Strasserism, National Bolshevism and the various types of Third Positionism have all been vindicated in the 21st century. We have seen without a shadow of a doubt that consumerist capitalism always devolves towards globalism. It is the worship of GDP and wealth that has funneled immigrants into the West for decades and an economic rationale is always at the forefront of the argument. Conservatism, libertarianism and neoliberalism have all been thoroughly proven to be erroneous systems of governance and it is obvious that if racial and ethnic interests are to be preserved, a firm hand around the throat of the economy is necessary. This of course does not necessitate full blown Communism or Socialism, but it is painfully apparent what happens when the market is the primary authority in a society.
>>489071296Based
"Nazbol" is what China has been doing ever since Mao took over
>>489071296If it worked it would still be around today.
>>489071838Are you implying that what we have now is working?
>>489071296I can only hope for another Falange
>>489071838>the retard from the country that is actively trying to nuke farmers thinks the current system works LMAOOOOO
>>489073731Yes. Are you implying your life would be better under a dictatorship?
>>489074064Strasserism was a democratic system; regionally elected heads would elect a president. I'm personally in favor of liquid democracy combined with an explicit constitution.
>>489071296Based thread
>>489074064And btw, the systems today are absolutely not working, unless you are not ethnocentric.
>>489071296When did Strasserism ever constitute a significant political force in Germany? From my knowledge, it was only active in a few circles in the tiny anti-Hitler resistance movement.
>>489071296>strasserismA meaningless nothing-ideology beheld by internet dweebs who are too afraid to hail Hitler and recognize the sanctity of the swastika.
>>489075192I see it more as a LARP for autists who think the Hitler regime wasn’t “real National Socialism”, but either way no one takes Strasserism seriously as an ideology
>>489075192Fascist Italy and NS Germany were too capitalist. Mussolini to his credit made an attempt to correct past mistakes with the Italian Social Republic and return fascism to its socialist roots but by then it was too late.
reactionary.
>>489075577How so? And why do you think it would’ve been any different if Strasser were in charge?
>>489075192Hitler was an idiot who destroyed Germany and stabbed the SA in the back. >>489075458>I see it more as a LARP for autists who think the Hitler regime wasn’t “real National Socialism”Because it wasn't. Hitler came into the party and hijacked for his own interests. Hitler allowed a great deal of privatization when he Furher, in direct contradiction to the party he had joined and their program. Maybe you should try learning a little history. >but either way no one takes Strasserism seriously as an ideologyBecause it never existed. How are you supposed to take something seriously with no history other than being a concept?
>>489075585Reactionary/revolutionary are meaningless buzzwords.
>>489075814your words are meaningless because you talk a lot but say very little.
>>489075699>How so?Both Hitler and the Italian state made too many compromises with capitalists, they essentially backstabbed their followers and their original platform, they would have ended up as gay democracies given enough time>And why do you think it would’ve been any different if Strasser were in charge?WW2 might have gone differently because the traitorous aristocrats that betrayed Germany would have been suppressed and removed from their positions, the economy would have been better prepared for war and rapprochement/alliance with the Soviets would have been possible
>>489075743> Hitler came into the party and hijacked for his own interestsHitler was a member of the NSDAP before either of the Strasser brothers joined it, before “National Socialist” was even added to the name, so why is he not a “real National Socialist” but the Strasser bros. were?> Hitler allowed a great deal of privatization when he Furher, in direct contradiction to the party he had joined and their program.Hitler fulfilled every point on the 25 point platform of the NSDAP. The Strasser brothers tried amending the platform but Hitler insisted it was inviolable. YOU need to read your history.
>>489076070> Both Hitler and the Italian state made too many compromises with capitalistsThat’s what Italian fascism is ultimately based on. It’s called corporatism, not sure if you’ve ever heard of it. And Hitler only compromised with industrialists for the sake of rearmament.> WW2 might have gone differently because the traitorous aristocrats that betrayed Germany would have been suppressed and removed from their positions>Implying it was “aristocrats” and not communist Jews that betrayed Germany
>>489076360>Hitler was a member of the NSDAP before either of the Strasser brothers joined it, before “National Socialist” was even added to the name, so why is he not a “real National Socialist” but the Strasser bros. were?Because when it was just known as the DAP there was a clear economic vision laid out, which Hitler drastically altered. So, yes, Hitler merely hijacked the party with already existing ideas. The reason why Strassers were so popular and rivals to Hitler is because they represented its original intent, unlike Hitler. So, Hitler is a true "NS", but not a "DAP". He did away with the socialist economics of the party. >Hitler fulfilled every point on the 25 point platform of the NSDAP.Wrong. >Abolition of unearned (work and labour) incomes. Breaking of debt (interest)-slavery.Hitler still permitted things like property ownership which provided unearned income (rent). This is part of his betrayal of the program. >We demand nationalization of all businesses which have been up to the present formed into companies (trusts).Another point that he didn't hold to. Hitler allowed most to stay private. >We demand a land reform suitable to our needs, provision of a law for the free expropriation of land for the purposes of public utility, abolition of land rent and prevention of all speculation in land.See above. >YOU need to read your history.Take your own advice.
>>489076809>he doesn't know about the large network of anti-NS German officials many from aristocratic families>he thinks communist Jews still held any important positions in Hitler's Germany>That’s what Italian fascism is ultimately based on. It’s called corporatism, not sure if you’ve ever heard of it.Corporatism isn't about compromising with capitalists, it's about supremacy of the state over them. But theory and how it was actually implemented in practice are two different things. The Italian Social Republic was closer to the original corporatist fascist doctrine. >And Hitler only compromised with industrialists for the sake of rearmament. Hitler's entire industrial system prior to 1943 was very inefficient and run by capitalists for private profit not really for the needs of the state/nation.
>>489077313>Hitler allowed most to stay private.Not only that, he privatized many.Hitler's actions once he got into office were in many ways a massive copout.
>>489077547Yes, Hitler was a pawn of the wealthy German class (and international, if we're being honest). This is part of the reason he was given power and the SA and Strassers were purged. That said, his National Socialism does deserve credit for preventing the more cancerous aspects of capitalism, like mass immigration. That is the point of this thread, to point out that high economic freedom simply doesn't work unless you are a globalist.
>>489071838It is
>>489077313The NSDAP drafted its economic platform after Hitler joined it, in fact Hitler’s stated reason for joining the Nazi party in Mein Kampf was listening to a lecture on the breaking of interest-slavery by Gottfried Feder. Far from hijacking the party, the party considered him their most valuable asset, as he was a charismatic orator and passionate leader. He even went to prison for the cause. > The reason why Strassers were so popular and rivals to Hitler is because they represented its original intent, unlike Hitler.Except the Strassers were not popular at all except in one region of Germany. They literally got voted down by the party majority. >Hitler still permitted things like property ownership which provided unearned income (rent). This is part of his betrayal of the program.The NSDAP was never against private property. Maybe Strasser was but he was not the NSDAP. > Another point that he didn't hold to. Hitler allowed most to stay private.Which ones were private? Come on, I know which sources you’re gonna use on this one, and I can show you why they’re all wrong.
>>489078349>The NSDAP drafted its economic platform after Hitler joined itWhich goes against the economic points of the 25 Point Plan. So, you're admitting he did not "fulfill every point" of it. >Except the Strassers were not popular at all except in one region of Germany. They literally got voted down by the party majority.They were popular with the people who stuck to the original party's intent. Hitler was popular with the Hitlerists who appropriated the party with him. If the Strassers weren't noteworthy, we wouldn't be discussing them right now, but we are. >The NSDAP was never against private property. Maybe Strasser was but he was not the NSDAP.Thank you for admitting that Hitler hijacked the party and changed it to his agenda. >Which ones were private? Come on, I know which sources you’re gonna use on this one, and I can show you why they’re all wrong.Literally almost all of them as Hitler as I just said because that's what Hitler maintained. So feel free to show me the mass nationalizations that supposedly happened during the Reich.
BasedReminder that strasser was too extreme for Hitler
>>489079209*Literally almost of them as I just said because that's what Hitler maintained.
>>489071296The problem with the Nazis Left is that they're almost indistinguishable from the Social Democrats like the SPD.
>>489079541Third Positionism in general is actually somewhat close to social democracy - it seeks to provide a robust welfare state with a lot of regulatory power over the economy. It's just more authoritarian and ethnocentric. It's not just the "Nazis Left". For the record, though, I'm personally not in favor of a big welfare system and a lot of social programs.
>>489079873Well, if the welfare state part goes too far, you sound like an Argentine Peronista.Btw, what are your thoughts on Peron?There is still quite a bit of controversy about him, but it seems that he also was strongly influenced by Strasser.
>>489079209>They were popular with the people who stuck to the original party's intent.This is cope.
>>489079209The party platform was drafted by Hitler and a few other party members in 1920, and was declared inviolable by Hitler himself in 1928. It remained unchanged until the end of the regime in 1945. > Thank you for admitting that Hitler hijacked the party and changed it to his agenda.Yeah, Hitler totally hijacked the party when he *checks notes* supported the property rights of German citizens. >Literally almost all of them as Hitler as I just said because that's what Hitler maintained. So feel free to show me the mass nationalizations that supposedly happened during the Reich.First off” mass nationalization” was never part of the plan, except for in the cases where a company became too big to be run by private interests. And you know damn well that nationalization did occur in the Third Reich, as in the cases of Junker’s airline or Thyssen’s United Steelworks.
>>489080633>Well, if the welfare state part goes too farI'm not saying I'm against welfare, just that I do think government has a responsibility to keep a low tax burden on its citizenry. >Btw, what are your thoughts on Peron?There is still quite a bit of controversy about him, but it seems that he also was strongly influenced by Strasser.Heard of him and vaguely of his policy and from I've seen of the memes, he's supposed to be a fuson of Ancapism and Fascism. Other than that, I've never studied him or his ideology. In general, besides being racist, I'm a fairly socially liberal person and wish for things like intellectual and "private" property to be abolished. Rather than central planning, I do favor things like the East Asian model which incorporates a lot of dirigisme. Also, Peron is a civic nationalist, which I view as a diluted form of globalism, so I part with him there.
>>489081310It's not. There was a delineation between the Strasser and Hitlerist camps. >The party platform was drafted by Hitler and a few other party members in 1920, and was declared inviolable by Hitler himself in 1928. It remained unchanged until the end of the regime in 1945.And? He didn't "fulfill every point" of the 25 Point Plan. This is a fact. IDK why you're trying to dispute it. You literally can't fulfill every point unless you were to nationalize everything. >Yeah, Hitler totally hijacked the party when he *checks notes* supported the property rights of German citizens.Well, yes, as the DAP was a legitimately socialist party. They didn't want private property. >First off” mass nationalization” was never part of the planExactly, so you are again admitting to him not fulfilling the 25 Points, just as you are again admitting that he hijacked a legitimately socialist party for his own benefit. >And you know damn well that nationalization did occur in the Third Reich, as in the cases of Junker’s airline or Thyssen’s United Steelworks.Exceptions, not the rule. First you ask me which ones were private, as if to imply the majority weren't. Then, you turn around and admit that mass nationalization was never the plan, contradicting yourself. National Socialism wasn't socialist. It was State Capitalism, which is much better than what I refer to as "consumerist capitalism". It was a step in the right direction (in some ways), despite my misgivings with Hitler and other things about the NSDAP. That's the point of this thread. Libertarianism, conservatism and neoliberalism all don't work unless you are a globalist or a crypto-globalist like civic nationalists. Ethnocentric societies inherently require economic authoritarianism and I'll give you credit for remaining relatively civil in argument.
>>489081350>>489082295
>>489082295>It's not. There was a delineation between the Strasser and Hitlerist camps.Yes, and the Strasserists were a significant minority because, as you’ve stated later in your post, they deviated from the 25 point plan. You are legitimately stupid.
>>489082982>Yes, and the Strasserists were a significant minority because, as you’ve stated later in your post, they deviated from the 25 point plan.They didn't. It was Hitler that did, as he retained majority private property. >You are legitimately stupid.Go say it in the mirror, anon, then it will be true.
>>489071296democracy is a sign of a nation in decline
AnarchoNaziSoviet is cureSo many verities
>>489083611Infinite verities of true democracy are that don’t include voting.Voting is the opposite of a true democracy.
>>489074064would your bussy handle it if i told you you already live in a dictatorship?
>>489084757>your bussyporn addict detected
>>489084901if knowing what a bussy is makes one a porn addict, doesnt that make you a porn addict too? is this the fabled mestizo IQ?
>>489085233>if knowing what a bussy is makes one a porn addictNo, it's using it in conversation like it's a normal word because you clearly think about it all the time. There was absolutely no need to include "your bussy" in that sentence yet you went out of your way to literally invent a phrase to do it because your brain has been melted by porn
>>489084901You could say that to anybody and have well over a 50/50 shot of being right
>>489085550>here was absolutely no need to include "your bussy" in that sentence yet you went out of your way to literally invent a phrase to do it because your brain has been melted by porncould it be that im trying to mock and emasculate him as an equivalent of calling him a fag? is it me thats a porn addict for using a slangy insult or you that starts convulsing and shaking at the mere mention of male anus, SWEARING you're not interested in it? perculiar...
>>489086230>n-no you!
