ϟϟ Welcome to /nsg/+/sig/: Your one-stop-shop for every redpill known to Yas Forums ϟϟ
Thread for discussion of
Traditionalism
Anti-Communism
Race Realism
the Aryan Ideal
National Pride
Racial Identity Movements
Improve yourself - Comrades, community, and folk!
> 卐 - SMASH (((MARXISM)))
> 卐 - PURGE DEGENERACY
> 卐 - DISMANTLE ZOG
ᛉ - ARE YOU NEW TO /NSG/? START HERE
pastebin.com
> What is National Socialism?
National Socialism is the belief of man as part of the natural world; it is the idea that society should be structured in accordance with the laws of nature. An integral part of National Socialism is Racial Idealism, an idea based in the unbounding love of one's own people. This love is expressed by placing the interests of the racial community to which you belong ahead of your own individual desires, understanding that this selflessness will be paid back in full by your fellow man.
National Socialism believes in putting the nation before yourself. Despite this, there is considerable difference between the socialism of Hitler and that of Marxist doctrine. Hitler's nationalism has the patriotic motive of placing the good of one’s country before personal ambition while retaining one's individuality and happiness, whereas Marxism squeezes the people dry in favor of a machine-like nation built only for profit.
In short, National Socialism believes that all men are NOT created equal. Just as every individual has his strengths and weaknesses, so too does each race have qualities which are unique to that group. National Socialism believes in the improvement of your people through individual means; its goal is that each new generation of children will be better off than the one before it.
ᛉ - GROUPS/PROJECTS OF INTEREST
gab.com
gab.com
/NSG/ + /SIG/
Copper engraving user I would like one of these
Love these generals.
Bump.
Inb4 eternal anglo ruins this thread.
It’s usually just t_d boom booms who come in spouting their nigger love who ruin them. Asking them how lolbert society would deal with coronavirus usually makes them fuck off quick. They always revert back to a communist argument where people will magically become rational actors.
As much as I love /nsg/, these threads tend to devolve into either OP spamming NS related pictures, or dying with only a few replies. Here's an idea I came up with to increase thread quality. I'll ask an open ended ideological question, and you can reply with your answer.
Today's question is real basic:
Why are you a National Socialist? Why don't you believe in some other ideology?
The totality I’d understanding of what race and human nature really are. The optimal society should use natural law where it is beneficial and suppress it where it is harmful in order to maintain optimal efficacy. For instance instance female nature is something that is detrimental to civilization but things like duty or prioritizing the tribe over the individual aren’t. Pretty much just the “risen beat” view of humans and not the “fallen angel.”
Because we need a strong state to set things right. And race matters.
Also, optics. OP pics for nsg shouldn’t be simple swastikas. We need nazi anime girls with big titles to grab people’s attention
*titties
I think the ethnostate should have population numbers in the daily newspaper. Reading the newspaper, seeing the daily growth, sounds pretty comfy. What else should be added?
kys
You can do better than that, kike.
>Why are you natsoc and not some other ideology
I'm not, natsoc is literal idolatry. It's one of the most materialistic ideologies actually.
race is real so multiculturalism and affirmative action is bullshit, men and women have different “missions” so gender equality is bullshit, free market capitalism has lost sight of long term growth in favor of quarterly profits, Communism and Marxist Socialism don’t fucking work so they’re bullshit, God is real and we can at least all agree that morality should not be defined by man so Atheism is fairly bullshit. Don’t want to live in a country where people have the choice to be obese, where buttsex is a human right, where transgenderism exists, where the mentally ill are our champions, where the degenerate is completely mainstream, where the white middle class constantly vote against their own interests, where pro-white parties and policies are deemed evil on the level of genocide, etc etc etc
I am natsoc for the reason that my people/country/religion/culture is being attacked. NatSoc is the only ideology that will not give the true oppressors any control over us. However, I also believe in LibRight as long as our country is pure and we can't get taken advantage of.
Bump
o/
bump o/
Because National Socialism is the only philosophy which fully explains what the objective purpose of human beings is in the material world allowing for objective morality to be constructed on the basis of scientific fact.
Just started hanging out in these threads a month or so ago. Enjoy them even if I don't fully believe in the ideology. All of a sudden a nat soc rally is coming to my city for the first time next week. Nice try powers that be but you're not getting me that easy. I said I was merely sympathetic and I mean it. Not gonna get shot at some fucking rally you can use as an excuse.
There is no objective morality though. Evolution explains why we are the way we are and what we've been living for in the past. But by no means is this to be equated with what we ought to do.
Bump
o/
Pls copperanon
Orthodox Christians were collaborators with Germany.
Perhaps NatSoc can be somewhat of a transitory phase into a lib right society. Kinda like how in Marxism, socialism is a transitory period into communism.
Whoops, forgot to change my flag from shitposting on another thread
>There is no objective morality though. Evolution explains why we are the way we are and what we've been living for in the past. But by no means is this to be equated with what we ought to do.
Yes user, there is objective morality, and i can demonstrate it without of appeal to any god, esoteric world view, or idealism. Merely predicated upon the verifiable nature of humanity and its existence on the whole.
In fact we can even use your own criteria for morality in this instance
"What humans OUGHT to do"
This is in fact the definition of morality as what we "ought to do" and if we understand this we can then determine what is "good" and "bad" for us to do.
To discover this we must first determine human nature
What humans are.
And the simple answer to this, while it may seem obvious once said, is that we are evolutionary organisms.
Our function, as is the function of all life is survive long enough to reproduce our genes. This pattern and function can be seen in all life from blades of grass, to wolves to human beings as all life must do this to fullfill its basic function, that which without life cannot continue to exist.
Thusly anything that helps us to fullfill this inherent and natural function can be considered objectively "good" and anything which does hampers our ability to fullfill this function "bad"
Homosexuality?
Race mixing?
Suicide?
All of these things do not allow our genes to pass on, so we can all objectively understand them to be Evil from an evolutionary standpoint.
This thusly begins to put into context why so many religions throughout the world have common rules against degeneracy, marital disloyalty homosexuality as those cultures which dod not hold to these ideals were more likely to die out in the long run.
We as biological organims have an objective purpose user
And once you really understand that and its implications?
You will know objective morality exists
And you will know what it is.
National Socialism gives the correct answers to all our modern problems and that even though the ideology is already 100 years old. It is also the only modern ideology that was able to free a nation from this (((globalist))) system and remove the Jews.
Because nowadays everything goes back to WWII and the Holocaust, it has to be through National Socialism that we finally break free.
the best thread for the best people
National Socialism is fundimentally about doing what is best for your race in any given situation.
Unlike ((((Capitalism))) or (((Communism))) Natioanl socialism values the well being of the poeple above all else
If nationalizing every industry accomplishes this?
A National Socialist would do it
If privatizing every industry would accomplish this?
A National Socialist would do this as well.
Hitler famously privatized way more industries in germany (prior to the war) then he nationalized as this created the greater abundance for the German people.
National Socialists aren't anti-free market
They are just against following the free market off a cliff.
Especially when it would mean the mass suffering or death of their people.
They changed their minds fairly fast after SS niggers burned down their villages and raped/killed Slavs en masse. If you are still natsoc as a Russian even after how much information is available to us nowdays you're definitely a brainlet.
That which is our natural function is not necessarily that which we ought to do. That just doesn't follow. Also, you are humanizing our genes. Genes don't create human beings in order to survive, it just happens to be the case that the genes that make fitter humans spread and the genes that don't die. Natural selection. Natural selection applies to everything. Life, companies, ideologies and moral systems.
But there is no such thing as objective morality. You don't go from IS to OUGHT without metaphysics, because nothing that is implies how things ought to be.
The Amerimutt Reich is about to be won in the streets
Pretty much yes. National socialism has no economic dogma. Although it does have a few guiding principles, such as anti-usury, autarchy, work ethic, respect for private property, etc.
>That which is our natural function is not necessarily that which we ought to do.
By what other metric would you determine what we "ought to do" which would qualify for the wrest of organic life?
Put it another way.
If we accept that the natural function of a single celled organism is to procreates its genetic matter allowing it to surviver as a biological organism in the long run (the same as a plant, dog or bacteria)
What makes a human objectively different that this purpose shared by all other life would be taken away and made "subjective" in his case merely on the basis of the presence of his consiousness?
>Also, you are humanizing our genes. Genes don't create human beings in order to survive
user words like "meaning" and "morality" are inherently language which is a social construct but said social construct was and is used to explain realities in the material world and the fact that the language is a social construct does not make the realities any less real.
If human being define concepts like "meaning" and "purpose" on the basis of phenomenon they witness it does not "humanize" to refer to them in said manner
It is merely using human language to describe something which has happened or happens.
1/2
2/2
>But there is no such thing as objective morality. You don't go from IS to OUGHT without metaphysics, because nothing that is implies how things ought to be.
This is a fundamental assertion of our modern age and it is infact dead fucking wrong.
You are insisting it is this way as you have been taught it is this way yet you provide evidence of this.
I'm not trying to jump down your throat
But this is really is just a belief, a belief which infact comes to conflict with the objective nature of the material world.
You ASSUME that the state of a thing cannot justify an action for that thing
But there is literally zero logic to back this belief up
While there is infact a great deal of logic which would state that a thing is meant to do that which is in its nature to do as it was inherently designed to this thing by nature.
Bump
Ok anons, another question. I asked this the other night, but it was late and there were only 1 or 2 people who responded.
If nat soc is about putting your nation first, why cant any race be welcomed as long as they accept the culture of the land and adapt to the society they are in while doing what they can do to put their country first?
I know not all nat soc are white supremacists but that's kinda what I see
Because the nation is based off of race.
>If nat soc is about putting your nation first, why cant any race be welcomed as long as they accept the culture
Because what Nat Socs mean by "Nation" or as they put it "volk" Is essentially "race" with geographically specific ethic undertones.
National Socialism is at its core racial patriotism, putting the interests of our people first as we understand it to be our objective purpose as evolutionary organisms.
You can no more "Allow in" other race to a racial nation then you can paint a white canvas black and claim it is still the white canvas afterwards.
Allowing in other races is to the nation fundimentally destroys the nation on the most basic level that comprises it, its genetics.
Basically the TLDR version of my post if you could be bothered with my fucking pargraph
>By what other metric would you determine what we "ought to do" which would qualify for the wrest of organic life?
That's just it, there is no metric for what you ought to do. Morality is just something invented to keep society together and reduce suffering.
I do have morality in that sense, but it isn't objective, it is based on preferences like the preference to survive and to be happy.
Genes don't think about what to do, they just are and happen to survive.
Do you think that animals that are hunted by humans OUGHT to be fasters so they survive better?
Why separate between living and dead matter? Just because the one moves and the other one doesn't? You are basing your morality on quasi religious ideas that don't correspond with reality.
If we only act to survive then there is absolutely no point in looking out for people's feelings, life wouldn't be worth living anymore.
I'm still new to the whole concept. How can it be about race when you're putting your country before yourself?
>imagine being an unironic nazi
This shit is embarrassing, kids
Nvm
you answered it
Cuz neetsocs think muh blood has some shared bond. Even though Europeans for 99% of their existence were their own worst enemy. Daily reminder that nation states and ethnonationalism make sense, but racial solidarity is a meme with no backing.
Several reasons:
Because nation is defined by race. Attitudes about things like politics and philosophy are far more based off of genes than our society lets on.
If you're talking about Africans, they have a lower IQ and disposition towards anti-social behavior
If you let in enough of another race, than they'll inevitably form their own communities, which will create a potential fifth column
Finally, the above three problems will only become worse and worse with time, as the one person of another race you brought in will have children, and those children will have children, etc.
Not a fan of Hitlerite NatSoc, but there was a time I considered myself to be a Strasserist NatSoc until I realized it was a dead movement.
You know how there are ethnic germans, or Germans whose ancestors all lived and evolved in Germany for 1000s of years. Under natsoc, only those people would be allowed in the state. No other immigrants. Except maybe from some racial cousin countries in Europe, see ’s graph, but they would be assimilated as “German”. Racial aliens, such as those races native to non European continents, would never be able to become German. The same works for any country which can be said is based off of ethnicity.
>That's just it, there is no metric for what you ought to do.
Again user, this is an assumption.
You are ASSUMING there is no meteric and rejecting one which has proof of its own existence laid obvious before you
If you know what to know what is "good" or "bad" for a thing you need to determine its purpose
And to determine its purpose you need only know its function.
The Function of life
All life
Bacterial life
Animal life
Human life
Is to pass on the genetic material that create an organism so that that it may survive as survival through procreation is the observable function of life.
As we understand this to be its function we can assertain its purpose to complete this task
And once we have shown its objective purpose we can objectively define that which helps it fullfillf this purpose as "good" and what hinders it as "bad"
Do you understand now?
> Morality is just something invented to keep society together and reduce suffering.
No user you are merely refering to moral constructs
Not morality
Morality is what is OBJECTIVELY "right" and "wrong"
>Genes don't think about what to do, they just are and happen to survive.
No they ARE DESIGNED to survive.
The are created to survive
If they arent they die off proving them to be objective failures at the objective task of life.
You are veiwing the world through a subjective frame work when an actual analysis of it as it is can gleam you objective answers.
You are insisting on relatvisism when morality is infact unarguable.
>Do you think that animals that are hunted by humans OUGHT to be fasters so they survive better?
YES
From their existence
That would be OBJECTIVELY GOOD.
>Why separate between living and dead matter?
Because living matter has an obeservable function
unlike dead matter.
(at least none that we are aware of)
>Why separate between living and dead matter?
Fucking how?
1/2
racial solidarity is not a meme when the superiority (as in power) of your race is in danger. white people might have been their number one enemy at one point but it was because many groups of white people were extremely powerful. that’s really no longer the case.
>If we only act to survive then there is absolutely no point in looking out for people's feelings, life wouldn't be worth living anymore.
There WOULD BE reason to look out for other peoples feeling as these feelings were crafted by hundreds of thousands of years of evoluiotn
in order
to help us
SURVIVE!
>embarrassing
>>>kids
What the fuck does it feel like to be this fucking drowned in group think?
So is Marxism dude.
It isnt about whats popular
Its about whats True.
Based New Fag.
Bump
If it is good for man to survive, but also good for the animal to survive, then what is good and what is bad? Should the animal die or should the human starve?
That's not objective morality.
For the Animal it is "Good" for him o survive and for man it is "Good" for man to survive.
You can have objective morality without it being a universal egalitarian code
Again
This is (ironically) another "spook" which we believe due to our cultural heritage
Not based on the actual reality of the world as it is.
>So is Marxism dude.
Marxism is everywhere, and only grows thanks to the establishment that propagates it.
>It isnt about whats popular
Its about whats True.
True, however it's a bit disheartening when you can barely find anyone who shares your beliefs even on the internet.
Anyway, these days I just consider myself a general Third Positionist.
Ok so the country is based off of ethnicity. Replace the word nation with ethnicity. So when in a nat soc society, one talks about a sense of "for the nation", they mean for the actual country itself but inherently it's meant for the race. If I'm getting this correct.
It definitely seems far out in today's society, but I guess when you strip all the BS politics and emotional response away and look at the biologics of it all, it works. How do you justify this when actually talking with minorities? You're basically saying they are less than you, but it's not there fault. And they would be better off in a country with their own race.
>the Aryan Ideal
I think you mean Nordic Ideal.
>NatSoc, a modern ideology
>Traditionalism
Pick one
shut up jew.
Thing is, natsoc can’t work with all countries. Like America, or Brazil, for example, both inherently multiracial, thus opposed to natsoc. It can only work with countries, who, at least in origin, have a common ethnic root, such as Germany, Japan, India, etc. I’d imagine that for America and Brazil we’d need something like classical Italian style fascism, which was non racial