I would vote for Hitler, if I didn't knew liberalism is like water. It shapes itself in whatever form needed, withdraws whenever needed, but never giving the ropes to pull on societies levers totally out of hand, if necessary playing the long-game sitting in the underground gnawing on society from its foundation until the bloodsucker are strong enough again to rise from the dead. Fascism has no decided economic policy, fascism has no preventive measures against corruption. The elite is never asked to part with its material power, if anything the elite just gets slowly replaced, by a new one. Everywhere fascism sees roo/ the root for human malice. In the smallest things they see the devil. (Jews turn us gay, trans-agenda, gommunism, cultural marxism etc.), but somehow they ignore the most obvious source, the human itself. They decide to wash over these problems with propaganda and a jesus like savior figure.
Fascism is just a fail-safe against people taking decided action against the current and any future elite. They simply don't want to give up their total control over our lives through sheer might of what really turns the world, that is material wealth.
Oh I forgot fascism isn't against that, somehow it's just the wrong people who got there. Don't you see the inherent flaw of the system? If a society naturally always has brought people to the top overruling the need of the majority of people, maybe the idea of this pseudo-meritocracy is cope in itself? The same goes btw for the later soviet communism. So even if you have a based leader, it signifies nothing. Once the money's rolling in again, through nepotism, corruption, lobbyism, media control, workplace control, worker extortion under threat of social or economic destruction it is just a matter of time until the good resolutions become forgotten.
To bring change you have to address humans natural tendency to screw the game for others, once they moved to the top. It's not like democracy doesn't work, it's just that democracy without ruling out the factor of money is bluepilled and shouldn't be called democracy at all. It's really more of an aristocracy or maybe a republic.
Our investments are already decided by teams of finance service contractors, corporations are already publicly and democratically owned by a small group of people. The structures are there, socialism is there. Just not for the majority of peasants.
There is no meritocracy involved anymore. We have fully automated surplus value absorption. And even if it was at some point. The status quo is exactly what you get long term, if money buys power.
Cuck if you let this money go into the hands of the aristocracy without society having any say being on the brink of extinction and slavery, especially cuck if you are okay with them reinvesting it into shaping the system again in turn. Repeating the cycle again and again, giving themselves more privileges until they have the absolute power.
Also it won't help to get away with government without permanently crushing formation of corporations. Privatizing the state doesn't give away with it. Thinking this will be more democratic is cope. Basic economics of accumulation. The new winners will slowly start the game from new.
Fascism is just a fail-safe against people taking decided action against the current and any future elite. They simply don't want to give up their total control over our lives through sheer might of what really turns the world, that is material wealth.
Oh I forgot fascism isn't against that, somehow it's just the wrong people who got there. Don't you see the inherent flaw of the system? If a society naturally always has brought people to the top overruling the need of the majority of people, maybe the idea of this pseudo-meritocracy is cope in itself? The same goes btw for the later soviet communism. So even if you have a based leader, it signifies nothing. Once the money's rolling in again, through nepotism, corruption, lobbyism, media control, workplace control, worker extortion under threat of social or economic destruction it is just a matter of time until the good resolutions become forgotten.
To bring change you have to address humans natural tendency to screw the game for others, once they moved to the top. It's not like democracy doesn't work, it's just that democracy without ruling out the factor of money is bluepilled and shouldn't be called democracy at all. It's really more of an aristocracy or maybe a republic.
Our investments are already decided by teams of finance service contractors, corporations are already publicly and democratically owned by a small group of people. The structures are there, socialism is there. Just not for the majority of peasants.
There is no meritocracy involved anymore. We have fully automated surplus value absorption. And even if it was at some point. The status quo is exactly what you get long term, if money buys power.
Cuck if you let this money go into the hands of the aristocracy without society having any say being on the brink of extinction and slavery, especially cuck if you are okay with them reinvesting it into shaping the system again in turn. Repeating the cycle again and again, giving themselves more privileges until they have the absolute power.
Also it won't help to get away with government without permanently crushing formation of corporations. Privatizing the state doesn't give away with it. Thinking this will be more democratic is cope. Basic economics of accumulation. The new winners will slowly start the game from new.
Last edited:
