04/23/2018 (Mon) 07:10:18
> Libertarianism is clearly yet another form of jewish control.
There are a lot of white libertarians; Hoppe is mentioned in the other infographic as being against degeneracy. Is it possible that Jews rushed to become the first theorists of libertarianism, in order to try to discredit it in the eyes of people who incline towards natsoc, and to promote natsoc so that it could be destroyed as it was in WW2?
> the Socialist economy will provide state-run banks, putting all efforts towards state development instead of into the pocket of some greedy
Right, and the capitalists are saying that this will be inefficient because the incentive structure will not tend to reward private labor, capital, and property. How does natsoc avoid the "tragedy of the commons"? If everyone (the government) owns the banks, then won't they tend to take less good care of them because they are collectively owned, and so if they make mistakes, they can just pass this off to the community to absorb rather than have to absorb the impact themselves (so they are given a signal to change course)?
Greed is a problem libertarians don't often talk about, although again just because one is libertarian doesn't mean one can't be against "degenerate" greed.
> Then try to go live in a nonwhite nation as a white man if you don't think it is that important of an issue. Race is everything, if we can't have a racially homogeneous nation free from jewish influence then we have NOTHING
If you want to be free from racial conflict or "Jewish influence", could this not exist for you under national capitalism? If you say a nonwhite or multicultural nation will not respect your freedoms, well, then that's not national capitalist or anarcho-capitalist, as if people are violating your rights, then either the government or rights-enforcement agencies would be able to enforce whatever violations exist.
I don't mean this to be offensive but you recognize the German natsoc gov't did not prevent "Jewish influence" from destroying it, allegedly. So I presume your plan is to try this again but do it better this time? Why not instead simply be free from perceived bad influences on your private property? You might think this is "selfish" and "neglecting one's 'Volk'" since you are not by government protecting everyone. However, the natsoc attempt to "protect everyone" now leads us to our present situation of forced multiculturalism. Could natcap at least allow a few people to be free, rather than a failed natsoc having everyone be not free?
Message too long. Click here to view full text.