National Socialism

da Vinci

PI Member
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
89
Likes
124
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #13
All in all, National Socialism is just common sense. If you're a Nationalist you must consider the people of the nation to be of the highest importance, so you cannot leave them to the randomness of Capitalism.
This I believe to be the Crux of the OP.

The war in many ways was much more about the rise of Globalism and the defeat of National Socialism which is a more modern Communism in my view.
 

da Vinci

PI Member
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
89
Likes
124
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #14
I'd say that China, Vietnam, Laos and the DPRK are de facto National Socialist societies today. Even Chavez was a National Socialist in an economic sense.
Some will argue that those countries lack democracy, however Democracy is the illusion that your vote will actually deliver real change.
 

maupin

PI Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2019
Messages
158
Likes
68
Location
Wonderland
In many ways he was forced into this, He would have been settled with a return to the lands stolen from Germany prior to World War1. If anything he was a reluctant war leader hence his hesitation over invading England.
The theory of Lebensraum completely contradicts what you are saying, not to mention the usurious nature of the Jewish people was a vital aspect of Hitler's politics. I am not saying he wanted global hegemony under the empire, but global hegemony under a specific form of idiosyncratic economic theories.
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2018
Messages
1,081
Likes
1,703
All in all, National Socialism is just common sense. If you're a Nationalist you must consider the people of the nation to be of the highest importance, so you cannot leave them to the randomness of Capitalism.
'the randomness of capitalism' is no explanation for the madness of Sweden. A country colonised by men from the most barbaric countries in the world, all courtesy of the swedish taxpayer.

the rise of hitler was a result of a) the punishing terms of the Treaty of Versailles b) The rise of Stalin.
 
Last edited:

Tadhg Gaelach

Staff member
Moderator
Donator
PI Member
Premium Account
Joined
Jan 14, 2016
Messages
39,707
Likes
39,251
Some will argue that those countries lack democracy, however Democracy is the illusion that your vote will actually deliver real change.

I was watching an interview with a Chinese billionaire businessman and he said that in the USA you can change the party in power but never the policy. In China, you can never change the party, but you can change the policy.
 

Tadhg Gaelach

Staff member
Moderator
Donator
PI Member
Premium Account
Joined
Jan 14, 2016
Messages
39,707
Likes
39,251
'the randomness of capitalism' is no explanation for the madness of Sweden. A country colonised by men from the most barbaric countries in the world, all courtesy of the swedish taxpayer.

Indeed, no Nationalist could find that acceptable.
 

Tadhg Gaelach

Staff member
Moderator
Donator
PI Member
Premium Account
Joined
Jan 14, 2016
Messages
39,707
Likes
39,251
The theory of Lebensraum completely contradicts what you are saying, not to mention the usurious nature of the Jewish people was a vital aspect of Hitler's politics. I am not saying he wanted global hegemony under the empire, but global hegemony under a specific form of idiosyncratic economic theories.

I wouldn't say that Hitler wanted global hegemony the way the Brits and the Yanks did and do. He wanted to rule the Germanic space, and no more.
 

maupin

PI Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2019
Messages
158
Likes
68
Location
Wonderland
I was watching an interview with a Chinese billionaire businessman and he said that in the USA you can change the party in power but never the policy. In China, you can never change the party, but you can change the policy.
In China of old, in order to become a diplomat, you needed to be the most intelligent chap around. The nobility would stick around, but the diplomats ran the schtick. Seems like a decent plan. Pound admired Confucius & China more than Christianity, actually.
 

da Vinci

PI Member
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
89
Likes
124
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #21
The theory of Lebensraum completely contradicts what you are saying, not to mention the usurious nature of the Jewish people was a vital aspect of Hitler's politics. I am not saying he wanted global hegemony under the empire, but global hegemony under a specific form of idiosyncratic economic theories.
Its theory but like all theories it is just an idea.

Hitler wanted a greater Germany, unite countries with close relationships to Germany and realigning he borders to those prior to WW1. That was the Greater Reich Hitler Sought.

France and Britain both had an Empire and colonies at the time, the hypocrisy of them trying to stop Germany expanding into what was once German territories was staggering.

Of coursde this is going off topic and away from the OP and the discussion on Nationalist Sociaism.
 

da Vinci

PI Member
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
89
Likes
124
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #22
I was watching an interview with a Chinese billionaire businessman and he said that in the USA you can change the party in power but never the policy. In China, you can never change the party, but you can change the policy.

When you look at most of the so called democratic countries in the world you often find that there are just two main political parties that hold the balance of power since Democracy was introduced. This is all you ned to know when it comes to understanding how undemocratic democracy actually is.
 

maupin

PI Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2019
Messages
158
Likes
68
Location
Wonderland
Its theory but like all theories it is just an idea.

Hitler wanted a greater Germany, unite countries with close relationships to Germany and realigning he borders to those prior to WW1. That was the Greater Reich Hitler Sought.

France and Britain both had an Empire and colonies at the time, the hypocrisy of them trying to stop Germany expanding into what was once German territories was staggering.

Of coursde this is going off topic and away from the OP and the discussion on Nationalist Sociaism.
I think you are conflating early Hitlerian plans with later ones. Lebensraum was an important aspect of his thought.
 

Tadhg Gaelach

Staff member
Moderator
Donator
PI Member
Premium Account
Joined
Jan 14, 2016
Messages
39,707
Likes
39,251
I think you are conflating early Hitlerian plans with later ones. Lebensraum was an important aspect of his thought.

Certainly it was. He thought the Germans didn't have enough space to prosper - specially compared with the huge expanses the Slavs have conquered and made their own. But, that's not the same as wanting global hegemony - the way the Anglos do.
 
Top Bottom