The recent dem debate made me realize I might have misjudged him because of who his supporters are. They're undoubtedly pathetic cucks and SJWs, and I know they like him for a reason, but I think there's more to him than his race-pandering and liberal demagoguery.
>"The countries of Europe should pick up more of the burden for their defense."
This sentence spoken at the debate didn't match up with my perception of Sanders as a stupidly altruistic man who would run the country into the ground if it meant feeling good about 'helping' the 'less fortunate' as designated by some social justice hierarchy.
He wants to help people, yes; Bernie Sanders is a socialist, yes. But the more and more I read makes me believe he's not just a socialist - he's a national socialist. He doesn't want to help foreigners and illegal immigrants - he wants to help Americans.
He's as isolationist as Trump is or Ron Paul was, and I don't think his supporters even realize it.
The people supporting him hear him talk about social issues that mean nothing in the end, and he throws them some line about white privilege or free stuff or human equality, and they cheer; in the same speech he expresses his disgust at jobs being taken away from the American people - race irrespective - by foreign workers and his anger at China's growing power coming at the expense of US interests, and they cheer again.
They don't realize what they're cheering for.
>>71155664
I always thought of him as an out of touch old man saying whatever he could to draw the ignorant youth vote.
Hasn't changed.
He's better than Hillary.
But I'm a #CruzMissile
>>71155664
>nazis were socialists
jesus christ this retarded sub-meme is starting to get on my nerves
Next you're going to be telling me that democracy has to be awful because "muh DPRK"
Seriously, read a book
![1433372902-zodiaccheese-index[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/Kl3PNbE.jpg "1433372902-zodiaccheese-index[1].jpg")
>>71155769
Why?
The nazis killed millions because of their nationalist policies
Germany had great economy because it had socialist economy
>>71156491
1000% Juif connerie.
>>71156491
They didnt have a great economy beacause of socialism they had a great economy beacause building a fucking army with a fuckying huge infrastructure makes jobs ... has 0 to do with socialism .. i agree with you on the nationalism side of your argument dough
>>71155737
First post best post
>>71156491
The nationalism wouldn't have existed without the socialism.
The government needed to make people dependent on them but also feel like they were prosperous because of them in order to build the social capital to mobilise the country to war.
Nazi nationalism was a by-product of their socialism.
>>71158112
The Treaty of Versailles put a 100k man cap on the german army.
Germany's economic 'miracle' happened before ww2. Germans took over poland so easily due to a combination of tactics, timing, and technological edge. Poland's army was superior in terms of raw power at the time. The fucking yuge infrastructure thing came after.
For Germany, socialism worked, but you must understand socialism doesn't work just anywhere. It needs fertile soil, the right population for the right culture and state of collective mind.
An uninspired population that's highly individualistic will atomize your group, it will make every individual take advantage of this system, in turn eroding whatever altruistic attitudes float in the collective expectation.
Hardly any system will work on this fractured atomized excuse of a nation, but socialism will work the least.
On the other hand, when the population is inspired and held together tightly by a sense of unity and shared identity, socialism flourish as it would in an actual family.
In short, Nationalism works because it appeals and inspires the population on a very instinctive level, a shared identity, a shared goal, meaning and achievement as a group. It becomes a well oiled machine where everyone can belong.
cont.
>>71161458
cont.
It's counterpart, International socialism, tries to fill this void with idealism, something more abstract, a notion of unity regardless of human characteristics. The reason this fails is because
1. It can't be fully grasped by the less intelectually gifted
2. It lacks a contrast, we identify what is by looking at that which isn't. When that which isn't can't be found, we must fabricate it from abstract thought. This method never feels as real as when there is a physical 'other'.
So international socialists just hope for inspiration. This is why people end up rebelling, this is why it's responsible for endless political casualties.
On national socialism most are willing, because it speaks to their instincts.
On international socialism, intellectuals are inspired, but most workers just go along to avoid getting shot. It is too complex to appeal to them.
When someone is willing and really believes in something, tensions lower, it becomes easier to trust your neighbour, to feel you're both on the same page.
It is somewhat of a self sustaining process that tips off balance when enough people start taking advantage of the system.
This is why national socialism can only work on homogeneous nations. You need altruism as a steam machine needs coal to fuel its engine.
It is important to look at, and try to understand this systems holistically. One cannot device an universal economic, or social, or any type of 'universal working' system. It would be like trying to engineer an omni-energy engine.
We can't ask if X system works, what we should ask instead is: Can X system work for Y to get Z
In germany's case, yes that was a very good system to raise a nation from its own ashes.
