@phoenix009 is on PowPing!

PowPing is a place where you can earn Bitcoin simply by socializing, for FREE.
Never tried Bitcoin? It's OK! Just come, socialize, and earn Bitcoin.
Check out phoenix009's activities
Total Economy: 0 USD
National Socialism is an in-group political-philosophy. It breaks down when faced with the reality of conflict within that in-group. Even if you say all Aryans have more in common with each other than outsiders, there are still significant divisions within. There are Bavarians, Prussians, Danes, Swedes, Norwegians, English, Scottish, Irish... the list goes on for sometime. Then there are also regional differences within, for-example—Norway. Say you are ethnically Norwegian and live in one valley, and you venture over the mountain to the neighboring valley to harvest the product of public unregulated land. Yet the ethnically Norwegian self-appointed leader of the unofficial community denies you the right and acts hostile. He and his posse then proceed to steal your harvest and equipment right in-front of you, laugh, and claim you have no evidence of the crime. After this, he wishes to deescalate lest the law intervene, and admits by omission that he has no formal right to the land as he and/or the community does not formally own the land. Yet he still claims some ambiguous collective form of ownership over the land. The problem here, is a lack of understanding and/or acceptance of the law. While the national law states that the public land is owned by the public (for use by all), the unofficial representative of the unofficial local community feels they own it, or at the very least, should own it. Conflict occurs when there is a lack of agreement over property rights. The people in the valley feel you were the thief, while you feel (and the national law agrees) that they were the thieves. Even if you manage to deescalate and concede that they 'own' the place in exchange for the return of your stolen goods... what then? Can you really trust such people? Perhaps the unofficial local community should be made an official defined community, and the public land should be made community land that only residents of the community have access to—with usage rights clearly defined. Regardless, the question remains. What if the neighboring community of Aryans prove to be dishonorable thieving and lying scum? What then? Even if you reduce the in-group to the nuclear family, there will still be divisions between family members, and sometimes these differences are irreconcilable. I think this is the greatest thorn in the side of National Socialism as an ideology. Libertarian political-philosophy—especially voluntarism and the non-aggression principle—is a better place to start from, but as we have seen with the USA, it has also has flaws. Perhaps the best solution, is some form of fusion between the two political-philosophies, with a hereditary monarch as the head of state and final judge. In the end however, might is right. If you had been able to call the might of the state, you would have been right. If you instead accepted that 'they' 'own' the land and can restrict your access—because they live closer to the land and/or have greater military power than you can or want to use—then they are right. No matter what, always pick your battles. Rise again.
the unity of fascism comes from how it's a reaction to the left, it's not really any coherent idea on its own, it only exists as a strategy for defending established interests against the change proposed by leftism
phoenix009 replied:
You are partially right. However, Oswald Mosley's movement in the British Empire before WW2, was certainly was not defending established interests. In fact, the British Union was directly threatening the monopolistic financial interests in the Empire—led by the Rothschild patriarch—with replacement by an ethnocentric-technocracy. The 'Nazis' as the 'Jews' call them, were directly challenging the status quo in Europe at all levels. The Spanish and Italian fascists conform more easily to the reactionary label. Franco especially, simply wished to turn back the clock and maintain the established interests of the Catholic Church and Monarchy.