many lolbertarians (not really Vox) also share the leftist assumption that the state is the only societal institution that matters, or that should even exist.

Hierarchy vs. egalitarian? Nature vs. nurture? The role of family in society? Sex roles? Nationalism vs. globalism? Stopping the poz? Etc.

Those photos you see of books being burned in Germany in the 30s? Most of them are books from Hirschfeld's "Institute for Sexual Research." Hirschfeld, of course, was a big promoter of homosexualism, trannies, and various strains of the poz. The quintessential leftist. Meanwhile, Hirschfeld fled to France, a country that was far more accepting of his attempts to push the poz (and thus more "right wing," apparently, according to many of the commenters in this thread).

Clearly, Hitler was somewhat leftist in economic terms (though it's interesting to note that you never seem to hear the post-WW2 Japanese system, and the relationship between the zaibatsu and the government, described as "leftist.") Just as clearly, he was using leftist means in an attempt to re-impose the Prussian tradition. In a cultural sense, much of it was pure, undiluted reaction. Whether that ever had any potential to actually succeed is another question.

The whole "Third Way" concept, which flourished in the 20s and 30s, goes well beyond National Socialism, of course. But it's pretty much been memory-holed by now.

A couple of final points. To be of the Left, one must be accepted by at least some significant part of the left. Who on the Left, then or now, accepts National Socialism as a leftist movement? It's a DR3/ "Anti-fascists are the real fascists"-tier argument that to them. They think it's funny. Completely ineffective rhetorically.

Also, there's something to be said for the theory that Communism won in the US in the 1930s, and the last genuine resistance lost out in the 1950s. The lolbertarian tunnel vision focus on purely economic issues often renders them incapable of perceiving this, but it can be a useful alternative frame for 20th century history. See anything written by Yockey-- or even (((Moldbug))), for that matter.

Blogger VD August 19, 2017 12:30 PM  

But discussing whether or not National Socialism is left or right is basically splitting hairs. A waste of time. The left-right spectrum is relative and dependent on historical context.

You're totally wrong.

It does not matter what is "really" left or right, what matters is what we want and how to get it.

And how do you expect to be able to do that when you lack a reality map?

What intelligent people such as you need to do is figure out a way forward, so we can start winning again, because we're losing.

What on Earth do you think I am doing? I am providing you with a sound philosophical basis for excising a major rhetorical weakness that has been the enemy's proven schwerpunkt for decades.

And you actually think that doesn't matter.

Blogger pyrrhus August 19, 2017 12:30 PM  

@94 The "common good" can be pretty easily understood as not gaming the system to dump your costs on the public while seizing the benefits for yourself. Immigration dumps enormous costs on the public to provide private benefits for a group of rent seeking groups.

Anonymous kfg August 19, 2017 12:31 PM  

" . . . it was a competing socialism that was neither conceived nor defined by Adolf Hitler."

It was essentially designed by Alfred Krupp in order to . . . fight socialism. The socialists will leave no capitalist good deed left unpunished.

Blogger Bodo Staron August 19, 2017 12:32 PM  

Lucas Evans wrote:

Economically it was one of the best managed socialist systems the world has ever seen. I don't know if it was sustainable, but it managed to drastically increase the standard of living of the average German, while building one of the greatest militaries ever. You need a special kind of selfless, hardworking, high-trust population to make a system like National Socialism work. Hitler's version was only compatible with the volkish Germanic peoples.


Yes. If you compare to the much longer running DDR (East Germany) you can see similar developments. Shitty products, much lower living standards compared to West Germany but still: No starvation. An economy that "somewhat" worked. Better than in other socialist/communist countries. It's German work ethic.

Blogger VD August 19, 2017 12:36 PM  

There is something of a "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" quality to this whole debate.

That's ridiculous. This is a ruthlessly pragmatic discussion. And you are simply not qualified to take part in it if you do not grasp that.

What part of "if you do not know yourself, you will lose a battle for every one you win" do you also not understand?

The appeal of Mises is his ideas are so ridiculous, only a simple person can believe them. Or an ideologue.

Said the guy who literally can't even read simple X-Y line chart. Go away, Serge. As has already been noted by others, you're far too short for the ride.

Wasn't it the whole point of National Socialism that it was a hybrid of Left and Right?

No. It was 7x more Left than Right. They are to the Right of the Communists, and the Left of the Democrats.

Anonymous normally a lurker August 19, 2017 12:39 PM  

@21
The Nazi economy was geared around maximizing military output, starting in 1933

Except plenty of evidence indicates it wasn't: German armament production peaked only in 1944(!) despite sustained Allied bombing, the German armed forced faced ammunition shortages after the French and Polish campaign, armament and procurement policies were generally unfocused and contradictory due to the nature of the Nazi system, women were not pressed into factories leading to a great reliance on foreign labour (causing production losses due to sabotage) and by all accounts the economy wasn't tranformed into a full war economy until the Speer/Bormann/Himmler triumvirate took power in 1943.

Anonymous luke August 19, 2017 12:42 PM  

"And we know from Etienne de la Boetie that all states benign or tyrannical rest always on popular support, and if the people are enslaved it's because they (or at least a plurality of them) CHOOSE slavery."

A good name for white leftists is white niggers. They want to be slaves to the state, in fact they will even kill so they can be enslaved, were even blacks that stupid?

https://mises.org/blog/taxation-slavery-and-consent

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 12:45 PM  

S1AL wrote:Ohhhh.

They not only don't understand what socialism is, they also don't understand what capitalism is.

And the final piece falls into place.


Right, it was never about the economics for them. That's just an emanation of the fixation on esoteric Hitlerism.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 12:47 PM  

Or, put more directly, Vox is wasting his time arguing Nazi apologetics with midwitted religious fanatics.

Anonymous Crew August 19, 2017 12:49 PM  

At the level of understanding people, because if you cannot understand what attracts them to an ideology you probably can't shift them from that ideology, it seems there are two issues here:

1. Some people are more genetically inclined towards the notion of being provided for, and

2. Socialism (including National Socialism) attracts those who are not smart enough to understand the longer term consequences of governments controlling everything.

Although I also think that there are those among the smarter proportion of the population who understand all that and simply espouse Socialism as a means to power and privilege for themselves.

Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 12:50 PM  

Aeoli, the argument is for the audience, not the opposition.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 12:50 PM  

I'll break down the thought process behind the typical channer's economics:

1. The modern world says I need to die.
2. The modern world is wrong.
3. The Jews are the modern world.
4. The Jews are wrong.
5. Hitler opposed the Jews.
6. Hitler was right.
7. Hitler believed in socialism.
8. Socialism is right.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 12:55 PM  

S1AL wrote:Aeoli, the argument is for the audience, not the opposition.

The intended audience is the thought leaders of the Alt-Right, so that they can justify jettisoning their losers. The problem with this is that the Alt-Right is defined by white losers. If they weren't losers, why would they care so much about a Robert E. Lee statue? They'd be too busy with their jobs, wives, and kids.

Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 1:01 PM  

You're looking at first-layer principles. The poll I linked in the other thread shows that about 40% of respondents "don't know enough about the alt right to comment". What happens when right-of-center Bob winds up here from reading about it? He sees "We're not Nazis, and Nazis are left-wing socialists". Bob says "Ok, makes sense to me", and keeps reading.

When right-of-center Bob encounters people meme-ing Nazi symbols and propaganda? Yeah, he's gone.

The argument is just as much, maybe more, for Bob than it is for the loons.

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey August 19, 2017 1:02 PM  

"The Nazi economy was geared around maximizing military output, starting in 1933

Except plenty of evidence indicates it wasn't"

Yep. Ranked in descending order, by percentage of GDP spent on the military in the mid-late 30s: USSR by far the highest, then UK/ France/ US, with Germany lowest. Facts can be inconvenient things.

"What part of "if you do not know yourself, you will lose a battle for every one you win" do you also not understand?"

What part of "left vs. right is only unidimensional to lolbertarians" do you not understand? Do you really believe that the major challenges facing us today are economic? That we are threatened by an imminent revolution to impose a dictatorship of the proletariat? Or do the forces that threaten us look more like... the current year version of Magnus Hirschfeld, the Frankfurt school and their descendants, and major (capitalist) multinational corporations pushing the same agenda?

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 1:02 PM  

That said, there's great utility in Vox crushing their intellectuals in public debate. Fascists glorify strength uber alles and they would learn from this.

Blogger John August 19, 2017 1:02 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 1:05 PM  

S1AL wrote:You're looking at first-layer principles. The poll I linked in the other thread shows that about 40% of respondents "don't know enough about the alt right to comment". What happens when right-of-center Bob winds up here from reading about it? He sees "We're not Nazis, and Nazis are left-wing socialists". Bob says "Ok, makes sense to me", and keeps reading.

When right-of-center Bob encounters people meme-ing Nazi symbols and propaganda? Yeah, he's gone.

The argument is just as much, maybe more, for Bob than it is for the loons.


We aren't talking about the symbolism right now. We're talking about where the ideas come from and how they interact.

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey August 19, 2017 1:07 PM  

"They not only don't understand what socialism is, they also don't understand what capitalism is."

This sounds a lot like "no true capitalism." Or perhaps "true capitalism has never been tried." Just sayin'.

Anonymous Koanic August 19, 2017 1:07 PM  

> The industrial revolution certainly changed the game. I don't think you can run an industrial economy without borrowing money.

The Bible prohibits neither corporations nor double-entry bookkeeping.

Natives are welcome to loan money to corporations, but domestic corporations cannot loan to natives. Corps can loan to corps all day.

Blogger ((( bob kek mando ))) - ( You are Welcome ... to go back to the hell hole you came from ) August 19, 2017 1:08 PM  

41. Jack Burroughs August 19, 2017 10:45 AM
Yes, it was economically Left wing. But it was Right wing in its radically essentialist view of race


you think the radically essentialist view of CLASS is Right wing?

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 1:08 PM  

Also, that poll only reveals that normies are hedging their bets because they don't know which way the wind will blow next. 40% of whites are normies, 40% are parasites, and 20% are high-trust.

Blogger ((( bob kek mando ))) - ( You are Welcome ... to go back to the hell hole you came from ) August 19, 2017 1:11 PM  

119. Koanic August 19, 2017 1:07 PM
I don't think you can run an industrial economy without borrowing money.



a - we don't have "money" now, we have fiat representations of Debt. ie - doubly abstracted

b - have you ever tried? or are you so wrapped up in the stories that the Banksters tell you that you can't imagine getting by without trading Concretes for Abstracts?

have you ever considered the Parable of the Talents?

Anonymous Koanic August 19, 2017 1:13 PM  

> I am providing you with a sound philosophical basis for excising a major rhetorical weakness that has been the enemy's proven schwerpunkt for decades.

ikr?

I sense a consensus developing around "swastikas are for places without girls, such as prison, the Internet, and NSDAP meetings."

Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 1:13 PM  

"This sounds a lot like "no true capitalism." Or perhaps "true capitalism has never been tried." Just sayin'."

On the contrary: capitalism is a vast spread, because it's actually an economic stance rather than a political one. Free-market anarcho-capitalism is the extreme end. Mostly-free-market capitalism with protections and restrictions to hedge against the extreme is much more normal. No sensible person wants a free market for nuclear weapons.

Heck, even most versions of mercantilism are still capitalism, just with enough restrictions to start moving into authoritarian areas.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 1:14 PM  

Koanic wrote:Natives are welcome to loan money to corporations, but domestic corporations cannot loan to natives. Corps can loan to corps all day.

An individual native can incorporate. We're starting to see a world where only natives who incorporate can survive because simple economic transactions are stacked against them. Therefore I distrust the corporate lending angle.

Blogger DonReynolds August 19, 2017 1:17 PM  

Excellent summary, Vox.
One of the first things the Nazis did when they came to power was abolish small business. They were not abolished by forcing them to close. They were abolished by requiring them to belong to industry-wide associations, which we know as CARTELS. The government ministry issued directives to the cartel. Ownership was essentially private, but controlled by the government. It was not the purpose of the German government to stop trade but to manage trade and exchange with both hands. From the economic standpoint it was a repudiation of capitalism, most especially what they considered the destructive tendency of (Jewish) capitalism to engage in cutthroat competition. The same competition that drives the price system had enabled the Jews to acquire too much wealth and power over the German people.

The Russian problem was the kulaks and the response was NATIONALIZATION, outright confiscation of the means of production, to be managed by the state. People could still own their shoes and spoon, but farms and shops and factories must be collectivized for the benefit of the workers. This was the Worker's Paradise. After collectivization, society was supposed to benefit from better state management and greater economies of scale. What were profits would now be part of the social dividend. Bigger would be better managed and the scale economies would mean more for everybody at lower cost. The pesky kulaks can simply be liquidated if they do not accept their reduced status.

There is a third model, you could call the American system. Vox is absolutely correct in saying it is more like the German method. Instead of creating deliberate cartels, the American approach to eliminating the destructive effects of competition is simply to drive out the small operators using regulation and taxes, while subsidizing the large corporations with subsidies and tax cuts. This is the face of OLIGOPOLY, and in extreme cases it becomes MONOPOLY....sometimes as public utility but most of the time it is unregulated monopoly.

The best example of this is the retail gasoline business, which used to be characterized by Mom and Pop operations. The major oil companies seldom operated their own retail gasoline stations, preferring to work through jobbers and farm coops and independent retailers who agreed to hang the company brand. What changed all that was the advent of the chain convenience store, which proved to be popular and rather profitable in an industry that had always been marginal. When the 22 major oil companies found out their retailers were making more profit than they were, they decided to become gasoline retailers. Some would sell out to their suppliers, others would find a new convenience store built on the corner, and others would simply lose their ability to buy fuel...or participate in the company credit card. This was not entirely successful. Mom and Pop would not surrender, so they had to be shut down completely and they found the perfect vehicle.... environmental regulations and taxes and fines....none of which would work without the enthusiastic campaigning by the Media and the EPA and the courts. Now the "polluters" have been forced out of business. The lucky ones saw the light and sold out (cheap) rather than face litigation, harassment, and bankruptcy. The popular media call this Crony Capitalism....the marriage of government power with politically correct corporations, which are never small business.

Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 1:18 PM  

"40% of whites are normies, 40% are parasites, and 20% are high-trust."

Questioning those numbers can be left for another time. I'll simply note that Benjamin Franklin observed, upon comparing the colonies to England proper, that monetary charity has the effect of increasing parasitism.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 1:19 PM  

Koanic wrote:> I am providing you with a sound philosophical basis for excising a major rhetorical weakness that has been the enemy's proven schwerpunkt for decades.

ikr?

I sense a consensus developing around "swastikas are for places without girls, such as prison, the Internet, and NSDAP meetings."


If this thing goes hot the forced segregation of Nazis into high-trust brotherhoods will result in the eventual defeat of the Alt-West. If it stays cold then the Alt-West will win because breeding will matter more than killing, and you need women for that (sad!).

I expect it will go hot, and that's why I oppose Vox's new direction.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 1:21 PM  

S1AL wrote:"40% of whites are normies, 40% are parasites, and 20% are high-trust."

Questioning those numbers can be left for another time. I'll simply note that Benjamin Franklin observed, upon comparing the colonies to England proper, that monetary charity has the effect of increasing parasitism.


You might prefer Jefferson's Bible then. The numbers will shift somewhat but not much because they appear to follow from the Pareto principle.

Blogger Jack Burroughs August 19, 2017 1:24 PM  

No. A radically essentialist view of *race* is Right wing. I guess one could argue that a radically essentialist view of class would also be Right wing; that is the basis of the Hindu caste system, after all. But that is irrelevant, because the Nazis did not have a radically essentialist view of class.

Yes, they were hierarchical and class conscious; but they were also meritocratic, taking the view that people should be free to rise and fall within a flexibly dynamic hierarchy, according to their own distinctive talents, temperaments, and characters.

Meritocratic, dynamic hierarchy is the opposite of class essentialism.

Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 1:24 PM  

"If this thing goes hot the forced segregation of Nazis into high-trust brotherhoods will result in the eventual defeat of the Alt-West. If it stays cold then the Alt-West will win because breeding will matter more than killing, and you need women for that (sad!)."

Your belief is opposed to the observations of a great many historians, who generally noted that men fighting for their homes were worth far more than mercenaries or single soldiers.

Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 1:29 PM  

"You might prefer Jefferson's Bible then. The numbers will shift somewhat but not much because they appear to follow from the Pareto principle."

You seem to have mistaken an observation of the danger of inculcated dependency for an admonition against charity. On the contrary, it's the "feed/teach to fish" principle.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 1:30 PM  

S1AL wrote:"If this thing goes hot the forced segregation of Nazis into high-trust brotherhoods will result in the eventual defeat of the Alt-West. If it stays cold then the Alt-West will win because breeding will matter more than killing, and you need women for that (sad!)."

Your belief is opposed to the observations of a great many historians, who generally noted that men fighting for their homes were worth far more than mercenaries or single soldiers.


The Confederacy lost. You might hate rats, but if you back one into a corner it will teach you a thing or two about strategy.

Blogger dc.sunsets August 19, 2017 1:33 PM  

Luke, ancient Roman historian Sallust nailed it 2000 years ago: "Most men do not desire liberty, most only wish for a just master."

Poster Child for this: someone who asks a politician, "What are you going to do for me?"

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 1:34 PM  

S1AL wrote:You seem to have mistaken an observation of the danger of inculcated dependency for an admonition against charity. On the contrary, it's the "feed/teach to fish" principle.

And here's the crux of the matter. Alphas have this retarded idea that you can bully an Omega into a Delta. You can't! It would have already happened! Putting an Omega in boot camp is how you make a monster out of a neurotic. Think Private Pyle.

So...you believe in teaching men how to fish. Show me your works.

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey August 19, 2017 1:34 PM  

Also, in a more meta sense, one of the downsides of sperging about "muh evil not-sees!" as a Pavlovian response when the legacy media presents you with certain taboo images is that... guess what? Those images will always show up. For the same reason that swastika graffiti will always show up, Jewish community centers will get bomb threats,

jpost.com/Israel-News/Dual-US-Israeli-citizen-behind-most-JCC-bomb-threat-calls-484990

and hoax crimes in general will be promoted by the media and the rest of the progressive establishment. Sure, avoiding taboo symbology is important. But that's a behind-the-scenes enforcement thing. If you tell the media "Just show me a man carrying a flag with one of these taboo symbols (a brand new flag, judging by the creases), and I will automatically get hysterical, attack the rest of the Right, and call them evil naaaatzees, guess what they're gonna do next time, hmm?

You can't stop them from doing this. Not without controlling the media (which would obviate the need to stop them of course). All you can do is ignore or mock.

The party line narrative on Charlottesville serves to justify the crackdown on wrongthink, of course. But it works the other way, too-- the crackdown serves to suppress the facts. Mutually reinforcing. I doubt that it's a coincidence that the first (and most effective) attack was on Red Ice, which is primarily a video site.

Anonymous Anonymous August 19, 2017 1:35 PM  

Aeoli Pera doesn't understand why antisemitism exists.

Perhaps my favorite rabbis can explain:

"Goyim were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world - only to serve the people of Israel . . . That's why he gets a long life, to work well for his Jew. Why are gentiles needed? They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will sit like an effendi and eat. That is why gentiles were created." Rabbi Yosef Ovadia, Chief Sephardic Rabbi of Israel

"It wasn't stated if this is a pipm who practices exclusively among the goyim or among Jews as well. I will relate both cases. In the first case, if the clientele is non-Jewish, the bottom line is that it is possible to honor the pimp. But in the second case, if he brings a non-Jewish prostitute to Jews or Jewish women to non-Jews, he cannot be called up to the Torah." Rabbi Yosef Haim ben Elijah Haham of Baghdad

"The difference between a Jewish soul and the souls of non-Jews is greater than the difference between a human soul and the souls of cattle." Rabbi Kook the Elder

"If a Jew needs a liver, can you take the liver of an innocent non-Jew passing by to save him? The Torah would probably permit that. Jewish life has an infinite value. There is something infinitely more holy and unique about Jewish life than non-Jewish life." Rabbi Yitzak Ginsburg

"The difference between a Jewish and a non-Jewish person stems from the common expression "let us differentiate . . . we have a case of "let us differentiate" between totally different species. . . . Two contrary types of souls exist, a non-Jewish soul comes from three Satanic spheres, while the Jewish soul stems from holiness . . . A Jew was not created for some other purpose; he himself is the purpose, since the substance of all divine emanations was created only to serve the Jews. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" means that the heavens and the earth were created for the sake of the Jews, who are called "the beginning". This means that everything, all developments, all discoveries, the creation, including the heavens and the earth - are vanity compared to the Jews. The important things are the Jews, because they do not exist for any other aim, they themselves are the divine aim . . . The entire creation exists only for the sake of the Jews. Because of this a non-Jew should be punished with death if he kills an embryo, while a Jew, whose existence is most important, should not be punished with death." Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson

The most damning possible indictment of Nazis is, they are White people who are just as hyper-ethnocentric as Jews.

Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 1:35 PM  

"The Confederacy lost."

A war of attrition, yes. Compare casualty rates. Your primary mistake is that you've failed to realize that the people with something to lose *aren't ready to fight yet*. Making comparisons *right now* is a category error.

Blogger Jack Burroughs August 19, 2017 1:36 PM  

"Wasn't it the whole point of National Socialism that it was a hybrid of Left and Right?

VD: "No. It was 7x more Left than Right. They are to the Right of the Communists, and the Left of the Democrats."

That may well be true of their socialist economics. But you are ignoring my main point--namely, that their radically anti-egalitarian racial essentialism was Right wing.

In this sense, it seems to me that the Nazis were simultaneously far to the Left of the Democrats (in their economics), and far to the Right of the Republicans--and even of the Alt Right?--in their anti-egalitarian, intensely hierarchical racialism.

Blogger DonReynolds August 19, 2017 1:41 PM  

normally a lurker wrote:@21

The Nazi economy was geared around maximizing military output, starting in 1933

Except plenty of evidence indicates it wasn't: German armament production peaked only in 1944(!) despite sustained Allied bombing, the German armed forced faced ammunition shortages after the French and Polish campaign, armament and procurement policies were generally unfocused and contradictory due to the nature of the Nazi system, women were not pressed into factories leading to a great reliance on foreign labour (causing production losses due to sabotage) and by all accounts the economy wasn't tranformed into a full war economy until the Speer/Bormann/Himmler triumvirate took power in 1943.


Very good summary!
Hitler was convinced that the defeat during WWI was caused directly by the hardship and privation visited on the homefront by the war economy. He refused to switch German production away from consumer goods for as long as possible. He knew instinctively that the German people were materialistic and they would tolerate foreign wars as long as it did not pinch them at the table or in the shops. Many Germans were relatively unaffected by material shortages until after the fall of Stalingrad and lived their lives (much the same situation as Americans have done during wartime since WWII.) With the Fall of France, the Germans acquired 2 million French military prisoners who became essentially slave labor for the German state for as long as they lasted. Many millions more prisoners would come from other countries, while the German economy continued to produce toys and foodstuffs for the consumer markets.

Blogger dc.sunsets August 19, 2017 1:41 PM  

Crew, all people who can't embrace the uncertainty of the complex system that provides all of the things we need (including jobs, charity, mutual aid, etc.) desire a planned world.

It's a major paradox of human life that centrally planned "order" is attractive despite a perfect record of producing chaos and hardship, while spontaneously produced order is rejected because it's seen as producing not enough order.

Also, cunning parasites & predators sell central control 24/7, while no one can systematically profit from the diffuse cornucopia produced by the market.

The best we could hope for is a state run by people who had the long run value of its total capital (people, land, innovation, etc.) in mind, for example a monarchy.

Imperfect, of course, but Utopia is not an option.

Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 1:42 PM  

"And here's the crux of the matter. Alphas have this retarded idea that you can bully an Omega into a Delta."

Your first error is believing that I'm an alpha. I'm most certainly not. At the very least, I'm disqualified on the basis that I'm an introvert who hates being in leadership positions.

Your second error is assuming that I'm advocating bullying. I reserve that for neurotypical lefties who try to win arguments by screaming about racism.

No, I'm simply talking about offering to help people on an individual level. I've done that. Not as often as I should, probably, but I'm a natural misanthrope forced into philanthropy by faith. My point here is that enabling *is not* charity (in the sense of loving-kindness). Now, those who cannot? Different story. Those who will not? The Bible is pretty clear on the issue.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 1:42 PM  

Anonymous wrote:Aeoli Pera doesn't understand why antisemitism exists.

Are you new?

The most damning possible indictment of Nazis is, they are White people who are just as hyper-ethnocentric as Jews.

Not even wrong.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 1:44 PM  

S1AL wrote:"And here's the crux of the matter. Alphas have this retarded idea that you can bully an Omega into a Delta."

Your first error is believing that I'm an alpha. I'm most certainly not.


My fault for jumping abstraction levels. I'm talking mythical truth, as in archetypal composites.

Blogger VD August 19, 2017 1:45 PM  

That may well be true of their socialist economics. But you are ignoring my main point--namely, that their radically anti-egalitarian racial essentialism was Right wing.

No. Of the 14 elements deemed of the Left, 6 were economic and 8 were social.

I am not ignoring your main point. I know far more about this than you do, nothing you say is even remotely new or original, and you are wrong.

Alles klar?

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 1:49 PM  

I guess we have to disentangle the idea of "helping" vs. "enabling" then. Is it helping if I go to Baked Alaska's hospital room and yell at him for being an idiot? Is this better for him in the long run? What if I go to his hospital room and tell him his pain-inspired hallucinations about dark Jewdoo priests marking his forehead actually happened? Is that helping?

No, the best thing to do in that situation is be there for him while he grieves the loss of his eyes. It's a very lonely feeling to be blinded.

Blogger VD August 19, 2017 1:49 PM  

I'll break down the thought process behind the typical channer's economics:

1. The modern world says I need to die.
2. The modern world is wrong.
3. The Jews are the modern world.
4. The Jews are wrong.
5. Hitler opposed the Jews.
6. Hitler was right.
7. Hitler believed in socialism.
8. Socialism is right.


That may be. Those thought processes can be easily corrected too. But that is not my concern at the time, given that the philosophical foundation is not yet secured.

A core campaign of "food and flush toilets" will ultimately prove sufficient for the rhetoricals.

Blogger dc.sunsets August 19, 2017 1:50 PM  

Serge,could you explain why Mises' central critique of a socialist "economy," that the absence of factor prices renders economic calculation impossible, is wrong?

I'm hanging on your brilliant insights on this....

Blogger DonReynolds August 19, 2017 1:52 PM  

@139 Jack Burroughs
"That may well be true of their socialist economics. But you are ignoring my main point--namely, that their radically anti-egalitarian racial essentialism was Right wing."

This is misinformation. The Nazis certainly had awareness of race differences and had their own ideas of how to categorize races, but among Aryans....they were officially and determined to be egalitarian.

The Nazi press never tired to showing rich industrialists sitting at the same dinner table eating with farmers and ordinary working people. German Socialism is much older than Nazi party. The Volk was profoundly egalitarian, much more so than the French or British class systems. The Nazi boast was that the most ordinary German workers could go on holidays (like the rich) or drive on the Autobahn in their Volkswagen (People's Car).

Anonymous A Most Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents August 19, 2017 1:52 PM  

@128 Aeoli
If this thing goes hot the forced segregation of Nazis into high-trust brotherhoods

Not gonna happen, because Omegas are not high trust.

Blogger VD August 19, 2017 1:52 PM  

Is it helping if I go to Baked Alaska's hospital room and yell at him for being an idiot? Is this better for him in the long run? What if I go to his hospital room and tell him his pain-inspired hallucinations about dark Jewdoo priests marking his forehead actually happened?

Is it helping if I go to Richard Spencer's room and tell him that I know he means well, that next time, he's bound not to screw it up again? Is this better for him in the long run? What if I go to his house and yell at him for being an idiot and tell him to get a normal job instead of trying to be something he observably is not and will never be?

Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 1:53 PM  

Right. And after that? Do you abandon him to dependency on the state or do you help him learn Braille?

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 1:53 PM  

Now, generalize what I'm saying to the Charlottesville protesters in general. Baked Alaska is just the most extreme case I know of, everyone else is on a spectrum.

For Christ's sake, just think of the way you have to treat a rescue dog. You don't go straight to the "man up" bit.

Anonymous A Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents August 19, 2017 1:55 PM  

Koanic
Natives are welcome to loan money to corporations, but domestic corporations cannot loan to natives. Corps can loan to corps all day.



Pharisetic legalism? How novel. No one's ever tried that before.

Blogger Duke Norfolk August 19, 2017 1:57 PM  

I finally listened to the debate between Vox and Greg Johnson.

The thing that strikes me is that Greg often converses with Mike Enoch and crew and I have yet to hear him challenge them on their stance on this issue. Granted they aren't showing up in Nazi garb, with flags, etc. But I know they were throwing out some related phrases, etc. at C'ville, and certainly play that up on the podcast and website.

Enoch is generally a smart guy, but I really don't get this approach that he is taking.

And though Andrew Anglin has stated that there should be no LARPing in real life (though that's redundant), there's obviously still a lot of that crap at his website. If he, Enoch, and others think that you can play this crap on the internet, talk earnestly about the desirability of doing Nazism 2.0 (at least it comes across as earnest and not ironic/sarcastic), and not have that taken into real life by many of their followers, well, they're foolish and not as smart as I thought.

I challenge Greg to take this right at Enoch on TDS. He has the relationship him that could open that discussion.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 1:58 PM  

VD wrote:Is it helping if I go to Richard Spencer's room and tell him that I know he means well, that next time, he's bound not to screw it up again? Is this better for him in the long run? What if I go to his house and yell at him for being an idiot and tell him to get a normal job instead of trying to be something he observably is not and will never be?

In Spencer's case, yes, you chastise him in private and if you have the authority you strip his rank and reduce his responsibilities to something he can handle. Then you stick a medal of honor on Baked Alaska and thank him for his service to his country, and set him up with a nice, fat pension.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 2:00 PM  

Publicly give him a medal of honor, I might add.

This isn't even getting into charity, this is military leadership 101.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 2:02 PM  

And I get it, not a leader. Just...next time keep in mind people are looking up to you. That's all.

Blogger Gary Eden August 19, 2017 2:09 PM  

Arguing economics misses the point; thats not why people go NAZI.

I think a lot of this has its base in 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend'. Jews are seen as the enemy and source of many our current problems and Hitler the only person who ever stood up to him.

Want them to dump the NAZI crap? You won't get that by yelling at them or arguing the fine points of National Socialism. You get that by showing them you're a better ally with a better program.

This isn't about economics, its about survival.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 2:14 PM  

S1AL wrote:Right. And after that? Do you abandon him to dependency on the state or do you help him learn Braille?

Let me put it this way, we won't get to the "after" part for a couple of months, at best. This stuff is very personal for the people who were there, and getting through the emotions takes more time than WINNARZ generally understand.

If we can't suffer losses correctly as a group then our internet propaganda efforts will be useless, and the war will be lost. Victim narratives work, but only if you support your victims. This is absolutely essential stuff for 4GW.

Blogger Jack Burroughs August 19, 2017 2:19 PM  

JB: "That may well be true of their socialist economics. But you are ignoring my main point--namely, that their radically anti-egalitarian racial essentialism was Right wing."

VD: "No. Of the 14 elements deemed of the Left, 6 were economic and 8 were social.

I am not ignoring your main point. I know far more about this than you do, nothing you say is even remotely new or original, and you are wrong."

I didn't claim to be saying anything new or original, so that objection is irrelevant.

You, however, do seem to be saying something highly original, or at least eccentric--namely, that there is nothing Right wing about anti-egalitarian hierarchical racialism.

Is that really your view, Vox? Is anti-egalitarian racial essentialism just another example of how Left wing the Nazis were?

Blogger VD August 19, 2017 2:23 PM  

I think a lot of this has its base in 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend'. Jews are seen as the enemy and source of many our current problems and Hitler the only person who ever stood up to him.

The entire Muslim world just looked at you and shook their heads. Followed by the Chinese.

Want them to dump the NAZI crap? You won't get that by yelling at them or arguing the fine points of National Socialism. You get that by showing them you're a better ally with a better program.

You can't show that you're a better ally until you show that you are not them.

But all of this touchy-feely massage stuff is not my concern. My concern is the truth. I don't care about the street theater at all.

Blogger VD August 19, 2017 2:25 PM  

You, however, do seem to be saying something highly original, or at least eccentric--namely, that there is nothing Right wing about anti-egalitarian hierarchical racialism.

I'm not saying it isn't Right-wing, as it is consistent with God, King, and Country. But it is relatively trivial and by no means unique to the Right. It took all of seven years for the Soviets to adopt it.

Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 2:25 PM  

"You, however, do seem to be saying something highly original, or at least eccentric--namely, that there is nothing Right wing about anti-egalitarian hierarchical racialism."

Would it help you understand if you differentiated between Monarchial Right and Democratic Right? Because that's the hang-up here.

Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 2:30 PM  

"If we can't suffer losses correctly as a group then our internet propaganda efforts will be useless, and the war will be lost."

Playing the victim card appeals to the left. It's a hard truth, yes, but that doesn't make it any less the truth. Why do you think the Right's Noble Defeat strategy hasn't worked for forty years? You're not going to win a single person with the argument "those poor, poor Nazi flag-wavers totally didn't deserve what happened". You just aren't.

Anonymous glosoli August 19, 2017 2:31 PM  

Odd ain't it, that the Jews are only the enemy of Christian Western nations. I wonder why, what's the thing about us Christians they hate?

I hear Christianity is spreading in China, and the BIS has been in there for 2 decades ahead of the monetary system switch. The Chinese may regret their decision to welcome the moneylenders, despite the extra zero on the gold price to come.

Anonymous Anonymous August 19, 2017 2:31 PM  

"What if I go to his hospital room and tell him his pain-inspired hallucinations about dark Jewdoo priests marking his forehead actually happened?"

Who are you trying to gaslight? Not only did it happen, it was caught on film. A Jew from the SPLC stalked Baked Alaska on the night of the torch parade, approached him, and ritualistically tapped him on the forehead with the flat of his hand.

Then, the next day, Baked Alaska was the *only* person who had blinding acid thrown on his face.

The SPLC was letting the world know that they were targeting Baked Alaska for destruction, before they sent a hitman to blind him.

Why was he the target? Because he is very effective. He is not self-marginalizing. He is not a Nazi, he is not KKK, and he is not a White supremacist - but he is a critic of Jewish hyper-ethnocentrism.

This is crucially important. The relevant enemy is not the left. The left, the people who think absolute equality will lead to Utopia, have come to a dead end, and so have the fascists, the people who think borrowing leftist ideas can lead to national greatness.

The system we are actually up against is Jewish supremacy. The zombie-left and the zombie-fascists (including Nazi LARPers) serve as useful idiots for the real regime.

Those who, on the one hand, refuse to LARP as fascists, but on the other hand realize that the left isn't the only, or even the main, enemy, are dangerous to the establishment.

We could dispense entirely with the term "right" and just call ourselves proponents of a well run society.

I pray Baked Alaska regains his eyesight. If he doesn't, I pray he becomes a new John Milton, with a greater intellectual output after his blinding than before.

Blogger John August 19, 2017 2:44 PM  

What does all this mean for this for the aesthetic at rallies, events, websites. Everyone already sort of agreed that a swastika at a rally was a bad idea the question before was whether the infighting and drama from banning them was worth it. Okay so no Nazi imagery but how far does that go. Are the matching white polo khaki uniforms Nazi esque, can haircuts be Nazi esque, tiki torches, what about non Nazi fascist symbols. Its a big grey area. What should the aesthetic be. Should it be a hodgepodge of American originated right symbols (Gadsden, Southern stuff, Maga , Pepe, kekistan, thin blue line...) some of which are mostly tied to other ideologies or movements, should it just be patriotic aesthetics with a bunch of American flags, red white and blue a couple of founding fathers larpers, something completely new, I've seen people here suggest that it should have no aesthetic and look like people going to a picnic, or no rallies at all at this stage.

For what the alt right talks about the whole Nazi sphere if you want to can be boiled down to the JQ. Very little of their time is spent talking about the economics of national socialism, most of them will avoid talking about economics and they will readily say that it is a secondary and far down the road issue at this point. What you say on the JQ I think is the heart of the issue on the Nazi labeling by the media, political people and elite. This is the much bigger question then Nazi larpers in uniforms waving flags.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 2:45 PM  

Anonymous wrote:Who are you trying to gaslight? Not only did it happen, it was caught on film. A Jew from the SPLC stalked Baked Alaska on the night of the torch parade, approached him, and ritualistically tapped him on the forehead with the flat of his hand.

Then, the next day, Baked Alaska was the *only* person who had blinding acid thrown on his face.


I'm interested in seeing that film. But even if true, I expect you'd be overestimating the SPLC. Jewdoo occultism is more of an intelligence agency slash special forces schtick.

Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 2:47 PM  

Huh. Well, he left out the "seem" while existing what you actually think. That's new.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 2:47 PM  

S1AL wrote:"If we can't suffer losses correctly as a group then our internet propaganda efforts will be useless, and the war will be lost."

Playing the victim card appeals to the left. It's a hard truth, yes, but that doesn't make it any less the truth. Why do you think the Right's Noble Defeat strategy hasn't worked for forty years? You're not going to win a single person with the argument "those poor, poor Nazi flag-wavers totally didn't deserve what happened". You just aren't.


It works on normies. That's why propagandists use it. The reason it doesn't work for Nazi LARPers is that people are incapable of seeing them as victims.

Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 2:50 PM  

*explaining

Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 2:53 PM  

We're arguing semantics now, and not on an issue that we can resolve analytically. The important point is that it won't work, and will actually be counterproductive. If the goal is to actually win, then even the underlying attitude has to change. If people refuse to accept that, then they'll just get booted. At this point, frankly, there's nothing that could possibly be better for the right than getting tag-teamed by Antifa and Nazis.

Anonymous normally a lurker August 19, 2017 3:01 PM  

@140
Yes, Hitler's programme also served to collapse most of the base support the communists and social democrats enjoyed. The Gestapo and SA dealt with the leaders, while the rank and file were either placated or could join positions in the state and party apparatus (leading to the rise of the "Beefsteak-Nazis": brown on the outside, red on the inside). The success of this is seen in the despondent reports of the SoPaDe (social democrats in exile) and is probably one of the biggest political victories Hitler won.

The core of resistance always lay with the military and the aristocratic conservatives after all.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 3:05 PM  

S1AL wrote:We're arguing semantics now, and not on an issue that we can resolve analytically. The important point is that it won't work, and will actually be counterproductive. If the goal is to actually win, then even the underlying attitude has to change. If people refuse to accept that, then they'll just get booted. At this point, frankly, there's nothing that could possibly be better for the right than getting tag-teamed by Antifa and Nazis.

We're arguing marketing.

Here's a fun anecdote. 90% of the Wikipedia page on torture is about Christians torturing pagans. I've talked to a midwit who believed Jews invented torture to persecute pagans so they could be forced to convert to slave morality (i.e. Christianity). Tell me that's a coincidence.

Anonymous kfg August 19, 2017 3:05 PM  

"On the face of it, hierarchical racial essentialism would seem to contradict the constructivist view of human nature officially propounded by the Communists."

Ya ever notice that when you open it up, the contents are not necessarily as advertised on the tin?

Blogger Johnny August 19, 2017 3:08 PM  

Germany was a well run country before the Nazis came along and it continued to be well run after the Nazis took over. Hitler's economic boom occurred because he successfully stiffed the allies out of the war debt and stimulated the economy with massive spending on rearmament. Otherwise there was nothing special about "Nazi Economics" and no real reason to copy it.

Hitler went to war before Germany was fully ready because Britain and France were rearming and in a few years would have been too tough for a likely German victory. The war in France had to be won in a few weeks because after that the Germans would have started running out of war materials. The real reason the Germans were able to sustain WWII was that they were taking countries that had natural resources and were alread industral. That along with the expanded population allowed the sustained war effort.

Hitler was overconfident and seemed to think the Germans could win on a suprior will to fight, and the German economy was not put on a hundred percent war footing until 1943. After that they did a really impressive job of extracting every available resource for the war effort, but otherwise there was nothing in how they ran the country that merits trying to copy their economic approach.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 3:09 PM  

Keep in mind, that's a guy with an IQ in the 130s. You can't just market to people in the 99th percentile and up.

Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 3:11 PM  

"I've talked to a midwit who believed Jews invented torture to persecute pagans so they could be forced to convert to slave morality (i.e. Christianity). Tell me that's a coincidence."

People also think the Crusades were an invasion of the poor Muslim homelands. Lies told about history are nothing new or exceptional. You don't counter that with your own lies. You country it with an implacable dedication to the truth.

Nazism is as much of a lie as Communism (on both moral and practical levels). They're both evil. Neither has a place in America or on the right. All the excuses in the world won't change that.

Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 3:13 PM  

This is why the argument "Communism is as evil as Nazism" is a superior construction to "Nazism is no worse than Communism", even if they're equal: one is denigrating an evil institution, the other is defending an evil institution.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine August 19, 2017 3:13 PM  

Even in the ideal (and impossible) situation where the government somehow manages to skillfully control and guide all of the quotas and trade ratios, this would still have the effect of a rigid government pyramid standing atop the shoulders of the individual.

If one resource is difficult or impossible to acquire, what will inevitably result is the entire weight of the pyramid coming to rest on the individuals mandated to serve that duty. They are the economic front line fighters, and will be mercilessly crushed to a bloody paste by the uncaring pyramid riding on top of them.

Thus, even a skillful socialism can never be anything more than a pyramid of power, mobile by sliding on a grease of defenseless human blood.

Anonymous Anonymous August 19, 2017 3:15 PM  

Here is the You Tube video of Jewish SPLC employee Stephen Lemons stalking and approaching Baked Alaska, then flicking off his hat and tapping him on the forehead with the flat of his hand. Lemons is accompanied by a female colleague. The one person who was stalked by the SPLC Friday night is also the one person who was blinded by Antifa on Saturday.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhAW4dj2SzE

I hope Baked Alaska successfully sues the SPLC, Lemon, Antifascist Action, and Mayor Signer, and everyone else responsible for this act of terrorism.

Blogger VD August 19, 2017 3:23 PM  

Do that again, Jack, and you'll be banned.

Do not EVER attempt to speak for me, or to falsely twist logic to claim that I am saying something that I am not.

You are done on this thread. The fact that you don't even know how Soviet policy changed depending upon who had the upper hand demonstrates that you are not equipped to even take part in this discussion.

I have read Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, Bukharin, and Stalin. Your bumbling around in ignorance is already intolerable, but when you attempt to summarize my words, and do so incorrectly, you have crossed a clearly defined line here.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 3:51 PM  

S1AL wrote:"I've talked to a midwit who believed Jews invented torture to persecute pagans so they could be forced to convert to slave morality (i.e. Christianity). Tell me that's a coincidence."

People also think the Crusades were an invasion of the poor Muslim homelands. Lies told about history are nothing new or exceptional. You don't counter that with your own lies. You country it with an implacable dedication to the truth.

Nazism is as much of a lie as Communism (on both moral and practical levels). They're both evil. Neither has a place in America or on the right. All the excuses in the world won't change that.


Your memory is terrible. Was I advocating the use of lies? No, I was saying victim narratives work. And the Crusades narrative is just another example.

Communism clearly has a place in America because communists are right now tearing down statues and erasing its history with willing police protection. This world is filled with evil, so arguing that there's "no place" for evil is stupid.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 3:52 PM  

Anonymous wrote:Here is the You Tube video of Jewish SPLC employee Stephen Lemons stalking and approaching Baked Alaska, then flicking off his hat and tapping him on the forehead with the flat of his hand. Lemons is accompanied by a female colleague. The one person who was stalked by the SPLC Friday night is also the one person who was blinded by Antifa on Saturday.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhAW4dj2SzE


Thank you for providing proof that you're a god-damned retard.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 3:56 PM  

Anonymous wrote:I hope Baked Alaska successfully sues the SPLC, Lemon, Antifascist Action, and Mayor Signer, and everyone else responsible for this act of terrorism.

I agree with that part.

Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 4:21 PM  

"Your memory is terrible. Was I advocating the use of lies? No, I was saying victim narratives work. And the Crusades narrative is just another example."

I'm not talking about you, I'm talking about anyone who holds up the flag of Nazism, which is a lying philosophy. If we're marketing ourselves as being in the side of truth, that means expelling all the obvious lies.

"Communism clearly has a place in America because communists are right now tearing down statues and erasing its history with willing police protection. This world is filled with evil, so arguing that there's "no place" for evil is stupid."

At this point I'm not sure if you're being pedantic or willfully obtuse. I'm not talking about a quantified assessment of the existence of Communist activists in the United States. I'm saying they don't belong here. You're treating philosophical rhetoric as an emotional statement. It's not.

Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 4:22 PM  

*empirical statement, not emotional

Anonymous JAG August 19, 2017 4:34 PM  

glosoli wrote:Odd ain't it, that the Jews are only the enemy of Christian Western nations. I wonder why, what's the thing about us Christians they hate?

The reason is simple. Jesus called them out on who they really worship.

Blogger Southern Israelite August 19, 2017 4:41 PM  

Totalitarianism = some propositions are true and some propositions are false. Crazy, I know.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 4:41 PM  

S1AL wrote:At this point I'm not sure if you're being pedantic or willfully obtuse.

I won't claim there's a method to my madness, but there is a central tendency. I'll be pedantic for a moment: if you can find the patterns in my behavior, you can reverse engineer the common causal elements. This is how mind-reading works.

I'm not talking about a quantified assessment of the existence of Communist activists in the United States. I'm saying they don't belong here. You're treating philosophical rhetoric as an emotional statement. It's not.

You're treating them as separate things. Philosophy must meet empiricism in the middle. It's not enough to derive the how from the why, you must first correctly describe the what. And to do that you have to be ruthlessly honest, as you say. And it is ruthlessly honest to say that America is made of Americans, and Americans do not have the balls or the average IQ for ideas to matter.

Anonymous A Most Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Deplorable Cents August 19, 2017 4:47 PM  

Once again we see that some people can be reached with dialectic, others only with rhetoric, and some cannot be taught.

Let me try a different approach.

Socialism is poop. Dog poop, in fact. Soviet socialism is dog poop on a stick, national socialism is dog poop on a plate,

Put a pretty doily on the plate under the dog poop? It's still poop.
Garnish that dog poop on the doily on the plate with nice fresh arugula? It's still dog poop.
Serve it on a red, white and blue plate with stars? Still dog poop.
Smother it with home fermented saurkraut with mustard on the side and a liter of beer? It's still dog poop.

No matter how someone dresses up dog poop, it's still dog poop. The alt Retard likes to sit around eating dog poop while telling each other it's really bratwurst made in an artisanal cottage in the mountains of Bavaria by lederhosen clad Aryans.

It's still dog poop.

Blogger Aeoli Pera August 19, 2017 4:54 PM  

That's bad rhetoric. You have to appeal to their values. For that, point out socialism was invented by Jews.

See? Easy.

Anonymous A Most Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents August 19, 2017 4:57 PM  

For that, point out socialism was invented by Jews.


"Then it was purified by the Aryan race".

See? Easy.

Yep.
You know, overestimating the intelligence of an audience is just as much an error as underestimating it. Calibration matters.

Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 5:03 PM  

"And it is ruthlessly honest to say that America is made of Americans, and Americans do not have the balls or the average IQ for ideas to matter."

Au contraire! Truly complex ideas presented in a dialectical format are irrelevant to most Americans. And most people, period.

Simple ideas, simple presented, are quite effective. "National Socialism is evil, just like all other forms of socialism" is a simple idea that you can never escape. You don't need pedantic arguments about the quantifiable degree to which socialism is left-wing (those arguments are useful in other scenarios). You just need to distill the broad concepts down to simple notions. Pithy sayings are popular for a reason.

Anonymous A Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents August 19, 2017 5:05 PM  

"National Socialism is evil, just like all other forms of socialism" is a simple idea that you can never escape.

Socialism is dog poop.

Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 5:13 PM  

"Socialism is dog poop."

This is more an issue of audience. If my goal is to convince moderates that (a) all forms of socialism are leftist, (b) socialism is evil, I have to plant both of those ideas.

If you're just trying to go with (b), different story.

Anonymous A Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents August 19, 2017 5:19 PM  

@196 S1AL
This is more an issue of audience.

@193
You know, overestimating the intelligence of an audience is just as much an error as underestimating it. Calibration matters.

You could just agree with me. But your pride won't allow it.

Socialism is still dog poop.

Anonymous Anonymous August 19, 2017 5:25 PM  

Eat fish, eggs liver, don't drink cals, sleep 8+hrs, 3-5 times per week gym and supplement organic zinc (150mg), 5.000 iu vit d. U are welcome

Blogger S1AL August 19, 2017 5:28 PM  

I will happily agree with you that there are situations where yours is correct. But if we can't have pedantic arguments about minutiae at VP, what's the point?

Anonymous kfg August 19, 2017 6:07 PM  

" . . .supplement organic zinc . . ."

And throw in some non-organic carbon.

1 – 200 of 215 Newer› Newest»

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts