>>969 >Do you have brain damage? It bears pointing out your reddit spacing if you're going to make such an accusation based on nothing but your opponent's usage of insults - which have been forthcoming from yourself, it is useful to note
> It does not require a great leap of imagination to see that Capitalism is in fact the modern equivalent of what was once known hundreds of years ago as Jewish Usury, profit for profit and not an expedient method of societal innovation which a true free market is, and it gets even better when subsidized by the state, and such a market needs regulation. They're the dominant beneficiaries of tax money being pumped into propping up their businesses and regulation preventing competition from smaller businesses. They're the beneficiaries of the exact same system as National Socialism posits, merely exercised by them rather than by the Puritan Hiter. You mistake that system turned against a people as freedom leading to degeneracy, and suggest instead propping the folk up with it, not for a moment trusting the people who founded civilization to do so again. I believe in my people's achievements, which is why I don't find it necessary to have some unskilled ex-soldier to dictate to that people how they should live their lives in the hopes of recapturing that success - a success brought about by liberty, now forced by totalitarianism.
>Only way your ideology could work was after a world war in which a country is left in total ruins by nukes and we have to revert to what you call "free voluntarism" and "communes" as a response to solving the problems of having such important things as civil service/hospitals/roads/schools/trains/industry instead of just coming together as a unified system, as one race and one nation, apparently this to you is "totalitarianism", shows what a whole nothing you know. The argument that nothing can be achieved without relying on the selfsame system as our oppressors can easily be turned around on your ideology:
"Only way your ideology could work was after a racial war in which a country is left totally depleted of people and we have to revert to what you call 'hard work' and 'corporations' as a response to solving the problems of having such important things as welfare/immigration/banking/media instead of just coming together as a unified world, as one species and one planet, apparently this to you is 'totalitarianism', shows what a whole nothing you know.'
see, here you've demonstrated the same framework of thinking as a liberal, unsurprising for an ideology deriving itself entirely from the ideals of the masonic revolutions. I can justify any system by citing it's necessity as proof that it is not totalitarian, and any size of empire you like based on appeals to unity. The true rejection of Marxism is that a people must have self-determination, not through a bureaucracy, but through their own achievement, and that loyalty to one's own requires rejection of unionist claptrap like your "one race and one nation" to defend your people and culture from outsiders - as the Austrians tried to against your beloved unemployed construction worker made lunatic-in-chief.
Not the worst arguments you could present by far, but it reveals your utter unwillingness to even consider that on any point your ideology could be wrong, a point of view I think it would be fair to call dogma.