Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2024 Poal.co

549

Communism is based on the idea that the state completely owns all corporations and all forms of production. In return they would promise to ensure a livable wage, free education and free healthcare etc. This leads to 99% of the population living just barely above poverty level, while those that are in powerful positions in government or at least well-connected to those in power to become fabulously wealthy. The level of taxation levied upon these poor souls to accomplish this ensured that the masses were poor and stayed poor their entire lives.

With National Socialism a person that founds a company or corporation gets to retain full ownership of said company. The wealth of the company is still distributed out amongst it’s employees, but in a drastically different manner. Much more beneficial to all involved. Lets use the analogy of a pirate ship crew. Pirate ships operated on a share by share basis. Yes the captain might get 10 or even more shares of the booty they collected, but if they captured a ship loaded with gold for example, even the single share that the deck hands and galley hands would get could be a small fortune. Likewise if a company was very successful and made billions of dollars, like many of today’s companies do, the single share that the janitors or night watchmen would get could be enormous sums of money. Name one other form of government where a janitor can afford a large house, fancy cars, multiple children and still afford to send them all to college as well. You can’t. There aren’t any.

This method of guaranteeing even the lowliest of employees would enjoy a full share of the company’s profits easily explains the level of fervent fanaticism Hitler enjoyed from his followers. The effectiveness of National Socialism is beyond debate as seen by how Hitler was able to take a country that had not only been utterly decimated in World War One, but incessantly raped and pillaged by the Jewish elite bankers such as the Rothchild’s after the war during the Weimar Republic. In a mere 12 years he took this ragged husk of a nation and rebuilt it to be the single most powerful nation in the world by the beginning of World War Two. There existed some forms of taxation in Hitler’s Germany, but most of that came directly from the companies making huge profits. Not on the backs of the individual. Other than military and infrastructure spending, most of these taxes were used to help the population have bigger families. For example, when you purchased a home the state would pay for 25% of your house once you had a child. If you continued to have more children you would have your entire mortgage paid off by the state upon the birth of your fourth child. Many other forms of assistance were geared towards helping the people be able to afford to have large families as well.

Exactly the same right?

Communism is based on the idea that the state completely owns all corporations and all forms of production. In return they would promise to ensure a livable wage, free education and free healthcare etc. This leads to 99% of the population living just barely above poverty level, while those that are in powerful positions in government or at least well-connected to those in power to become fabulously wealthy. The level of taxation levied upon these poor souls to accomplish this ensured that the masses were poor and stayed poor their entire lives. With National Socialism a person that founds a company or corporation gets to retain full ownership of said company. The wealth of the company is still distributed out amongst it’s employees, but in a drastically different manner. Much more beneficial to all involved. Lets use the analogy of a pirate ship crew. Pirate ships operated on a share by share basis. Yes the captain might get 10 or even more shares of the booty they collected, but if they captured a ship loaded with gold for example, even the single share that the deck hands and galley hands would get could be a small fortune. Likewise if a company was very successful and made billions of dollars, like many of today’s companies do, the single share that the janitors or night watchmen would get could be enormous sums of money. Name one other form of government where a janitor can afford a large house, fancy cars, multiple children and still afford to send them all to college as well. You can’t. There aren’t any. This method of guaranteeing even the lowliest of employees would enjoy a full share of the company’s profits easily explains the level of fervent fanaticism Hitler enjoyed from his followers. The effectiveness of National Socialism is beyond debate as seen by how Hitler was able to take a country that had not only been utterly decimated in World War One, but incessantly raped and pillaged by the Jewish elite bankers such as the Rothchild’s after the war during the Weimar Republic. In a mere 12 years he took this ragged husk of a nation and rebuilt it to be the single most powerful nation in the world by the beginning of World War Two. There existed some forms of taxation in Hitler’s Germany, but most of that came directly from the companies making huge profits. Not on the backs of the individual. Other than military and infrastructure spending, most of these taxes were used to help the population have bigger families. For example, when you purchased a home the state would pay for 25% of your house once you had a child. If you continued to have more children you would have your entire mortgage paid off by the state upon the birth of your fourth child. Many other forms of assistance were geared towards helping the people be able to afford to have large families as well. Exactly the same right?

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (39).
[–] • 13 pts

I just responded to another person having this same contention, did y'all just get out of a meeting or something?

I have a different argument then the one you are straw manning. I copypasta that shit form the other thread... here is my take.

Definition: NAZI; Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei "Nationalist Socialist German Workers Party"

Socialist structures, be they marxist or nationalist, have a fundamental flaw which is that the inevitable bureaucratic bloat, centralization, and institutional memory of these organizational structures has always lead/will invariably lead to, a massive unwieldy system that falls to despotic tyranny of the minority.

Conversely, natural and universal laws of scarcity and competition mean that any successful system will need to be decentralized more local controls in order to promote and benefit from inevitable group competition. My study of history leads me to believe that self determinationism and individualism in the pursuit of private property drives healthy and necessary competition which in turn promotes and capitalizes on our natural and universal evolutionary progresses of scarcity driven group/tribal identity.

[–] • 1 pt

Your straw man is actually a straw man.

The NSDAP actually had far less bloat than the "free market capitalism" of the US because they saw regulation as something that was occasionally a necessary evil rather than a cost of doing business. If the workers and owners could come to an agreement on some dispute they would see no need to step in. Because the owners and workers were heavily motivated to work together this was often the case. In the US the owners are encouraged to exploit the workers and constant intervention is needed. People are begging for more intervention right now particularly with social media because those companies are run by predatory foreigners. The companies run by people who love their country like Lindell and Nehlen don't need constant regulation.

The best way to minimize bloat is not is to have a strong sense of nationalism.

[–] • 0 pt

Interesting take, thanks for the thoughtful reply.

I disagree with your last line. I don't feel nationalism will impede bloat but I do agree with you that it is important.

Also, in order for a Republic to exist according to Aristotle the society must poses "philia" or a homogeny of values, ideas, and objectives. Without this fraternity, which most often stems form ethnic identity, effective structural organization is incapable of managing and responding effectively. Philia in practice is a motivator for cooperation and mutual resolve in much the same way you articulate the NSDAP works to achieve.

As for the rest of your content. NSGermany was not around long enough for institutionalized bloat to develop. In that regard the experiment in NS government has not been allowed to run its course and it very well could be able to withstand the institutional decay. Unfortunately at this point we do not know for sure and so both of us are simply speculating. But its a fun mental exercise.

[–] • 1 pt

I agree that any system will bloat eventually. To the extent that it can be fought against the only effective tools (apart from violence) are a strong leader (dictator) and nationalism. NS Germany would have bloated over time, but it would have been no more, and possibly less than any other form of govt.

[–] • 0 pt

Socialist structures, be they marxist or nationalist, have a fundamental flaw which is that the inevitable bureaucratic bloat, centralization, and institutional memory of these organizational structures has always lead/will invariably lead to, a massive unwieldy system that falls to despotic tyranny of the minority

Workers owning the means of production causes this?

[–] • 8 pts

Socialist systems as governance cause centralization and bureaucratic bloat. It is as inevitable as it is necessary for them to exist.

The false pretense that superficially owning the means of production some how mitigates the absolute authority of any socialist systems central controls is an asinine position that ignores reality and human history.

[–] • 0 pt

China's centralization seems to be working well.

[–] • 4 pts

Workers don't really own the means of production in socialist regimes. A centralized cabal which claims to represent, or even 'be' the workers takes total control - see the so-called 'vanguard of the proletariat.' The National Socialists were only nominally different. The title of ownership remained in private hands, but the government had complete say down to fine detail. The point is that control is centralized, which leads to bloat, incompetence, and corruption. The bigger the organization, the more bureaucracy it takes to control it. Past a certain point, it is all bureaucracy, all rent seekers, drones and crooks, basically corrupt scumbags. That is why the world government so beloved of the globalists is unfeasible, and also why the slimy bureaucratic types lust after it so much.