Is national socialism an alternative?
-
- Posts: 99
- Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2016 3:50 pm
Is national socialism an alternative?
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?
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?
-
- Posts: 4430
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm
Re: Is national socialism an alternative?
tyranny by any other name...
-Imp
-Imp
Re: Is national socialism an alternative?
Nope; it did none of those things. It was simply a lie.Above us only sky wrote: ↑Fri Jul 21, 2017 1:36 pm 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.
-
- Posts: 99
- Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2016 3:50 pm
Re: Is national socialism an alternative?
If it is simply a lie, then how to explain the success of China and Putin?Skip wrote: ↑Sat Jul 22, 2017 6:47 amNope; it did none of those things. It was simply a lie.Above us only sky wrote: ↑Fri Jul 21, 2017 1:36 pm 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.
-
- Posts: 99
- Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2016 3:50 pm
Re: Is national socialism an alternative?
First of all, the leader of a national socialist nation does not have to be a tyrant. A communist state has a tyrant.
- FlashDangerpants
- Posts: 6521
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm
Re: Is national socialism an alternative?
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.Above us only sky wrote: ↑Fri Jul 21, 2017 1:36 pm 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.
Re: Is national socialism an alternative?
What have they got to do with naming a political party?Above us only sky wrote: ↑Sat Jul 22, 2017 11:25 amIf it is simply a lie, then how to explain the success of China and Putin?Skip wrote: ↑Sat Jul 22, 2017 6:47 amNope; it did none of those things. It was simply a lie.Above us only sky wrote: ↑Fri Jul 21, 2017 1:36 pm 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.
You can't combine the left and the right; any such amalgam has to be a lie. You can have a moderate, liberal party that reconciles those elements; you can formulate a policy and set an agenda that tries to achieve those goals. The methods and means vary, as does the success. (I wouldn't call capitalist Russia a success, nor equate one temporary leader with an entirely different nation.)
Re: Is national socialism an alternative?
What communist state? There are none. So far, the only true communes have been very much smaller than states; a village at most.Above us only sky wrote: ↑Sat Jul 22, 2017 11:27 am First of all, the leader of a national socialist nation does not have to be a tyrant. A communist state has a tyrant.
And the very definition of communist precludes a tyrant of any kind.
Lots of fascist states, though, and they have plenty of room for tyranny.
-
- Posts: 99
- Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2016 3:50 pm
Re: Is national socialism an alternative?
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 downFlashDangerpants 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.
There 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.
The '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.
-
- Posts: 99
- Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2016 3:50 pm
Re: Is national socialism an alternative?
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?
Here is the reason: in the American two party system, vested interests are well protected by the two parties, and stalements between all those competing vested interests is the norm. If a high speed railway is in the plan, the airline companies will do their best and hire the best lobbyists to make sure that plan can never see the sun.
Meanwhile a national socialist system is able to break those vested interests and push the plan through by political might.
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?
Here is the reason: in the American two party system, vested interests are well protected by the two parties, and stalements between all those competing vested interests is the norm. If a high speed railway is in the plan, the airline companies will do their best and hire the best lobbyists to make sure that plan can never see the sun.
Meanwhile a national socialist system is able to break those vested interests and push the plan through by political might.
Last edited by Above us only sky on Sun Jul 23, 2017 4:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Is national socialism an alternative?
which is why it is fundamentally irrational. Those are psychological states. Do you want a government whose aim is to somehow dictate a 'national mood?'Above us only sky wrote: ↑Fri Jul 21, 2017 1:36 pm ... what it is trying to achieve is the nationalist goal (unity, national prestige and strength),
On the contrary, if you are trying to give people a sense of 'unity/national prestige', this can only be done by throwing up barriers; them and us. You don't have to pick on the Jews, but you do have to pick on somebody. But the truth is that everyone - even foreigners! - are people, just like you. So you have to invent some false rationalisation for why one group of people are superior, more innately deserving, than another.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.
But it never stops there. If you can sell the idea that one nation is superior to another, then the thought will soon occur to the national socialist party that one part of that nation (i.e. themselves) is superior to the rest of their nation a.k.a. 'the plebs'.
A political ideology of selfishness based on lies rarely works out well in the long term.
- FlashDangerpants
- Posts: 6521
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm
Re: Is national socialism an alternative?
I'm afraid you misunderstood what Rule of Law means.Above us only sky wrote: ↑Sun Jul 23, 2017 11:15 amYou 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 downFlashDangerpants 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.
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.
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.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.
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.
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.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.
- FlashDangerpants
- Posts: 6521
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm
Re: Is national socialism an alternative?
They don't provide lots of economic advantage. We're planing one for the UK and the numbers don't justify it at all.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?
Per mile high speed train lines cost a phenomenal amount in construction and maintenance.Above us only sky wrote: ↑Sun Jul 23, 2017 11:38 amHere is the reason: in the American two party system, vested interests are well protected by the two parties, and statements between all those competing vested interests is the norm. If a high speed railway is in the plan, the airline companies will do their best and hire the best lobbyists to make sure that plan can never see the sun.
No private company would fund this project so only with huge state backing will such a line get built.
Afterwards, like all the others everywhere, it will mostly lose money and require further subsidy (because they don't provide much economic benefit)
Each one competes with just one air route for passengers and maybe a slow rail route if you also carry freight.
If you have as many cities and they are as far apart as American ones, there are few sensible places to put a high speed rail line.
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.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.
Re: Is national socialism an alternative?
All tyrants make laws. Does that mean they're legitimate? Of course of it does: they say they are and nobody dares to contradict them.Above us only sky wrote: ↑Sun Jul 23, 2017 11:15 am 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.
I think those were considered trivial infractions, not worth mentioning, given the scope of their crimes.Another example, How many fund embezzlements in Nazi Germany by corrupt party officials have you ever heard of?
Might improve the circulation to your brain. Unless you keep that organ in some other part of your body?I 'm not saying Nazi Germany is good, I'm just mentioning the fact, don't hang me upside down
-
- Posts: 99
- Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2016 3:50 pm
Re: Is national socialism an alternative?
First of all, psychological states are not irrational, I suggest you buy a psychology textbook to read and learn.Londoner wrote: ↑Sun Jul 23, 2017 1:03 pm which is why it is fundamentally irrational. Those are psychological states. Do you want a government whose aim is to somehow dictate a 'national mood?'
On the contrary, if you are trying to give people a sense of 'unity/national prestige', this can only be done by throwing up barriers; them and us. You don't have to pick on the Jews, but you do have to pick on somebody. But the truth is that everyone - even foreigners! - are people, just like you. So you have to invent some false rationalisation for why one group of people are superior, more innately deserving, than another.
But it never stops there. If you can sell the idea that one nation is superior to another, then the thought will soon occur to the national socialist party that one part of that nation (i.e. themselves) is superior to the rest of their nation a.k.a. 'the plebs'.
A political ideology of selfishness based on lies rarely works out well in the long term.
A national socialist government does not produce 'mood' because it is not its job, its job is to achieve what a nation as one wish to achieve.
The ' national mood' is real, although in a democracy you use the word 'public opinions' or 'public mood' instead, when Otto Frederick Warmbier died, the United States as a whole experienced great anger and sadness, this anger and sadness experienced by Americans collectively is called ' national mood' . In a two-party system, politicians understand the arts of manipulating this 'national mood' for their own selfish gains, for example, George Bush successfully utilized the American national mood after 911 to declare two wars.
The 'them and us' barriers always exists in a liberal democracy, and don't forget Trump won the election by manipulating this barrier.
In fact, the whole liberal democracy institution is based upon this 'them and us' barriers:
First, you distinguish them from us by what vested interests do you have, if you and they have totally different interests, then a 'them and us' barrier between you and they is created.
then you and they join or organize totally different political parties or 'pressure groups' and hire different lobbyists to make sure your interests can overcome their interests.
In the end, one interest group beat other interest group in the process of election and policy-making.
However, in national socialist ideology, all nationals in a nation, regardless of sex, skin colors, occupations are considered sons and daughters of one big family. 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.