Man in The High Castle

Because I know behind the show is probably some coked up jewish writer who thinks he's way more clever than he is

It's a Ridley Scott project you ignorant pleb

Because the show features a resistance? Because the show refers to the Nazis as fascists?

Nice try, Shlomo

Attached: 1548110883669.png (2241x1248, 208K)

hahaha i know dude like why would any american want to stop a foreign fascist dictatorship lmao fucking coked out jews at it again

>This is the Scary Dystopia that we would live under if the Germans had won the War

Damn..... Really glad we won, look at the horror!!

Attached: The Dystopian Reality Had Nazis Won.png (475x668, 508K)

Because in the current year, the term "fascist" has become so diluted that it's almost meaningless. It's another buzzword. I think the fact that it is placed prominently in the trailer is an attempt to make a political statement

Thankfully we live in this timeline and avoided the horror

Attached: London 2018.jpg (1871x1025, 628K)

that only started in season 3 when I think they decided to be more blatant about it because people weren't picking up it was a theme from the start

Still haven't watched it though, does it end up happening anyways?

How does Season 3 end?

>Because in the current year, the term "fascist" has become so diluted that it's almost meaningless
The Nazis are actual fascist though. Should they just avoid the term entirely because of the current political climate? Should they avoid using Nazi too?

>I think the fact that it is placed prominently in the trailer is an attempt to make a political statement
You think a show about Nazis having the word Fascist placed prominently in the trailer is an attempt to make a political statement?

>The Nazis are actual fascist though
I get that, but I think the motivation wasn't a historical one
>You think a show about Nazis having the word Fascist placed prominently in the trailer is an attempt to make a political statement?
The fact that the sitting US president is routinely referred to by that term should answer your own question

the premise of the show is as close to the actual meaning and gravity of the real term as it gets

I haven't seen Season 3 fully, but 1 and 2 are shocking neutral on the Nazi philosophy

Hitler is a good guy in the show, and that's not a joke.

Attached: Season 1.png (1180x842, 1.17M)

>but I think the motivation wasn't a historical one
What makes you say that?

>The fact that the sitting US president is routinely referred to by that term should answer your own question
So because Trump is called Fascist and the term Fascist was featured prominently in a trailer about a show which revolves around Nazis means the show was trying to make a political statement?

you know the whole "rent free" thing goes both ways

Th show is about actually fascists though. Like you get sent to the camp, or disappeared fascist. The secret police and rabid nationalism in all levels of society.

This is word salad. You have wasted my time. Asshole.

I can understand that. Again, I haven't seen the show, only the marketing material

Sounds comfy

>Again, I haven't seen the show, only the marketing material
I get that I'm just trying to understand why you think the trailer was trying to make a political statement.

I would describe the show as incredibly odd.

It focuses at the Power Struggle between the Japanese Empire and the Reich, which rule two half's of the world. A lot of focus is on how the two sides would rule over their halves....

... And the Nazi half is very clean, advanced, safe and calm, unless you take part in the 'politics.' Like, you'd expect the show to not showcase that, you know?

Attached: Horror (?).png (1920x1080, 2.9M)

Maybe I'm just too jaded, I just get the sense that it's the same stock hollywood bullshit

In the second season the writers had to be a little more "Nazi's are bad guys, grrrrrrrrrrr!!!"

They took a big liberty for a scene, yes.

Useless Eaters, they were sterilized, not put to death. Especially not in the case of the person not actually being a Useless Eater. Nazis didn't kill old people either.

user it seems to me you're just assuming political agendas where there aren't any. People were doing the same with the Chernobyl TV show before it even came out and it turned out to be pushing no modern agenda whatsoever. You have to give things a chance and stop seeing a political boogeyman where there isn't one.

You're right

I don't think I've ever heard that said in my entire time on this site. Thank you based rational user

I've just reached such heights of contrarianism that I don't even obey the culture of the site anymore desu

it's almost like user is observing the world through a very specific lens, and perceiving many innocent events to be a threat, and reacting to them in an elevated way...almost like some kind of...reactionary? hmm

They try to teleport to other earths and fail for now. Julianna gets caught, tells Smith he's a shithead who killed his son by proxy, and warps to another earth. Himmler gets shot

I've come to the point where I just sincere post exclusively and try to be as nice as I can to every I talk to on here. Fuck being an edgy ironic zoomer

>Useless Eaters, they were sterilized, not put to death. Especially not in the case of the person not actually being a Useless Eater. Nazis didn't kill old people either.

>have to make the Nazis more evil than they were to stop people form sympathizing

Always astounds me. Reminds me of Hitler Rise of Evil, where test audiences started liking Hitler, so they added a fictional incest story with his niece.

I think it's an intentional design. A contrast of a clean nazi world with people just fucking dying and getting euthanized like it's no big deal.

>Hitler Rise of Evil, where test audiences started liking Hitler
Sauce?

Setting up the Multiverse End of Reich I see.
Eh, lame, but not surprising.

lol, never seen the movie, they added fucking incest to it? Lmao

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aktion_T4

Nazis put to death the mentally feeble and old.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aktion_T4

my mistake for posting the link twice

The writers realized they fucked up with Season 1&2 by making Smith the most likable and interesting character and they try to fix that in Season 3.

It didn’t help them that he’s pretty much the best actor on the show too

>wikipedia

Look, you can see Old People and War Vets etc all over the Reich in actual footage that we have of our History. Trusting the winners of a war to be fair in their recounting of the losing sides philosophies...

Because it aligns with your presupposed views. You see what you want to see, and as a result you like it.

Shock abounds.

Attached: US soldier, in uniform and wearing a tallit, a Jewish prayer shawl, attends the first Rosh Hashanah (1153x1742, 188K)

Exept the Nazis are just as vacuous as Marxists and the idea they'd promote a healthy family-based society is just flat out wrong. The problem with WWII is that we didn't keep going and take out Stalin and Mao.

>wikipedia
What issue do you have with that page specifically? Anything said in that page you find fault in?

>Look, you can see Old People and War Vets etc all over the Reich
They didn't kill all old people as a general rule. Perhaps I should've been more specific. From the wiki:

>In early October, all hospitals, nursing homes, old-age homes and sanatoria were required to report all patients who had been institutionalised for five years or more, who had been committed as "criminally insane", who were of "non-Aryan race" or who had been diagnosed with any on a list of conditions. The conditions included schizophrenia, epilepsy, Huntington's chorea, advanced syphilis, senile dementia, paralysis, encephalitis and "terminal neurological conditions generally".

>Trusting the winners of a war to be fair
You don't have to place your blind trust in anyone friend. There are primary sources that document much of this and tons of other stuff like the Holocaust. The Germans are pretty autismo about their record keeping so there's a lot of primary source material you are more than free to read.

Braindead Ameritard Walmartian

And Julianna is a complete harlot and uses her sexuality to get all the men around her to die in place of her.

>the idea they'd promote a healthy family-based society is just flat out wrong
How is that? There was a lot of focus on exactly that, but I'm curious on what you mean..

>The problem with WWII is that we didn't keep going and take out Stalin and Mao.
The problem was allying with the Soviet Union ever. The damage will never be repaired.

Attached: Medal.png (361x528, 74K)

What makes you think the world would be roses and sunshine under a Fascist Military Dictatorship?

The Nazis didn't wipe out Non-Aryans ever anywhere and that includes a certain you know what event as well.

This can be verified by anyone who ever had family who lived trough Nazi occupation, including my family.

I will not start the 6 trillion debate here, it would take over the entire topic.

The show seems to think so.

>The problem was allying with the Soviet Union ever.
In regards to Britain they really had no choice. Germany invaded Russia and as a result both the UK and Soviet Union were at war with the Germans it was strictly a union of necessity. The Western Allies actually had offensive plans in mind against the Soviet Union after the defensive pact was signed between Nazi Germany and the USSR in order to bomb oil fields IIRC. This was cancelled after Operation Barborrosa.

>The Nazis didn't wipe out Non-Aryans ever
I never suggested they tried wiping out all non-Aryans. What I posted was in regards to Aktion T4 in particular

>The show seems to think so.
lol keep watching

WWII was a shitshow, that wasn't "supposed" to get so big. Could've accepted the hundreds of peace proposals, but Britain didn't so now we're here.

Its done and over, but as I said, the damage will never go away.

>The show seems to think so.
he says while making a bunch of nazi apologist posts

>reports of nazis killing civilians in every country they invaded
>lol dude is just propaganda, everyone is lying! they were nice guys!

Worked fine in Spain for four decades, as long as you don't consider the opinion of the average person. it was a "dream", that lasted too long.

Attached: An insurgent fighter tosses a hand grenade over a barbed wire fence and into loyalist soldiers with (1247x879, 419K)

>Could've accepted the hundreds of peace proposals
Hitler's word meant nothing at that point the Nazis had violated dozens of treaties in the past why make a deal with someone as untrustworthy as Hitler?

>Its done and over, but as I said, the damage will never go away.
Don't you think Germany is to blame for WW2 as well?

I would rather live in a unified nation rather than a nation where 50% of the population is manipulated into hating the other 50% and leadership flips political beliefs every 4-8 years.

Real societal change can only happen in strong centralized government or a revolution.

That's a simple fact.

The real issues lies whether the dictator is "enlightened" or not.

As I said before, you're trusting the good graces of the winners of the bloodiest war of all time to interpret objectively events of a side not allowed to defend itself. Fact is, they didn't go in and start wiping all non Aryans out.

It was thus certainly not a wide spread policy, and the claim is that this place had it going, and 100s of thousands died, evidence is Brits word. Mhhm.

ok. The show seems to think so.

Yes, Germany is mostly to blame. Yes Hitler was a failure all around, (he lost.... really badly) but there is 0% nuance in all discussion regarding WWII. The vast majority of people don't even know what lead up to WWII, anything about WWI, and what even started WWII.

They think Germany just declared war on literally everyone around them and started wiping out non-Germans, the end.

>I would rather live in a unified nation
In a unified nation where you have no rights? Where you can be taken away by Gestapo with no trial? Where the Government has absolute control of your life? You'd be sacrificing quite a bit. Do you trust the Government enough to hand over almost complete control of your entire life?

>As I said before, you're trusting the good graces of the winners of the bloodiest war of all time
Again I'm not placing blind trust in anyone. There are primary sources you can refer to. There is evidence. This isn't like religion dude there is proof to these claims

>Fact is, they didn't go in and start wiping all non Aryans out.
I never said they did

>It was thus certainly not a wide spread policy
I never suggested it was. In fact Aktion T4 was pretty limited in its scope. The wiki includes all of this info. You should READ it

>The vast majority of people don't even know what lead up to WWII, anything about WWI, and what even started WWII.
user the average person is fucking stupid.

>They think Germany just declared war on literally everyone around them and started wiping out non-Germans, the end.
Among historians I see a lot of nuance in regards to WW2. Among average people I don't see much historical discussion whatsoever. I just don't see why you'd use the average person's knowledge about the war as evidence there's little nuance surrounding WW2 debate.

Forgot to mention that this post was meant in full and utter sarcasm.

Fascism is an idea that makes everyone other than you the enemy, thus the targets to blame is boundless. If not X, it is Y, if not X&Y, it is Z, ect. You always have another "other" to blame.

Grow the fuck up and realize that which you believe objectively wasn't as you believe it.

Learn. Read. Mature.

Attached: Stalingrad.gif (320x180, 474K)

Not that I disagree with I user I think Fascism is just a big a meme ideology as Communism but what enemy did Mussolini's Italy target? I know they didn't have the race and Jewish autism the Nazis had.

>Again I'm not placing blind trust in anyone. There are primary sources you can refer to. There is evidence. This isn't like religion dude there is proof to these claims
I don't know a good place to discuss these things, if you could suggest one that would be convenient. (This thread is not one, lol)

And I mean a place that doesn't ban and dox you if you say a kind word or question hyperbole regarding Germans in WWII.

>I never said they did
Alright.
>user the average person is fucking stupid.
Regarding most subjects outside their scope of knowledge, yes. I mean, it makes sense to a degree. I don't know anything about cars except surface knowledge, but at least I know that I don't know more than surface knowledge, you know?

>Among historians I see a lot of nuance in regards to WW2. Among average people I don't see much historical discussion whatsoever.
Where?
> I just don't see why you'd use the average person's knowledge about the war as evidence there's little nuance surrounding WW2 debate.
Well it certainly does mean that in 'polite society' (and in politics...) you cannot discuss it at all.

It targeted Italy, and that's why it was both the most and least successful government Italy has ever had. To this day the Italians cannot top the depths they sunk to.

What?

Italians are actually allowed to say a kind word regarding their History in WWII, and there's open longing for many aspects of the Mussolini rule. Politicians can even compliment some parts of him and keep being elected. This includes Mussolini's grand daughter.

I happen to know a lot about Italian's in this regard actually...

Attached: Mussolini.png (567x642, 426K)

Mussolini was trying to make a name for himself, to be a modern day Caesar. He went into North Africa thinking he could conquer, he failed and he fucked it up so bad that the the wehrmacht had to overtake their previously independent campaign. It isn't a statement on Italians, it is one on Italian leaders and their appointed military commanders. They were basically fighting Isonzo over and over 30 years later.

Attached: 5th Army soldiers study a map of Rome. In background is the ruins of the Coliseum. Italy.jpg (576x721, 104K)

Nazi America>Soviet America>Real 1950s America>>>>>>>>>Modern-day America

>I don't know a good place to discuss these things
Like WW2 debate? /his/ is great for that. There are people on there much smarter than me who can talk your ear off about WW2.

>I don't know anything about cars except surface knowledge, but at least I know that I don't know more than surface knowledge, you know?
Thing is user history just isn't awfully interesting to most people. Remember all the shit heads in your high school history courses? That's the majority of the population in regards to history. Most just don't bother to learn not due to a political agenda but just cuz they're lazy

>Where?
Antony Beevor, David Glantz, and Omer Bartov are pretty good in my opinion.

>Well it certainly does mean that in 'polite society' (and in politics...) you cannot discuss it at all.
Discuss what exactly? Why the war happened? I've spoken to professors about this and there was no incident. Depends how you speak about it suppose.

Fascism is necessary as a rule, and the only alternative to Communism and Anarchism. That's what you get as choices. Be divided eternally by class, have no rules at all, or a common set of rules and goals as a nation that benefits all.

>b-but what about Democracy??
Meme ideology that is crumbling more and more each day that ironically relies on a common bedrock of 'the vast majority of people already agree on the most fundamental issues by default.' Or in other words, it breaks down the second people are pitted against each other more than debating flavors of policy.

lmao dude you really don't know how good you have it. Modern day America isn't perfect but I don't understand why people ITT think switching to an authoritarian Government where there is only allowed to be one party would fix things

Yeah, but see this is what I meant. Only the Chans have any discussion. That I know of. Which is ok, but a forum or something would be more what I'm looking for.

Its very, very censored all over the web.. A shame since discussion should always be encouraged.

>Fascism is necessary as a rule
How do you figure

>That's what you get as choices
Kinda narrow minded in my opinion. Tons of political ideologies in between. It's not an either or situation with Fascism and Communism being the only options

>Meme ideology that is crumbling more and more each day
Mate Germany crumbled in 12 years. Every Fascist regime has collapsed what makes you think Fascism is NOT a meme ideology?

>Only the Chans have any discussion
Why go anywhere else fren? But if you look around I'm sure you can find a history board to your liking. I don't venture much outside of this site though

>Its very, very censored all over the web
Any specific examples you had in mind?

>How do you figure
I explained how I figure.

>Kinda narrow minded in my opinion. Tons of political ideologies in between. It's not an either or situation with Fascism and Communism being the only options
Can you list more? Fascism, Democracy, Communism, Anarchy. I explained why Democracy will and is failing currently. Feel free to disagree, but explain why.

>Mate Germany crumbled in 12 years. Every Fascist regime has collapsed what makes you think Fascism is NOT a meme ideology?
There have been very few fascist regimes. First one, lost a war. Spain died with the ruler... he had poor succession.

South American ones wish they could go back, lol.

Again, you will soon enough see that you wont have a whole lot of options. Anarchy, Communism, Fascism. Take your pick!

>Any specific examples you had in mind?
Err, all of Social Media and major discussion platforms? All of them. As in, there is no need to list them all, because there is not one which isn't censored.

Biggest exception is Yea Forums, that's it. As far as I know..

>I explained how I figure.
Would you mind pointing it out?

>Can you list more?
Constitutional Monarchies, Confederations, Commonwealth, Sultante, etc. There are more than just 2 choices friend this black and white mentality is pretty ignorant imo

>There have been very few fascist regimes.
And they've all crumbled

>First one, lost a war.
You think the war had nothing to do with their Fascist ideology?

>Spain died with the ruler.
And why do you think that is?

>Again, you will soon enough see that you wont have a whole lot of options. Anarchy, Communism, Fascism. Take your pick!
I disagree mate. Personally I think you have a utopian vision of what Fascism is versus what it actually looks like in practice.

Fair enough my man. To be fair though I don't know if social media is the ideal place to debate WW2.

At least you're putting your communications degree to use.

because the producers didn't realize that people would prefer safe neighborhoods and stability over personal freedom and diversity
the obergruppen-whatever Smith is also a great character, it is way too easy to identify with a guy that supports the system despite his misgivings because the alternative is starvation or worse
doesn't help that the American Nazis and the Japanese occupiers have interesting plots, meanwhile the rebels have some kind of love triangle going on in bumfuck nowhere

Attached: dapper.jpg (945x1365, 978K)

AMERICA FUCC NAW

>Would you mind pointing it out?
Democracy is failing all over the West as people vote against other people, not along other people. Big difference. Leaving the options I listed.

> There are more than just 2 choices friend this black and white mentality is pretty ignorant imo
Right. I suppose they're umbrella terms.

>Constitutional Monarchies
I would say this is much closer to fascism than Democracy, do you not agree? And its worse, as the ruling is tied to family, encouraging corruption.
>Confederations
As in the USA? Or as in Nations cooperating? In the former case, its far closer to Democracy, and hence failing, in the latter, it could be any type of rule..
>Commonwealth, Sultante
Similar to Monarchies, fuck the British Empire btw.

>You think the war had nothing to do with their Fascist ideology?
No. Communism won, another totalitarian ideology. All others lost.

>And why do you think that is?
The system was set up too much on one person instead of the ideals of Fascism.

>I disagree mate. Personally I think you have a utopian vision of what Fascism is versus what it actually looks like in practice.
I don't have a Utopian view, I have a practical one. Again, Democracy is nice.... when everyone already agrees. When that becomes impossible, its the best option left.

There is nowhere to debate at all, that's the problem (yes, yes 4chin, I know)

>There is nowhere to debate at all
History boards my dude

axishistoryforum. the mods are very patient as long as you dont say retarded shit

>Leaving the options I listed.
I disagree that Fascism and Communism or Anarchism are our only choices

>I would say this is much closer to fascism than Democracy, do you not agree?
No I wouldn't. An Absolute Monarchy would be closer to Fascism I think

>And its worse, as the ruling is tied to family, encouraging corruption.
No they'd be limited in their powers by the constitution

>No. Communism won, another totalitarian ideology.
Hitler's reason for going to war with Russia in the first place was very much inspired by NatSoc and the concept of Lebensraum. You should read Mein Kampf.

>The system was set up too much on one person instead of the ideals of Fascism.
Not to belittle you dude but this sounds like the "not real communism" debate point I hear from tankies. Also Fascism is totalitarian by nature too much power is bound to be vested in one person

>I have a practical one
Ok what are your critiques of Fascism?

Isn't there time travel on this show? I also stopped watching after one or two seasons because I'm not sure of the direction of the story.

>the world would be roses and sunshine under a Fascist Military Dictatorship
MANDATED

I want to rape Reinhard.
He makes Mein hard.
I want to stick my finger tips.
Deep into his womanly wide hips.
I want to violate the Butcher of Prague.
I will do it in the style of a dog.
I want to rape Reinhard Heydrich.
With German Sausage, Snake and Dick

Attached: Heydrich's hips.jpg (219x696, 50K)

>I disagree that Fascism and Communism or Anarchism are our only choices
If you want to be pedantic and support specifically and exclusively Monarchism or something like that, which veeery few people do, fine.

I'm not sure at all why you would pick that over Fascism though.

>No they'd be limited in their powers by the constitution
See, the Constitution is a great, no, a fantastic idea. Its the precursor to 'functional Democracy' aka Fascism with another label. If you set ideals that are not debatable at all and cannot be voted on at all, that's the common framework! That's the common goal and purpose! Problem is, the US one is in fact debatable and isn't comprehensive enough.

See, the reason the US lasted half as long was the slow erosion of the Constitution + capable Europeans..

>Hitler's reason for going to war with Russia in the first place was very much inspired by NatSoc and the concept of Lebensraum. You should read Mein Kampf.
I have.

>Not to belittle you dude but this sounds like the "not real communism" debate point I hear from tankies.
But they were real fascism that had a poor structure of succession. As far as living in these nations, in South America it was preferable to the current situation and the same is true for Spain soon enough. You see, as I said, Democracy can work temporary as it accidentally produces a framework when everyone agrees due to common ideals and history.

>Also Fascism is totalitarian by nature too much power is bound to be vested in one person.
No, it is totalitarian to the ideals of a nation. (or it should be) Again, picture the US constitution, but more comprehensive and not debatable.

>Ok what are your critiques of Fascism?
Critiques of the Spanish Fascist rule? Again, the focus was on the Person not the ideology. And it should be on the latter. For the ideology as a whole? Hard to implement, but unlike Communism, not impossible. (in the 'muh True Communism' sense)

Thanks, but the moment I tried to enter I get a security warning... which is concerning

>If you want to be pedantic
I'm not being pedantic you are trying to boil down a complex debate into 3 options. I think that's too narrow minded personally

>which veeery few people do
Very few people support Fascism friend

>See, the Constitution is a great, no, a fantastic idea. Its the precursor to 'functional Democracy' aka Fascism with another label.
What kind of rational is this? How is a functional democracy Fascism with another label?

>If you set ideals that are not debatable at all and cannot be voted on at all, that's the common framework!
But the constitution is not static. There's plenty of room for debate in constitutional monarchies

>Problem is, the US one is in fact debatable and isn't comprehensive enough.
That's why we can add and remove amendments. The constitution is flexible like that

>I have.
Then you understand NatSoc played an enormous role in driving Germany to go to war? You can see how the ideology was at fault for the collapse of Nazi Germany?

>But they were real fascism that had a poor structure of succession.
That's a pretty common feature of Fascism though. Line of succession is hardly ever defined under thees governments because they act as cults of personality a lot of the time.

>in South America it was preferable to the current situation and the same is true for Spain soon enough.
I don't know enough about South America to say anything one way or the other. Spain's main problem as I understand is with the economy how would Fascism help them fix this?

>No, it is totalitarian to the ideals of a nation.
What does that mean? Also wouldn't it be totalitarian regardless?

>Critiques of the Spanish Fascist rule?
I was hoping for your critiques of NatSoc and Mussolini Fascism in particular

>For the ideology as a whole? Hard to implement, but unlike Communism, not impossible.
Communism was technically implemented in practice it just didn't work. Same has been true for Fascism

Attached: LoGH.jpg (960x540, 101K)

>Very few people support Fascism friend
More than you think. Many people have fond memories of the South American or Italian Fascist rule. And I would argue that China is a Fascist nation. I mean, it certainly is not Communist, nor Marxist. And its not a Democracy. It has rules that are not debatable for its people, but allows the people to acquire wealth and function within those rules. It also views the people as a resource, not a detriment.. I would argue they completely changed their ideology but kept the name, lol.

>But the constitution is not static. There's plenty of room for debate in constitutional monarchies
That's the problem with them.

>That's why we can add and remove amendments.
Exactly. That's why the US is failing. (and the entire Slavery Arch will long term end up a huge drain on the nation on all levels, including Democracy)

>That's a pretty common feature of Fascism though. Line of succession is hardly ever defined under thees governments because they act as cults of personality a lot of the time.
That's the one thing that needs to be done right in the future.

> Spain's main problem as I understand is with the economy how would Fascism help them fix this?
Spain is currently being divided like all of the West. Marxism vs Traditionalism + a whole other slue of confused and contradictory ideologies and people. Killing Democracy long term.

>What does that mean? Also wouldn't it be totalitarian regardless?
Not to a person, to an ideal. Rule under Rules (Constitution) and not a person. (President)

>I was hoping for your critiques of NatSoc
Really hard to do when the big issue is deing completely destroyed by a war..
> and Mussolini Fascism in particular
Don't have much, and again, war.

>Communism was technically implemented in practice it just didn't work. Same has been true for Fascism
Communism cannot be implemented in practice. You cannot give people equal amounts of everything (including power!) at all times.

spbp

>More than you think.
Based on what?

>Many people have fond memories of the South American or Italian Fascist rule.
People have fond memories of Communism too dude that really doesn't mean much

>That's the problem with them.
I disagree. You aren't going to get it absolutely right the first time. No one is infallible mistakes will be made there should be a mechanism in place to fix this

>That's the one thing that needs to be done right in the future.
So you'd agree that's a fault in Fascism?

>Spain is currently being divided like all of the West. Marxism vs Traditionalism
Isn't the economy the biggest on most universally agreed on issue? I'd argue people care much more about that than political polarization

>Not to a person, to an ideal.
Ideals can't rule a nation

>Rule under Rules (Constitution) and not a person. (President)
There's a LOT of room for interpretations with Constitutions and the society it applies to will not be the same in 100 years. Again dude, you won't get it right the first time

>Really hard to do when the big issue is deing completely destroyed by a war..
A war which was largely due to the ideology itself? You don't see the flaw here? The system of government and why it went to war are not divorced from each other you know. Also you have no critiques of any NatSoc policy whatsoever? How about Lebensraum? How about the unsustainable nature of the Nazi economy?

>Don't have much
Really nothing at all?

>Communism cannot be implemented in practice
Again "not real communism". What would you call the USSR?

>What kind of rational is this? How is a functional democracy Fascism with another label?
Because living under those rules is the whole point of Fascism..
Again, a common set of rules and values that apply to all, enforced by state and cannot be voted on. Taking that approach to most aspects of life. But not all. And what it doesn't apply to, it doesn't apply to.

I know that might seem confusing, but its not like Fascist nations don't allow for anything unique at all. There are simply limits, and for good reason.

>Based on what?
I explained... And again, China. Are you going to argue they're Communist? Or against anything I said about it?

>People have fond memories of Communism too dude that really doesn't mean much
The funny thing is the fond memories are for Totalitarianism parts of Communism, NOT not owning anything and being sent to camps and spying on your neighbor etc.

>I disagree. You aren't going to get it absolutely right the first time. No one is infallible mistakes will be made there should be a mechanism in place to fix this
Not trough Democracy. Trough a small group of people who (actually, no memes) have the best interest of the nation at hand, and with the minimal possible change. Kind of how China operates today.

>Isn't the economy the biggest on most universally agreed on issue? I'd argue people care much more about that than political polarization
Not my experience at all? And Economic policies should be one of the only and the most Flexible ones for any nation. With. Limits. You can't have people left with nothing, and you can never distribute equally all wealth. (National Socialism)

>There's a LOT of room for interpretations with Constitutions and the society it applies to will not be the same in 100 years. Again dude, you won't get it right the first time
And you think America is getting it right now...? That the direction headed is bright? That Democracy will bring America to a bright future?

I hate nazis, but they made John Smith the most likeable character on the show.

i assure you as a chilean that people hated fascism especially pinochet and still do, millions cheered when he died

>A war which was largely due to the ideology itself? You don't see the flaw here? The system of government and why it went to war are not divorced from each other you know.
I don't think that's why the War happened. Its not like Democracies or Communist nations are Pacifists.
> Also you have no critiques of any NatSoc policy whatsoever? How about Lebensraum? How about the unsustainable nature of the Nazi economy?
They could've been.. nicer about it? But this was in the 40s, if you look at Britan, USA, or any nation on Earth from then, you would describe them as nice or modern or without any flaws that were simply due to the time period? Not to mention WWI and the Depression royally pissing off the Germans.

And I don't think the Nazi Economy was unsustainable.. Many parts of it were taken to much of Europe today, again, economically. And then some bad stuff was added on top. I can go into detail with this if you want..

SHUT UP

Are you young? I bet you are.

And you prefer how things are now..? Can you explain why. Specifically? Because I'm guessing this is History Book repetition.

>pinochet and the gobierno militar was fascist

t.comunacho

Attached: commiedegenerates.jpg (1600x1200, 232K)

Why do conservatives lean toward fascism nowadays?

Attached: 1496848125699.png (403x672, 432K)

>Because living under those rules is the whole point of Fascism..
How?

>Again, a common set of rules and values that apply to all, enforced by state and cannot be voted on
You don't see the flaws with such a system?

>But not all. And what it doesn't apply to, it doesn't apply to.
Who is the judge of this?

>I explained...
No you didn't you mentioned elderly people that have fond memories of Fascism that is not a large base

>And again, China. Are you going to argue they're Communist?
Not necessarily but my question was what do you base this notion that Fascism has more supporters than I thought? I don't think you'll find a lot of people pro-Fascism in China

>Or against anything I said about it?
I honestly don't know enough about China to say one way or the other.

>The funny thing is the fond memories are for Totalitarianism parts of Communism
What's your point though?

>Trough a small group of people who (actually, no memes) have the best interest of the nation at hand
This is what I mean by utopian idealism. You put that much power in the hands of the few with no checks or balances you are bound to have corruption just like the Soviet Union.

>Not my experience at all?
I disagree. I think people are much more concerned with ed oNot my experience at all? the economy and how the quality of their lives is impacted over anything else

>And you think America is getting it right now...? That the direction headed is bright? That Democracy will bring America to a bright future?
I never said any of those things.

>not wanting to live in a crime free Aryan utopia.

>I don't think that's why the War happened.
Why do you think Germany invaded the Soviet Union? You think Lebensraum, a prominent part of NatSoc, had nothing to do with it whatsoever?

>They could've been.. nicer about it?
It's not about being nice it's about policy. A concept like Lebensraum is inherently expansionist and aggressive.

>you would describe them as nice or modern or without any flaws that were simply due to the time period?
No I wouldn't and I never implied it either

>Not to mention WWI and the Depression royally pissing off the Germans.
Yea I agree Versailles was a flawed peace

>And I don't think the Nazi Economy was unsustainable
The Nazi Economy was based predominately on mass rearmament military spending exceeded 10% of GDP during PEACE time. Had they not gone to war the economy would've collapsed as all this weaponry would've served no purpose. Check out Wages of Destruction it's a great book on the matter

>Many parts of it were taken to much of Europe today, again, economically.
Such as?

>I can go into detail with this if you want..
Please do

It wasn't a utopia. Watch the show

So does anyone recommend the show? I’m not interested if it falls off after season 1 or 2, should I watch?

Attached: 1504973942304.png (375x362, 128K)

>How?
I explained? Or how what?
>You don't see the flaws with such a system?
Beats the hell out of the current one. Its the reason China is becoming the Sole World Superpower, and the US is losing that Status.
>Who is the judge of this?
The people who create the Constitution. Afterwards? The government which enforces the Constitution.
>No you didn't you mentioned elderly people that have fond memories of Fascism that is not a large base
What do you mean its not a large base? It is.
>Not necessarily but my question was what do you base this notion that Fascism has more supporters than I thought? I don't think you'll find a lot of people pro-Fascism in China
They're pro Fascism because China is a Fascist nation. I don't care what they call themselves, I care what they are.
>I honestly don't know enough about China to say one way or the other.
Well you do know they're Totalitarian, right? And that they're NOT Communist? (People have wealth, and inequality exists, and economic policies are not all Government Controlled) So there you go?
>This is what I mean by utopian idealism. You put that much power in the hands of the few with no checks or balances you are bound to have corruption just like the Soviet Union.
There should be checks and balances. I mean, there are in the US as well. Judges, who make sure that no one in power goes against the Constitution. Its not impossible.
>I disagree. I think people are much more concerned with ed oNot my experience at all? the economy and how the quality of their lives is impacted over anything else
Mhhm. Trump has improved the US economy a lot. You hear mainly about that in the news, do you?

>I never said any of those things.
But that's the very key point... The most important one. What you see is where Democracy leads. Everywhere.

Only coz people resisted.

Is this the show that's implying that the Third Reich wasn't a disfunctional shithole, which was doomed to fail either economically, or politically (Soviet-style)?

>Why do you think Germany invaded the Soviet Union? You think Lebensraum, a prominent part of NatSoc, had nothing to do with it whatsoever?
Because Hitler lived in Hubris and was Power Hungry. He also thought the Soviets were in the verge of collapse and would welcome him with open arms, freeing them from Communism. He further saw the success of Finns against the Soviets and thought they'd be easy pickings, and even allied with the Finns.

>It's not about being nice it's about policy. A concept like Lebensraum is inherently expansionist and aggressive.
That is not true... How does the policy force expansion?

>The Nazi Economy was based predominately on mass rearmament military spending exceeded 10% of GDP during PEACE time. Had they not gone to war the economy would've collapsed as all this weaponry would've served no purpose. Check out Wages of Destruction it's a great book on the matter
Err, America spends tons on Military, and the Nazi Economic recover was a damn miracle and why Hitler was so popular..

As far as the European Economic discussion... It would take a very, very long time and I actually have to go now, I've been at this for hours.

Nice discussion though! Time will tell who is right!

i had family members disappear and everyone was considerably poorer except a small handful of people, my parents struggled through the dictatorship

>The Nazis didn't wipe out Non-Aryans ever anywhere

Yes, that would have required actual competence and at least a distant idea of what they wanted to accomplish. Instead we had Panzer Meyer driving around all Nazi-like, burning villages and losing the war.

>I explained? Or how what?
I just don't understand how you're relating Fascism to a functional democracy. The fact they are both based on rules and ideas?

>Beats the hell out of the current one.
I'm not asking you if it's better I'm asking you if you see the flaws. Do you?

>What do you mean its not a large base?
You think the elderly who lived under Fascism and are pushing 80-90+ years old with fond memories of Fascism is a considerable base?

>They're pro Fascism because China is a Fascist nation.
But I'm asking you if you think you'll find a lot of Fascist supporters in China. The original question after all is what do you base this notion that there's more supporters "then you think"

>Well you do know they're Totalitarian, right? And that they're NOT Communist?
I didn't argue either of those points

>There should be checks and balances
Ok who elects this all supreme group of people? Do they serve terms? What happens if they make a decision the public is unhappy about? Is there an impeachment process?

>You hear mainly about that in the news, do you?
Sure and if the economy was in trouble I guarantee you that would be people's main concern. When times are good people find shit to complain about

>What you see is where Democracy leads. Everywhere.
Fascism has collapsed every single time though. Democracy has a better track record than it by miles

>file name in english
>le degenerate meme
>opposing fascism is communism
hi /pol/

i once had a fantasy that i was 12 yrs old and was the personal fuckboy of the Japanese military governor in California

>Because Hitler lived in Hubris and was Power Hungry
He was power hungry because of the inherently aggressive elements of NatSoc. Once again I'm gunna ask you again (and please just give me a direct answer) do you think NatSoc had nothing to do with the decision to go to war?

>That is not true
How is it not?

>How does the policy force expansion
Do you understand what Lebensraum was? It was a policy of expansionism

>Err, America spends tons on Military
Not 10%+ of GDP during peace time dude and never to unsustainable levels.

>and the Nazi Economic recover was a damn miracle
This is a meme. Read Wages of Destruction I'm telling you dude why it was unsustainable you can look this shit up if you want to.

>As far as the European Economic discussion... It would take a very, very long time
You just said you could go into detail

>Time will tell who is right!
Alright man

>Why is this show trying to redpill me

Attached: 8AED081D-BE9B-4E6A-8BC1-D3161582F6A0.jpg (933x787, 67K)

Communism will win.

Attached: b32c581a19db30e13ab323b672f1af29607d31101f7ef4d9adc7d279dd10d38a.jpg (600x404, 69K)

Don't worry user, communists will get everything they deserve.

Attached: communists.jpg (1628x478, 272K)

He'll be in the parallel universe.

Attached: 1493116293683.png (770x1080, 731K)

This show is like Lost but far, far worse in every way.

As a man with natsoc or at least extreme authoritarian leanings would I find this show to be good?
Also heard it gets shit after season 1, is that true?

It goes full retard during season 3 and has nothing to do with the book that it was based on by that point. Avoid like the plague.

Is the larp communism or the communism that kills homosexuals?

It's good. Obviously you can't expect for it to be a true story they still have to paint nazis as the cartoonish bad guys and have them do some silly bad stuff. If you filter out the parts where they go off the rails on that you will see there are parts of the show that are absolutely goat. It's not a great show but it's funny to see them almost going redpill on what the nazis really were instead of the fanfic we get from the history books.

S3 is so lame I stopped watching.

Take the Catholic Monarchy pill.

You already do.

>The problem with WWII is that we didn't keep going and take out Stalin
This is exactly what Churchill wanted to do. He hated that square-headed, murderous mother-fucker. Yanks didn't agree with him though.

It's not like Lost at all you dumbfuck.

>wanting to get randomly mugged on the the street

Real societal change has happened in leaps and bounds over the last 60 years. Do you want to know the root cause of these changes? Female voting.

If Women didn't vote, politicians wouldn't and couldn't cater to them. Female political interest has directly led to the exponential rise of the welfare state and increase in government power.

If women didn't vote, the West wouldn't be so cucked.

This.
Especially they would have never killed the child of a high ranking SS officer. In the worst case the son would had been sterilized, more likely the whole thing would been keeped a secret. It's not like they had a free press.

>the idea they'd promote a healthy family-based society is just flat out wrong
They literally did you retarded faggot.

>it's okay if crime kills millions of people who didn't do anything but randomly get too close to an African