Is national socialism an alternative?

How should society be organised, if at all?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Skip
Posts: 2820
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2011 1:34 pm

Re: Is national socialism an alternative?

Post by Skip »

Above us only sky wrote: Sun Jul 23, 2017 5:00 pm
The job of the government is to balance those different interests through policy-making to prevent domestic conflicts which may damage national unity. The government does not allow one interest group to bully another.
That would be nice, if it ever happened. And then, imagine a world government that could manage it among nations!
Above us only sky
Posts: 99
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2016 3:50 pm

Re: Is national socialism an alternative?

Post by Above us only sky »

Skip wrote: Sun Jul 23, 2017 5:56 pm
Above us only sky wrote: Sun Jul 23, 2017 5:00 pm
The job of the government is to balance those different interests through policy-making to prevent domestic conflicts which may damage national unity. The government does not allow one interest group to bully another.
That would be nice, if it ever happened. And then, imagine a world government that could manage it among nations!
It totals depends on what the system is, at least a nationalist socialist system is designed to achieve that.
Above us only sky
Posts: 99
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2016 3:50 pm

Re: Is national socialism an alternative?

Post by Above us only sky »

FlashDangerpants wrote: Sun Jul 23, 2017 1:37 pm
Above us only sky wrote: Sun Jul 23, 2017 11:15 am
FlashDangerpants wrote: Sat Jul 22, 2017 2:05 pm
If you choose those goals over rule of law, human rights, and the peaceful transfer of government to competing parties then that stuff probably sounds great to you. But I don't think 'national prestige' is valuable enough to hoard up a pile of political prisoners, and I don't think that is even prestigious behaviour.
You have to overcome the political correctness that only a liberal democracy has the rule of law. let's not forget that colonial India under British rule also has the rule of law. Another example, How many fund embezzlements in Nazi Germany by corrupt party officials have you ever heard of? I 'm not saying Nazi Germany is good, I'm just mentioning the fact, don't hang me upside down :shock:
I'm afraid you misunderstood what Rule of Law means.
In a state with strong rule of law, the government will lose court cases and be forced to change plans.
This never happens in China, nor in Russia, and it never happened to Nazi Germany either.
Above us only sky wrote: Sun Jul 23, 2017 11:15 amThere are no 100% political freedom on earth, imagine what will happen to a guy in Washington D.C who is a member of congress, advocates in public that the American two party system which includes his own party should be dissolved to make way for a real multi party system and all constituencies should be draw fairly? I say that guy will become a 'political prisoner' in a sense that he will be seriously disciplined by the party whip and his political life will be over.
Sure... when I am using the term I am talking about people who are actually sent to prison camps where often they are tortured and die.
Your 'political prisoner' is nothing of the sort and that was a really lame attempt.

If you are so sold as you appear to be on the benefits of repressive states, then the repression is something you are going to have to learn to like. I hope you get to enjoy some one day.
Above us only sky wrote: Sun Jul 23, 2017 11:15 amThe 'national prestige' might looks superficial, however don't forget that liberal democracies Including UK is willing to spend millions of tax payers' money to hold the Olympics and make sure the Olympic Opening ceremony in London looks nice.
Some people seemed to enjoy having the Olympics in London, most of us thought it was a bit annoying. But we defintely wouldn't trade away our human rights to have more of that.
To FlashDangerpants,

You sounds like the boring Civics teacher in my middle school.

100% Rule of Law does not exist in any system whatsoever. There should be a law preventing high school Civics teachers from brainwashing the kids with those ''Rule of Law = liberal democracy' truism , why haven't we seen such laws in a liberal democracy?

laws are made by humans, and humans have the right to explain them, and in this world there is such thing called 'human nature', which is above the Rule of Law , if you were the lawmaker, and someone sues you for violating the laws you have made and he wants you to go to prison to spend the rest of your life, and you are the judge and the sole explainer of the law, will that guy win?

In a liberal democracy, If you are a common guy and you sue the federal government for a political cause, you have a fair chance to lose. for example, if Edward Snowden sues the Federal government for violation of the American constitution in these domestic surveillance projects targeting American people, will he ever win? To be precise, he will be arrested even before setting foot in the court.
If you still believe the Civics truism of 'Rule of Law = liberal democracy' check this news.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3244148.stm

likewise, in a national socialist state, how much rule of law exists also depends on the kind of case you are in, if you sue the national government, you have a fair chance to win the case if your claim is purely an economical one, however, if you were the Nobel Peace Prize laureate Liu Xiaobo and you want to sue the government for a political cause (you fight for American two-party system in China), just like Edward Snowden, surely you will lose.
User avatar
PauloL
Posts: 473
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2017 10:12 pm
Location: Lisbon, Portugal.

Re: Is national socialism an alternative?

Post by PauloL »

Above us only sky wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2017 1:36 pm National socialism, previously known as 'Nazism' is hated because of its anti-Semitism and national expansionism.

However, If Winston Churchill lived long enough to visited Russia and China to experience this new form of national socialism in the year 2017 he probably would not say 'Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others'.

Here are the reasons:

National socialism is the combination of the right ( nationalism) and the left (socialism), what it is trying to achieve is the nationalist goal (unity, national prestige and strength), it recognize capitalism yet use state socialism to balance different social class to achieve this nationalist goal.

This new form of national socialism rejects anti-Semitism and national expansionism, because anti-Semitism creates conflicts among people and it destroys the unity of a country; and national expansionism actually can hurts the nationalist goal.

Is this modified national socialism an alternative? Does it have the potential to replace liberal democracy?
.




Are Russia and China national socialist countries? That's new to me.

National socialism combines right and left? Again, this is new to me.

Nationalism, anticommunism, imperialism, single party, self-sufficiency are among the most consistent features of National socialism.

Perhaps for that reason, it seems popular in Croatia, Turkey, India, and Muslim countries, amongst others, at least Mein Kampf is a best seller there.

Liberalism in its current version is highly unpopular, but I doubt that anyone will wish to replace it by a repressive regimen of any kind.

Maybe the unpopularity of the current Liberalism comes from a phenomenon of Orwell's Animal Farm, where survivalists of ancient policies (in force at the time of French Revolution) and abusers distort the system.




.
User avatar
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 6269
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Is national socialism an alternative?

Post by FlashDangerpants »

Above us only sky wrote: Sun Jul 23, 2017 6:33 pm To FlashDangerpants,

You sounds like the boring Civics teacher in my middle school.
Somebody else who knows stuff you don't and was never impressed by your wild assertions of non-fact?
Above us only sky wrote: Sun Jul 23, 2017 6:33 pm 100% Rule of Law does not exist in any system whatsoever. There should be a law preventing high school Civics teachers from brainwashing the kids with those ''Rule of Law = liberal democracy' truism , why haven't we seen such laws in a liberal democracy?
Who said anything about 100%? There is better and there is worse. Britain and America, Sweden, Denmark etc are the best, China and Russia occupy the other end of the scale along with Venezuela and Zimbabwe.

In China and Russia the judges are ordered to render judgments that benefit politicians. In the UK and America governments lose court cases all the time. When Russian oligarchs need to sue each other they do so in London because we have respected courts and Russia has none.
Above us only sky wrote: Sun Jul 23, 2017 6:33 pm laws are made by humans, and humans have the right to explain them, and in this world there is such thing called 'human nature', which is above the Rule of Law , if you were the lawmaker, and someone sues you for violating the laws you have made and he wants you to go to prison to spend the rest of your life, and you are the judge and the sole explainer of the law, will that guy win?
Please try to write sane prose that makes some sort of point.
That is totally stupid and I can see why your civics teacher thought you were thick.
Above us only sky wrote: Sun Jul 23, 2017 6:33 pm In a liberal democracy, If you are a common guy and you sue the federal government for a political cause, you have a fair chance to lose. for example, if Edward Snowden sues the Federal government for violation of the American constitution in these domestic surveillance projects targeting American people, will he ever win? To be precise, he will be arrested even before setting foot in the court.
If you still believe the Civics truism of 'Rule of Law = liberal democracy' check this news.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3244148.stm
Again, you are just falling apart. You should try to compose your thoughts into something coherent.

Edward Snowden is in trouble with the authorities because he treasonously released state secrets, so I can't get what your point is about him suing. Other people may well sue over the issue of warrantless wiretapping, but nobody is going to sue for the right to commit treason.

You seem to be suggesting that if I sue my government over civil rights and lose I go to jail for it even when I am not a traitor, which is weird and completely untrue.

If that's not your point, then try to make your points better please.
Above us only sky wrote: Sun Jul 23, 2017 6:33 pm likewise, in a national socialist state, how much rule of law exists also depends on the kind of case you are in, if you sue the national government, you have a fair chance to win the case if your claim is purely an economical one, however, if you were the Nobel Peace Prize laureate Liu Xiaobo and you want to sue the government for a political cause (you fight for American two-party system in China), just like Edward Snowden, surely you will lose.
That's just poor work, you aren't going to get anywhere with these false equivalences.

But more to the point, you shouldn't be trying. If you like this national socialism so much you should be arguing that it is right for governments to lock up dissenters for the common good and to preserve harmony because that is a basic function of the systems you are praising. If you can't bring yourself to wish for the dictatorship to send you to prison when you fail to observe the faith, you aren't really committed to the case you are presenting, nor to the political systems you keep trying to sell us.
User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 12314
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Is national socialism an alternative?

Post by Arising_uk »

Skip wrote:What communist state? There are none. So far, the only true communes have been very much smaller than states; a village at most. ...
Kerala.
User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 12314
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Is national socialism an alternative?

Post by Arising_uk »

Above us only sky wrote:Meanwhile a national socialist system is able to break those vested interests and push the plan through by political might.
So how did the French or Japanese do it?
Above us only sky
Posts: 99
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2016 3:50 pm

Re: Is national socialism an alternative?

Post by Above us only sky »

Arising_uk wrote: Sun Jul 23, 2017 11:42 pm
Above us only sky wrote:Meanwhile a national socialist system is able to break those vested interests and push the plan through by political might.
So how did the French or Japanese do it?
The high speed railway was partially done in France and Japan simply because in those two countries, the interests group for railway industries overcome the airline industry interests group. Because In Japan and France, the railway industry had been a state owned enterprise for a very long time, this gave them more saying in the process of policy-making.

Check this videohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLcP16951zc
China has launched the newest bullet train with a 400km per hour speed :shock:

How many bullet trains with a 400km per hour speed have we seen in a liberal democracy?
Last edited by Above us only sky on Mon Jul 24, 2017 1:56 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 12314
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Is national socialism an alternative?

Post by Arising_uk »

But in France at that time the airlines were also partly state-owned?

Still, in either case it didn't take a nazi government to do it so your case appear moot.
Above us only sky
Posts: 99
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2016 3:50 pm

Re: Is national socialism an alternative?

Post by Above us only sky »

Arising_uk wrote: Mon Jul 24, 2017 1:46 am But in France at that time the airlines were also partly state-owned?

Still, in either case it didn't take a nazi government to do it so your case appear moot.
The French high speed railway was built because in the battle of policy-making, the airline industries have slightly less influences than railway industries. In France, the Alstom company enjoy enormous political influences.
Here is their link http://www.alstom.com/
Last edited by Above us only sky on Mon Jul 24, 2017 2:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
Above us only sky
Posts: 99
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2016 3:50 pm

Re: Is national socialism an alternative?

Post by Above us only sky »

FlashDangerpants wrote: Sun Jul 23, 2017 11:21 pm

But more to the point, you shouldn't be trying. If you like this national socialism so much you should be arguing that it is right for governments to lock up dissenters for the common good and to preserve harmony because that is a basic function of the systems you are praising. If you can't bring yourself to wish for the dictatorship to send you to prison when you fail to observe the faith, you aren't really committed to the case you are presenting, nor to the political systems you keep trying to sell us.
Edward Snowden is a whistle blower fighting for civil rights, to some extent he is an American political dissent, yet we have seen him being accused for treason by the government. if next time there is another whistle blower fighting for civil rights, I guess you would be the one who wish to persecute the whistle blower for 'treason' ASAP before he mentioning the civil right violation issue ? :(

BTW, Liu Xiaobo was also being persecuted for 'treason'.
Above us only sky
Posts: 99
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2016 3:50 pm

Re: Is national socialism an alternative?

Post by Above us only sky »

PauloL wrote: Sun Jul 23, 2017 6:47 pm
Are Russia and China national socialist countries? That's new to me.

National socialism combines right and left? Again, this is new to me.

Nationalism, anticommunism, imperialism, single party, self-sufficiency are among the most consistent features of National socialism.

Perhaps for that reason, it seems popular in Croatia, Turkey, India, and Muslim countries, amongst others, at least Mein Kampf is a best seller there.

Liberalism in its current version is highly unpopular, but I doubt that anyone will wish to replace it by a repressive regimen of any kind.

Maybe the unpopularity of the current Liberalism comes from a phenomenon of Orwell's Animal Farm, where survivalists of ancient policies (in force at the time of French Revolution) and abusers distort the system.
Check this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mU1JmMUkP84

The idea of national socialism has been existed for a long time, long before Hitler, yet Hitler had hijacked this idea, yet if we return to the true idea of national socialism long before Hitler, we will appreciate its usefulness.

Russia and China are national socialist if you look closely at their ideology and the design of their political & economical system. They did not announce to the world that they are national socialist simply because they had fight hard against German Nazism and Japanese Nazism, publicly say they are national socialist will damage their ideological continuance.
Above us only sky
Posts: 99
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2016 3:50 pm

Re: Is national socialism an alternative?

Post by Above us only sky »

FlashDangerpants wrote: Sun Jul 23, 2017 1:49 pm
Above us only sky wrote: Sun Jul 23, 2017 11:38 am Here I have a good example:

A high-speed railway provides lots of economical and social benefits.Russia is planning to build its own high speed railway while China already has the best high speed railway network on earth, yet how many high speed bullet trains have we seen in America?
They don't provide lots of economic advantage. We're planing one for the UK and the numbers don't justify it at all.
'the numbers don't justify it at all' is a common truism in liberal-democracy capitalism.
If communism wages the war of poor against the rich, then capitalism wages the war of rich against the poor; and this war of rich against the poor is waged through the liberal democracy system. In this war of rich against the poor , the phrase ''the numbers don't justify it at all' is always the best ammunition.

Let me explain:
in capitalism, the sole purpose of almost any enterprise is to earn profits and maximize profits earned, this means in the policy making of a liberal democracy, whether a high speed railway has economical values (profits) determines whether a high speed railway can ever be built.

However, in national socialist system, the highest purpose of almost any major national enterprise is to achieve national unity and maximize the prosperity and wellbeing of every nationals within a nation, because every individuals, poor or rich, in the end of the day is a family member of a big family, the nation.

Therefore a national socialist country will decide whether a high speed railway network be built by adding up all the benefits of the railway, includes not only economical benefits, but also social benefits ( travel safety,jobs to the poor, experienced engineers, technological know-hows and national prestige) and environmental benefits (less carbon dioxide released than airlines) to make the decision.

While in liberal democracy capitalism, a project with less profits but huge social and environmental benefits can never be built, because as you have said 'the numbers can never justify it at all'.
Above us only sky
Posts: 99
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2016 3:50 pm

Re: Is national socialism an alternative?

Post by Above us only sky »

FlashDangerpants wrote: Sun Jul 23, 2017 1:49 pm
Above us only sky wrote: Sun Jul 23, 2017 11:38 amMeanwhile a national socialist system is able to break those vested interests and push the plan through by political might.
Just like China recently achieved the useless distinction of end to end ballpoint pen manufacture by directing a state owned company to waste a lot of money on a nonsense investment.
The news is not accurate at all, what China has invested money on is the technical know-how of making and installing the tiny steel ball on the tip of a half-finished ballpoint pen.

Given how small the tiny steel ball is and the lifespan of a ballpoint pen, you won't be surprised to realize it has been a technical secret for some big Swiss companies for a long time. If you consider the task super easy, then I will donate 1000 dollars to you so you can produce the tiny steel ball for me.

Because they respect the intellectual property right of tiny steel ball hold by some foreign companies therefore they did not hire some spies to steal that technology, instead, they are willing to put much more money to figure it out by themselves.

What Bloomberg really hates is not the fact that China spends big money on research, what Bloomberg hates is China did not send the annual big tributes to some foreign companies to buy the right to use their intellectual property right of tiny steel ball, instead they use the money to fund their own research. :shock:
Last edited by Above us only sky on Mon Jul 24, 2017 4:24 am, edited 2 times in total.
Above us only sky
Posts: 99
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2016 3:50 pm

Re: Is national socialism an alternative?

Post by Above us only sky »

FlashDangerpants wrote: Sun Jul 23, 2017 1:37 pm Some people seemed to enjoy having the Olympics in London, most of us thought it was a bit annoying. But we defintely wouldn't trade away our human rights to have more of that.
If 'most of us thought it was a bit annoying' then why in a liberal democracy the 2012 London Olympics became a reality? Is it because the pressure group and lobbyists are working? :(
Post Reply