This is the ultimate trad book on politics
>*de* SadeInto the trash it goes
>>25339471The author himself is a von
>>25339473That’s even worse, since he should know
>>25339477Dumas obviously didn't even know, always using D'Artagnan when he should have just said Artagnan
>>25339465How is his argumentation style in this one? I have been thinking about buying it, but I was scared that he starts to put six quotes from Goethe on every fucking page.
>>25339513That sounds like Das Kapital
>>25339465>Hitler>leftI thought this was just a joke, are people seriously this dumb?
>>25339496"Except d'", "du" and "des" are always kept. Sade, being a monosyllabic name, would have kept the "de" if it didn't sound better without it (like Retz instead of de Retz). Sade himself at the end of his life dropped the "de" entirely from his full name.
>>25339532>Sade himself at the end of his life dropped the "de" entirely from his full name.That was because he was a leftist. In his case it indicated his nobility. This is always the case with "von" in German
>>25339532Wdym sade is monosyllabic?
>>25339612It's pronounced "sad" not sadé
>>25339525Daily reminder that National Socialism was a collectivistic movement.The clue was in the word "socialism."
>>25339735Socialism in natsoc means it was social and promoted socializing and being a society. Not that it advocated abolishing privatized capital, capital remained very much privatized. National socialism is national capitalism
The ultimate book to dry all pussies, and make all men look sadly at you as if they'd just watched you drool onto your pissed pants.
>>25339735>The clue was in the word "socialism."You're falling for a 90 year old PR stunt by the NSDAP to secure voters among the workers, good job.Hitler on many occasions stated hiss staunch opposition to Marxism. Hitler assured the capitalists of Germany, who where worried about supporting the Nazis on account of the word "socialism" in their name, that he would respect and defend their right to private property.In fact some historians argue that the election that solidified NSDAP rule in Germany was in large parts thanks to sizable campaign funds by capitalists in charge the various big German companies at the time
>>25339765>Socialism in natsoc means it was social and promoted socializing and being a society.LOL no. It established the nation state as the foundation of society. Everything was subordinate to the nation, including capital.The capitalists retained their assets so long as they got with the programme. Heaven help them otherwise.>>25339791>Hitler on many occasions stated hiss staunch opposition to MarxismNo shit. Marxism was internationalist in nature. Hence the nationalist reaction that was Nazism.>Hitler assured the capitalists blah blah blah right to private property.Private property is not precluded by socialism, so long as it serves the needs of socialism. Hitler was content with the commitment of Germany's industrialists, who advanced the cause of the nation, even while making handsome profits from slave labour.
>>25339839None of what you're describing is left wing
>>25339839>Everything was subordinate to the state, including capital.That's how all states theoretically work, stupid.
>>25339868>it wasn't REAL socialism!
>>25339839Sure that's why his 1933 campain was financed by Standard oil trough it's subsidiary I.G Farben.> Everything was subordinate to the nation, including capital.Yet it made bucks to Standard oil, General electric, Ford, which owned the german industry. Capital is not subordinated to the nation if it goes into Capital pockets. More like the "nation" is subordinated to the Capital. Not saying that State Capital (bolshevism) is any better. But you have to stop with this bullshit that the Reich means of production were controlled by the workers. It wasnt. Read Antony Sutton: Wall street and the rise of Hitler. Whatever if the "nation" was in control, if the end result was making the Capital richer. > Hitler was content with the commitment of Germany's industrialists, who advanced the cause of the nation,The industrialists do not give a shit about the nation. They only care about making more Capital. The NSDAP was required by the industrialist since germany was in a chaotic state pre-1933. The Reich put order in the country, and that was good for the industry. It served the interest of the Capital. Stop already with youir NSDAP/ bolshevism false dichotomy. Both are wage labor based mode of production. Source: Hitler, Adolf - Address to the Industry Club in Duesseldorf on 27th January 1932. Hitler literally reassured the german industry that everything is going to be ok for them.
>>25339891According to Ernst Rohm (RIP), it definitively wasn't. He literally said that the Reich did a nationalistic revolution, but they yet had to make a socialist revolution. So they got rid of him.
>>25339891It isn't socialism at all. Your entire supposition that it was is based only on a word. I presume you don't take seriously Socialistic states which call themselves 'democratic' republics. I must presume you know the difference in that case between actually embodying a style of government, and just using popular political words to gain support for yourself.
>>25339791Capitalism is incompatible with a dictatorship because the dictator will take your property if you don’t do what they say, so they have no incentive to actually protect private property. And Hitler doesn’t need gibs from industrialists once he can just go to their businesses and take their stuff outside of the legal system.
>>25339926The portions of this book which I‘ve seen posted have never shown that industrial support for the NSDAP began before they had reached their groundswell in popular support. >>25339927Where it remains impossible on the evidence remaining to ascertain whether he was or was not planning a coup, we have sufficient reason to take Hitler at his word that concern over this was the primary motivator.
>>25339945ah so here is you line of thinking, there are two options, capitalism and socialism. Everything that isn't capitalism is Socialism. Dictatorship isn't capitalist, therefore it must be socialist, Hitler, being a dictator can be nothing other than a socialist. Bravo my good beanhead
>>25339954My definition of socialism is state-owned/collectivized means of production. That’s the natural result of someone having absolute power in the country. Otherwise you get the modern liberal relationship of competing individuals trying to control the state.
>>25339960Under this definition, virtually all pre-capitalist societies, in the middle ages, in the ancient world, in which absolute power in government was common, would be classed as socialist.
>>25339967Yeah, but those are pre-industrial feudal societies with no relationship to industry. Capitalism and socialism apply to modern societies.
>>25339974certainly not, Capitalism and Socialism are the ideologies which prevail in modern times merely, but you can't pretend as if all history doesn't exist when you write up these overly simple definitions, because the result will be the sort of false dichotomy which you have created.
>>25339987Okay bro
The chief thing which Marx advocates for, is the splitting of revenue proportionally to the amount of work done by each worker, the problem in our society is that it is split grossly disproportionately.
>>25339990Look, you started this ridiculous parody of a critique of socialism, you should be able to carry on a conversation for more than 5 minutes when someone gives you an ear on the subject.
>>25339881Bullshit, faggot.
>>25339926>Capital is not subordinated to the nation if it goes into Capital pocketsIt does if the capitalists use it in support of the nation.>But you have to stop with this bullshit that the Reich means of production were controlled by the workersI never said that. Nazism abolishes distinctions between workers and bosses. As I've said, they are all subordinate to the nation.>The industrialists do not give a shit about the nationThey don't have to, so long as they advance the national cause. Which they were happy to do, as long as it kept them in profit.
>>25339465De Sade, the sadist coomer from a noble family, a leftist? Also the guy who was a hyper-nationalist with deranged racial supremacist views was a ''leftist''? The guy who wrote this book is a loon
>>25339735Yes and The Democratic Republic of Korea is both a democracy and a republic.
>>25340077> the sadist coomer from a noble family, a leftist?If you read his works he constantly talks about how bad the church is and how theft shouldn’t be illegal because it “distributes wealth more equally.”
>>25340083he was just shitposting
>>25340005Little baby doesn't understand law, huh? Concept a widdle too tuf for yowr widdle bwain, huh?
>>25339891Do you by any chance also think that East Germany and North Korea are democracies?
>>25340009>Nazism [doesn't] abolish distinctions between workers and bossesExactly, because it isn't socialism, otherwise it would
>>25339765>National socialism is national capitalismI'll be sharpening my long knives for you, faggot.
>>25339465Great writer. The trouble is, the other side of this is inbred nobility running on credit betraying their birthright and the people they're meant to lead and protect at the same time. "A country has the [Leftists] it deserves."
>>25340604You'll be saluting your boss and sucking him off to show your patriotic devotion to his private enterprise before you volunteer to die for his wars kek
>>25340082muh nigga>>25339465introduction by derek zoolander
>>25339945Capitalism IS dictatorship. The owner of private property quite literally IS the dictator of that property and by extension a dictator over whoever works on it. All privatised work places are dictatorships.
>>25340637Buckley wrote the intro
>>25340656>>25340656fucking lol of course he didhit parade of faggot idiots
>>25339525this is the kind of moron who cannot even define fascism lmao
>>25340631Whatever the hell that means I don't speak pink. And I'm unemployed anyways, I don't work for anyone and live off welfare and charity mostly.
>>25340682Funny you mention it. Roger Griffin, a fascism scholar I'm currently reading, compares the definition of fascism to Augustine of Hippo's quote about time:"I know well what time is, so long as nobody asks me.But, when I must say what it is. I no longer know"There are many definitions of fascism that are debated among scholars, each with some overlap and each more or less useful for certain purposes.Griffin narrows down a so called Fascist Minimum based on how fascists themselves understood their political project:They view themselves as a self-appointed vanguard of an imagined community which is perceived as exposed to an urgent or sustained existential threat.
>>25339735>EVERYTHING EBIL IS LEFTHoly retardo
>>25340640I meant dictator in the political sense of one person having absolute power in the country. Capitalists still have to compete with other capitalists and can lose or gain power depending on the market.
>>25340132*faggotry intensifies*
>>25340598Did you think we wouldn't notice what you did there?>>25341105A characteristic of retards is the use of strawmen. Take an IQ test, and prepare for the worst.
>>25341999The actual idiocracy meme
>>25342150no u
>>25342007>Did you think we wouldn't notice what you did there?No, I've just misread the post I was replying to
>>25342007>IQ testlmao
>>25341092wow thats like everything but the important stuffreally good job
>>25341656That would still mean a dictatorship of the Bourgeoisie
>>25343065What I'm getting at is that fascism is notoriously difficult to rigorously define, as any person actually studying the subject would tell you, so "lmao, can't even define fascism" isn't quite the gotcha that anon thought it is
>>25343078>What I'm getting at is that fascism is notoriously difficult to rigorously defineBecause it's an empty ideology that doesn't really represent anything
>>25343078>Hitler>leftbro, is that really the argument you want to make ?
>>25343078Far right wing authoritarian ultra-nationalism. There doesn't need to be a theocratic element to it but there usually is.
>>25344402No, I'm saying the precise opposite and it's ridiculous that it's even up for debate in the first place>>25344412>ultra-nationalismbang on, the imagined community I mentioned above is the ultra-nation and there is almost always a narrative of some imminent crisis threatening it, which can be anything from Judeo–Bolshevism to the woke agenda coming for your media or some shit.
>>25339775Two more weeks...
>>25344428its authoritarianism, typically with an business/industrial oligarchy with a nationalist demagoguery and a populist front.
