[–] Veridic 4 points 44 points (+48|-4) ago 

They were socialist in that they wanted their society to be the top priority. Not their money, not their leader, not their achievements, but their society. They all wanted to put their families first.

Would you sell your wife for money? Would you pollute and squander your natural resources for money? The nazi's considered some things as sacred, some things are priceless. Their blood and their soil. Do you blame them for that?

[–] Atomized_Individual 2 points 15 points (+17|-2) ago 

They were pro gun, pro business, pro family, anti abortion ( for German women )

[–] Res_Publica 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

How was lebensborn pro family? They wanted Hitler to be everyone’s father figure, and kids to grow up in State orphanages.

[–] bruddah 1 points 10 points (+11|-1) ago 

Exactly this. A sense of connectedness that comes from a people with shared values

[–] mrfetus 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Be my neighbor.

[–] mrfetus 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Thank you. HH

[–] casualgoat [S] 20 points 2 points (+22|-20) ago 

Fucking bullshit. They were socialist in the fact that they thought government had the ultimate say in a society as opposed to a government ruled by the consent of the governed.

"Consent of the governed. In political philosophy, the phrase consent of the governed refers to the idea that a government's legitimacy and moral right to use state power is only justified and lawful when consented to by the people or society over which that political power is exercised."

Your arguments are bullshit conjecture meant to illicit an emotional response. Strawman Fallacy. Shill harder faggot. We're on to you.

[–] bb22 2 points 18 points (+20|-2) ago 

From what I've read, they left private businesses alone. They didn't overburden people with taxes. They used public works projects to put people to work, and there was little corruption involved in them (construction of the Autobahn for example).

They were socialist compared to the original interpretation of the US Constitution, but they were no more socialist than FDR's America from what I've seen.

[–] sbt2160p 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

implying that the Nazis didn't have consent of the governed?

[–] LexOrandiLexCredendi 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

You will always be ruled by someone, either by faceless oligarchs who want you dead after making you suffer for years in social experimentation or by a government in some fashion.

Self determination and self rule are slogans intended to deceive you.

Go read some Moldbug.

[–] whatisbestinlife 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

until we stop paying for globalist affairs such as free money for israel we are socialist tit suckers. wanna wipe your name clean?

[–] Koalemos_Grottesco 5 points 25 points (+30|-5) ago  (edited ago)

You're using a lot of words you clearly have little understanding of. Please sober up and fuck off.

Progressive ideals? What? I'm willing to bet money Spencer is more illiberal than you are.

Equivocating between Marxism and NatSoc is actually retarded. While liberalism took the historical subject to be the individual, Marxism took it to be class, and fascism took it to be tradition (and in the case of Germany organized tradition around race). If you read anything about why the choice "socialist" was used by NatSoc, it was exactly to undermine Marxists, and again to equivocate between them on the basis of nothing other than the term shows you're a fucking ignorant idiot.

Lastly, to say it is a "liberal agenda" shows that...again again... you have no idea what any of these terms actually mean. Fascism is literally a reaction against liberalism. The postmodern era is the consequence of liberalism winning, and it is a fucking disaster. If your concern is "muh lefties" but don't understand the problems of left-wing liberalism AND right-wing liberalism then you're about as bluepilled as it gets.

[–] Whitemail 2 points 17 points (+19|-2) ago 

[–] lemon11 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Marxists had been using the word for over fifty years by that point. "True liberals" also can't reclaim their label from progressives because they look the same from the outside, and together they form a motte-and-bailey deceit.

[–] Whitemail 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Liberalism is the doorway for Marxism. If you try to be liberal, (((they))) will exploit that, and you'll end up with progressive freaks like we have now.

[–] i_yam_wat_i_yam 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

And once again, I have to mention there is no source for this quote. There isn't even a speech on that date. Look it up.

[–] matthew-- 4 points 0 points (+4|-4) ago 

Is the government taking money from the populace, or creating it out of thin air (and destroying its value) to fund public works and welfare systems?

If yes, then it is socialism.

Is the hierarchical system determined based on something other than competency (class, race etc.)?

If yes, it's Marxism.

And no fancy infographic is going to change that fact.

[–] Glory_Beckons 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

TIL Marxist Socialism is the only form of government that has ever existed. /s

Governments always redistribute a portion of their population's work effort towards common goals. That is literally what it means "to govern". The difference lies in only in how much, and what for. Taxes in the Reich were much lower than in the USA or any other Western country today. And their main objectives were improving infrastructure and sustainability.

A pure meritocracy has never existed, but the Reich got a hell of a lot closer to that ideal than anything around today. "Die Klasseneinigung Deutschlands" -- The Class Unification of Germany -- was a major talking point for the party. One they followed through on without compromise. They got rid of the aristocracy, formal and otherwise. Any man could rise to any position, no matter his background. Children from poor homes were guaranteed a decent education and basic needs, to ensure the best among them had a chance to rise to the top.

The very word "Nation" comes from the same root as "native". It literally means "that which has been born".

You cannot therefore have a nation of many races. The truth of this has never been more evident than today. The same people who call for "open borders" -- that is, no borders at all -- are the ones who also spit on flags, destroy monuments and tarnish history. All are attempts to destroy the nation. All escalate as the nation becomes more "diverse".

[–] Shekelstein6M 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Is the government taking money from the populace, or creating it out of thin air (and destroying its value) to fund public works and welfare systems?

If yes, then it is socialism.

Is the hierarchical system determined based on something other than competency (class, race etc.)?

If yes, it's Marxism.

Oh wow, I never knew that monarchists were actually communists.

8000 years of human history was actually all communism. Who would have thought.

You retards make me laugh.

[–] Whitemail 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Honestly, I think a lot of things should be used for the benefit of the population in general. Most cases of Marxist socialism were Jews push a scam to rob, enslave, and destroy. Going into the Ukraine and seizing all the produce, so that people starve to death isn't communism. Communism is just the lies they told people, so they could do stuff like that. If oil reserves or something else valuable will be used to benefit the people, there needs to be limitations on it. I think the UAE actually has a good model to look at. They give benefits to qualified Arabs. If you're not Arab, you can never get any of these benefits. I heard from a Syrian girl living there that they provide housing, discounts at stores, and other things. She was a foreigner, so she wasn't getting shit.

The modern Western welfare states were set up by governments that don't give a fuck about us with the lie that they are some kind of charity. Their intended purpose is to be a magnet for all the black and brown savages to come walking in and destroy the place.

[–] LexOrandiLexCredendi 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

As I pointed out elsewhere, Marx was ultimately advocating for a stateless libertarian utopia and using the dictatorship of the Proletariat to get there.

[–] Weasel_Soup 0 points 12 points (+12|-0) ago 

The soviets were taking all the resources in their territory by force (nationalizing) and they were planning on conquering all of Europe. They were fighting fire with fire. People often forget to mention the urgency the Germans had to defend themselves from Stalin.

[–] albatrosv15 2 points -2 points (+0|-2) ago 

Eh, if there wouldn't have been "evil hitler", how could soviets justify "liberating" half of europe?

[–] Shekelstein6M 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

They invaded half a dozen countries before Hitler invaded Poland...

[–] nul 4 points 9 points (+13|-4) ago 

Meh, i'm drunk too. Otherwise I wouldn't respond to this kind of bait. The lack of any serious responses does alarm me though.

National Socialism is center left. Get over it. Only in today's modern society where everything is tried to be put on a spectrum of 2 dimensions does this matter. Everything is either capitalism or socialism... false. Think of it more as a threeway . Capitalism is a fatty, socialism is a skinny twig, and natsoc is a jacked guy. Your inability to see outside of your conditioning says a lot about you . Here's a quote from the man himself.

And yeah, I read a lot of nazi doctrine, which is why i'm confident when I agree with you and call spencer and his alt-right pussies a bunch of faggots. INB4 wasn't real national socialism. (But really, they're a bunch of fags, we can agree). But remember, a lot of people came this way from the Left. is it better to be born good or to overcome evil through great effort? Also, just a side note, skinheads and their culture are also generally faggots too. Most of them just find nazi Germany to be "cool" but don't know any of the ideology behind it. I do suggest reading zero tolerance. More links

Hitler was a great guy, but he was too much sun, and not enough lightning. If you can't understand that then you need to do more lurking.

Anyway, if this doesn't make sense, I'll leave you with this

Now quit being a drunk faggot and go read a book.

[–] i_yam_wat_i_yam 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

There is no source for that quote and no recorded speech by Hitler on that date.

[–] Goat-Master-5000 2 points 8 points (+10|-2) ago 

OP is either retarded or a shill.

Jason Kessler was NOT a "Bernie Bro".

"Kessler" is an Ashkenazi Jew surname. From Google:

"Kessler or Keßler is a surname of German, Dutch, and Jewish (Ashkenazi) origins. It is an occupational name that means coppersmith."

Kessler is a Jewish man who supported a black candidate named Barack Obama. He was an activist in the Occupy Movement, and worked for CNN as an assignment editor. He's also "pro-gun control".

That's not a "National Socialist"; that's a globalist double agent deliberately subverting a movement....and indirectly causing a lot of mayhem and violence.

[–] jackthebutholeripper 2 points 7 points (+9|-2) ago 

Someone saw Death of A Nation recently

[–] casualgoat [S] 9 points -3 points (+6|-9) ago 

Absolutely, and thanks for promoting it.

Ultimately, wasn't anything I wasn't aware of before, but it did embolden me to make this post rather than sit quietly and let Voat fall to liberalism.

I won't sit back and watch free speech die, regardless of the culprit and/or forum, without first speaking my peace.

[–] jackthebutholeripper 2 points 0 points (+2|-2) ago 

I thought it was just ok. A little tongue-in-cheek, not to mention the last 1/3 of the movie about the girl who wrote the anti-hitler stuff could have been scrapped altogether imo

thx for singlehandedly saving voat with this post though. It was really falling down that leftist track. Is the username @Spartacus taken yet?

[–] Trigglypuff 3 points 7 points (+10|-3) ago 

Lol, I bet you’re some anarcho capitalist faggot, or a Jewish communist.

The reich is faggotry of the highest order.

Do your employers know that you’re tripping out shlomo?

load more comments ▼ (39 remaining)