ahahahah🤣

Alex with the actual _observation_ !!! XD nice !

Oh, so thats what he was doin with all them people, makin windmills.

makes sense why Germany took the Netherlands

based comment

What he said.

The reason why TIK has to have a disclaimer is because commies (and useful idiots) talk a lot of sh1t. It is apparent that the leftist gaslighters seek power over others more than they value understanding.

It’s disturbing because that means the people doing the censoring believe these ideas are so potent that the mention of them is enough to convince people of them, unless you explicitly disapprove the Holocaust

You don’t need to put a disclaimer like that in videos about Mao, Lenin, Stalin, war criminal dictator George Bush and tony Blair etc Shows you who the system fears and what they are trying to hide and who they don’t fear and don’t try to censor.

This disclaimer wont convince socialists

That is what "Völkisch" means. The policy of the NSDAP under Hitler was a policy of "German people in the german nation". Hitler was against christianity, where else Mussolini cooperated and supported the catholic church.

Not even ethno-nationalism, more like racial nationalism. He wanted to assimilate memebers of other ethnic groups considered "Aryan" like the Nordic peoples and the dutch into the Greater German Reich.

ethnonationalism would imply that hitler would respect austrian independence from germany, which was in reality the first thing militarily the NSADP did when in power - morph austria into the reich, without firing a shot.

"Ethno-Imperialism" would fit better I think.

​@@AleXoEx0 It doesn't. Nationalism in its most refined definition means that a group of people (nation) should be organized politically under a common authority and jurisdiction, aka a state. Such a country is called a nation state. Whether nation equals or should equal ethnicity is unresolved really.

That’s because of woke

NA/EU moment

@@TexWashingtonwhy unfortunately

@@whatda7705 because nobody likes Nazis

It is handy that the 'Woke' postmodernists put so much effort into screaming at us about their monopoly on tolerance, and supressing any questioning or disagreement. Otherwise, we might have mistaken them for just another mob of murderous irrational totalitarian ideologues.

Yeah I watched peaky blinders and they basically just say fascist are all the same even if they come from completely different countries with opposing views. Like Moseley is working with the IRA who want to break away from Union which he wants to protect.

No way really? Well that's just embarrassing. Yea I can imagine it now being about skin colour probably too which is American racism.

That's the BBC for you.

@@liammiskell3522 it's not a bbc show...

The excuse is that modern audiences cannot understand the realities of the past. Well, they would if they were taught about them properly - but that might cause the audience to doubt certain modern ideologies. Can't have that.

I was kind of surprised you didn't use that term since it popped into my head and fit. Possibly "Ethnocentrism" could have also fit.

Yes, I think racialism works better.

Yes "völkisch" comes from Volk which means the people. And the people and the race aren't necessarily the same so racialism is the better term.

Perhaps it could be described as "International-Nationalism".

Issue is racialism is often just used to mean racism when its not that so Volkisch works better even if it of an older time

I just pointed out national syndicalism as another example of syndicalism, but yeah, he was his own thing, more willing to take allies and related to catholithism and tho authoritarian he wasn't as radical as the others

José Antonio wanted an agrarian syndicalist Spain, where as Ramiro Ledesma Ramos wanted something more similar to what Stalin was doing with mass industrialisation and central planning

Antonio de Oliveira Salazar and the Estado Novo in Portugal would be interesting too

He should do one comparing fascism, national socialism, falangism, British unionism, and Soviet VFP/VSN industrial falangism

Corneliu Codreanu is another one for the list

i second this

Yes that would be nice. However contrary to popular belief the Showa state was not fascism, even with Hideki Tojo as the prime minister. While I admire the nationalistic goals of that state, it did not meet basic core tenants necessary to be considered fascist. As someone who has spent years reading fascist literature, and a supporter of it, I hope people are not still confused about where the Japanese system in WWII lies.

This is not what you're looking for per se but it is an interesting watch nonetheless. ukposts.info/have/v-deo/rp-gZHmnh5l2kZc.html

@@user-pn3im5sm7k Japan was just bringing back samuraism and war fetishesism under the guise of something "fascist".

@@shelbyspeaks3287 Nationalism or honoring past warriors is not something special to fascism, and can manifest in any ideology. No need to bring a word thats irrelevant to Japan. In an ideal world people would stop using words they don't know the meaning of.

The biggest issue isn't UKposts's guidelines, it's the people enforcing it. Some of them are sensible, and some of them are not. It just seems luck of the draw whether you get a free pass or are purged from existence.

@@TheImperatorKnight The problem is the folks doing the enforcement are third-party non-native speakers sitting in some sweatshop far away from Soy HQ

Turtle on that Tik, DPA, History Legends grind

@@TheImperatorKnight why do you use the awd as a modern example from what I researched about them and what people like them have said before they are just satanist wannabes of course I do not support any of these believes but still whats up with that

@@TheImperatorKnight the worst part of it is, at least a third of them are AI's. I've had 24 hour shadowbans a lot recently.

You’re an idiot

today fascist just means enemy of the system, it is our system's friend-enemy distinction. the system's neatest trick is that people will rail against "fascists" as if they are bring truly rebellious when in reality they accept the system's terms and so of course they act exactly as the system would prefer.

problem is many people aren’t going to take the time to learn politics or sociology as they aren’t compulsory subjects (in the uk). i think it leaves people unaware of how politicians deliberately polarise their society by stirring up things like nationalism. so many ideologies intersect as well so people are mislabelling a lot.

Why are these criticized as bad ideologies when Democracy is perfectly ok with race replacement and sterilizing children to be another gender?

All of them were anti-wars and against bolshevism and for national sovereignty. Pretty simple. Fascism and NS was a defence against bolshevism so it had to be an authoritarian state. Europe saw what revolution jews did in Russia and knew that that same bloody genocidal revolution was about to be imposed on Europe by USSR

it's about saving your people

They wouldnt recognize one if he explained his ideology

And remember, all through the summer of 2020 "antifa" was trying to convince us that the fascists must be the good guys.

@@mark12strang58 They might even agree with him.

My favourite answer is it doesn't matter what fascism was when it was created it matters only that it means racist today

I tend to say, "Sorry, I'm pro-Capitalism, not Syndicalism."

Thank you! Terri does a good job with the thumbnails :)

​​@@TheImperatorKnight Hello. I really like your Videos. Could you make a video about variantes of marxian socialism like stalinism, maoism or trotskyism? Would be great! Keep up the good work.

Post ww2 we live under strong political repression. No more free speech than Nazi germany or USSR, the only difference is different speech is censored/allowed and the regime doesn’t have to be as brutal since it has basically consolidated power in the entire western world besides 3rd world countries and I guess Russia and China too.

It sucks that you have to start with a disclaimer, all the more so because the radical left will just ignore it anyway. It is still smart to do so, just for legal reasons or the Mighty Google Algorithm.

The critics have been accusing me of holding all sorts of views, and they're just pulling it out of thin air. It's sad that they're so intellectually dishonest.

@TIKhistory I remember awhile back I had a lengthy debate with someone who was a stalinist in Australia (little bit weird). He was terrible, supported things like the holodomor and stalins purges but I digress. I remember debating with him about hitler and national socialism, I argued it was a more left wing ideology and he disagreed (obviously). I eventually referred him to your video "Hitlers socialism" and before even looking he said "he's just a racist trying to get away from his inherent nazism" I mean....wow, all that from just the thumbnail lol.

@@TheImperatorKnight Might some critics be so intellectually vacuous that they have nothing to which to be honest?

Yes, in my mind "Nazi" is always a far uglier and scathing insult or accusation than just "Fascist".

@@foodchewer People just don't know the meaning. Antifa are closer to fascism than literally anyone they protest against but they're so clueless that they have no idea what they're doing is what they claim to be against.

​@@foodchewerNothing is more vile and evil than a Marxist though

@@AverageAlienyes there is, a nazi.

I wouldn't even classify Franco as fascist, he was nationalist and anti-marxist primarily and while he did ally with fascists in the civil war, he also allied with monarchists and the church, against a similarly politically diverse alliance. He mostly just wanted to ensure that Spain did not fall into the hands of communists, he was surprisingly hands-off with the governing of Spain.

In that vein, modern China is nothing but a huge syndicate with a communist leadership structure. It’s not a Leninist system.

American Fascism? Sounds like President Franklin D. Roosevelt's 'New Deal' because President Franklin D. Roosevelt was, allegedly, a fan of Mussolini and wrote to Mussolini several times. Today the States are considered a 'mixed economy ', and I don't know how a mixed economy would translate as Fascism, Socialism, syndicalism, mercantilism, or capitalism.

Hitler's campaign speech in Eberswalde is interesting. He definitely spoke out against Syndicalism explicitly there.

@@bustercrabbe8447 The United States is not a mixed economy. The US has a long history of government and big public corporations working in tandem to ensure that the means of production remain in the hands of large monopolistic corporations that are subsidized with public funds to ensure that no meaningful competition can spring forth. It's socialism mired under the guise of capitalism and well meaning government

@@tonyv3758 The USA is officially designated as a mixed economy. If you like socialism, work for the government. If you like capitalism work on Wall Street and become a stock broker. Or you can operate a non-profit company. Or you can become an entrepreneur and start your own business and grow it into a wealthy corporation. Or you can become a landlord. And it's more or less depending on the State you live. In the USA the government controls its citizenry through laws, taxes, and licenses which doesn't make for socialism. Could you name one of those large monopolistic corporations?

Apparently by the mid-20th century the Mosley name was tainted by mustache man’s trip to Paris (WW2), so Max abandoned politics and went to a field (motorsport) where his dad’s name didn’t have baggage

Sounds interesting. Can you tell what makes it unique?

Brasil Getúlio Vargas first.

@@handroids1981 it kind of just took elements from other types of fascism, it made the state really religious unlike other forms of fascism, and although still opressive it was usually preatty mild when it came to opressing the people

salazar wasnt a fascist

@@enzathecomedian6759 OP should`ve been more precise: he/she was referring to Brazilian fascism.

Suppressed how exactly?

@@TheMrFu Tearing down statues would be one of the most visible. Erasing names off of buildings.

@@greyone40 not relevant to the video subject matter

"We defeated the wrong enemy" -General Patton

​@@gigachad6885 Any Western leader would have thought similar, indeed even before #WW2 Churchill and others thought so. Not forgetting the Russian civil War up to 1923 which saw UK, USA, German and 6 other nations fighting on Russian soil. 🇬🇧 #ourhistory

Yeah, I'm not against the idea of freedom etc, I just don't think "democracy" is what people think it is. The American Founders created a Republic for a reason, not a democracy. And interestingly, Mises was pro-democracy (at least in his early books). People accuse me of "just believing Mises", but this is one element of Mises that I do disagree with.

@@TheImperatorKnight So many things that we're taught to feel a certain way about from a young age are not what they seem, democracy isn't necessarily synonymous with freedom, feminism was never about equality, fascism though always terrible isn't necessarily synonymous with racism , communism was not always necessarily synonymous with being "woke" or socially liberal (for example, homophobia in the Soviet Union and Castro's Cuba, racism in the 20th century Australian communist party).

​@@TheImperatorKnight A Republic and a democracy are not mutually exclusive subjects. Also it seems like you're presupposing that the original ideology of the American Founding fathers was correct when back then Senators weren't even elected and you could only vote if you were a white landowner. Conflating the idea of Totalitarianism with Democracy is just dangerous and misinformed. Don't get me wrong, Authoritarian Democracies do exist but thats not the same as Democracies just plainly being Totalitarian.

​@@johnnyjohn-johnson7738 Social issues like lgbt rights weren't really what made someone "woke" back in the day. It was mainly anti-colonialism and feminism. Not defending the Soviet Union or Castro's political treatment of LGBT people but historical context matters.

@@jamesmcpherson8599 I can see where you're coming from, I am not arguing whether the fact that Communists were progressive for their time, I'm wrestling with the general assumption that being homophobic or racist makes you a fascist, because both the fascist and communist movements were extremely big tent in the beginning when it comes to social views, we had extremely conservative (and often racist) Australian and Chinese communists and extremely progressive British fascists. For example one fascist group in the UK was lead by Rotha Lintorn-Orman, who was a woman with an emo haircut who was involved in the early 20th century equivalent to the "swingers" movement (sex parties) and wanted to get more women into politics (she was also rumored to be bisexual), she also started a female version of Mosely's fascist defense force (honestly she was so progressive that I can't help but wonder if she was a 2000s hipster who ended up in the past somehow.) On the other hand, John Curtain was an Australian Prime Minister was involved in the Communist movement before joining the Labor Party, he was a devout and proud white nationalist and did not see it as conflicting with his socialism, in fact he blamed capitalism for non white people moving to Australia and believed that they could peacefully go back to where they came from once worldwide socialism becomes a thing. in Spain there were some trade unions in the Republic who did not women to get involved in the work force. Point is, being a fascist or communist does not automatically mean you have a particular set of social views.

This video is fantastic. It should be shown in all schools tbh. But having said that, still your last sentence is technically wrong. You meant "(originally) racist." From 1938 onwards, you see openly racists laws and discourse in Italy.

@@ramirosotto yeah. I completely agree. But fascism as an ideology is not a racist ideology to begin with.

National socialism isn't racist either

@@Swedishoutlaw nazis flocking HARD to some of these comments

@@friendlywobbly9903 We do 😎

Yeah, I've given up trying to persuade them. I'll still fire off the odd broadside, but the videos are now made for those who wish to listen, not those who cannot.

19:19 "Real socialism" should not be to describe economy of the Third Reich. That term is already taken (see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_socialism). The Real socialism is an official term coined by Brezhnev USSR to describe "comunism in real life". The Real socialism was the final state on a way to implement comunist regime. It was "as close to communism as we can get", nothing could be improved and it was the reason why the whole east block froze in late 60s till it fell down in 89... Some of us experienced the Real socialism (or ream communism?) first hand...

@@jkotekvolnycz you do realise this is supposed to be done for comedic purposes, right?

@@jkotekvolnycz - Oh, jeez, of COURSE there's going to be at least one - and no doubt multiple - socialist philosophies that officially call themselves "Real Socialism", but are only "Real Socialism" for as long as they are being tried, and once they go completely defunct, then "Real Socialism isn't REAL socialism - real socialism STILL hasn't been tried, which is why we need to try Real Socialism again, but really try harder!"

@@jkotekvolnycz There's at least six (possibly 7 but not sure, Globalism has elements of Socialism) different variations of Socialism who claim to be the real Socialism mate. Marxism, Maoism, National Socialism, British Socialism, Cultural Marxism ( race/ gender/ identity based socialism currently called 'woke' in west) in current day west, Democratic Socialism and Globalism. I'm definitely missing a few variations from Cold War era.

Oh i don't think we do. There is probably as much ignorats today as there was at any point in history. I don't see a reason why there should be more ignorants today than in the past. What is more likely is that ignorants of the past are forgoten by history as they are not worth mentioning.

@@Alaryk111 They were also a lot less visible. There was no internet permanently and widely disseminating their ignorance.

I can say little but, alas. The sad part is that those who are well versed in this are usually surrounded by those who aren't. Those knowledgeable are then forced to either remain silent forever, or try argue with those who refuse to learn and get back lashed, even called the labels they were explicitly teaching against.

oh no, kids are so dumb these days!!11

@@Alaryk111hat’s the problem! Stop looking back! And don’t use that line we must so we won’t forget! Yes people are more ignorant today than ever before.

One on the Ustase could be good too. Apparently they were so bad they freaked out the Nazis.

Definitely should, also to know more about the American “democratic socialism” and the rise of socialism in the post world war 1 era and pre world war 1 era

@@magdalenusrex346 the ustase were like national socialism bumped up to the max they basically just killed whoever they felt like its like if the dirlewanger brigade was a whole army

Maybe add the Action Française and Vichy Govt too!

@@ancapgrandscribe9546 pre-WW2 there was also William Pelley and his “Christian Commonwealth” here in the States. A mix Socialism and a ethno-religious ideology. The guy even ran for president back in the day.

Yeah I'd like to see that too. The Romanian Fascists tended to be more religious right? As in Catholic? They were clericals?

Now that’s what I call a third position. LOL

Yeah, thinking about it, this might be necessary. I mean, they're close enough where I would say that syndicalism is just another variant of socialism, but I know that explanation won't be good enough for some people.

my understanding of the nuances is rather limited since i never really went down the Marxist theoretical rabbit hole and have only superficial knowledge but as far as i do understand them socialism is more or less the umbrella term/political family of . Syndicalism is one branch of that which focuses on the trade unions as the leading and organizing forms for ushering in the workers revolution. This form mostly comes from states where the industrial revolution already entrenched itself and thus workers movmements were entrenched as well. By contrast, Lenin's variant of socialism focused on the enlightened role of the avant-garde political party as the nexus for generating the revolution since Tsarist Russia had a mostly peasant population, not a lot of industrial workers, and thus they needed to be "showed the way" into class consciousness. Mao's socialism would be Lenin's flipped upside down as Mao thought that peasants were the leading class to communism, not industrial workers. TLDR version: It's all kind of the same. They just have constant schisms on the subjects of who's in charge, how best to do the revolution and govern after to usher in utopian communism and who the true "socialist" class is. TIK will probably do a much better job going over the details if he makes the video P.S. for those that know the memes: Juan Posada's socialism is nuclear alien space dolphin comrades :)a

@@Skelli2 Syndicalism is much more anarchist than socialism (not the umbrella term), the worker still owns the means of production but instead of owning all the means of production by proxy of the state they own their immediate means of production through their union and mutually assist other unions, they can all be part of bigger unions or even just one really big union but everything is supposed to be very direct-democratic and "stateless". But again it's an idea born from anarchism so there will be 20 people giving you 26 different definitions.

@@mnk9073 thanks for the answer and adding more knowledge

@@mnk9073 The closest forms Syndicalism I can think of would be the stock market the other would be a Partnership, or a Sole Trader(defined under UK business law, basically what type of legal entity a business is). Those are really the closest you can get to in terms of practical and functional forms Syndicalism.

This hits close to home. I'd grown up in a very multicultural environment in school + other places, and it caused deep insecurity within me during quite a bit of it. I was the white kid with no culture to show, or wear. I can't remember what set it off, but I 'discovered' my British heritage and became wildly nationalistic for Britain as a young teen - I seemed to focus on the 18th century and British Empire a lot. I'm not racist at all, and was aware of the faults of the British Empire... but it just made me so inexplicably happy to have a feeling of belonging and pride, knowing that my ancestors were a part of a 'great' nation. I'm not nationalistic towards Britain very much anymore, but it's always going to be a small part of my past I won't forget. You're right when you say it's emotional. My personal experience was mostly harmless, but definitely a bit of an obsession for a while.

@@laurac.405Just out of interest, why aren‘t you a „nationalist“ as you described anymore? It would genuinely interst me.

@@gavriil8662 I'm not entirely sure. You see, I feel nationalistic for what _was_ , but when it comes to what Britain is now... I just can't bring myself to the same feeling. I was like that for a bit about Germany too (which have roots in as well) - until I realised that this image I had of Germany in my head wasn't real, and that Germany's also 'westernised' and 'modernised' just as much as the United States. It kind of crushed me, and so the nationalism I once felt dimmed down a lot. Hope that helps, some.

@@laurac.405 It does, thank you very much. I know how you're feeling and I can't blame you, it's tough. But I don't think we should give up hope. What once was, has been written down numerous times, so it can be again (, it's not lost forever). And even though everything seems lost right now...I'd like to think that we can become 'great' once again. I think of it in a spiritual way: 'become who you are' (who you once were). I don't think we should forget our great potential. On the other hand, maybe I am enthusiastic because I'm still young (not a teen anymore though). We'll see how things get. All the best to you and your future plans.

quit yappin

I'm almost curious enough to hope there IS a future video on that gobbledygook, but I have a feeling it's a "be careful what you wish for" kind of topic that I wouldn't wish on anyone, least of all myself!

Imagine being so bad, someone being a more coherent version of you is marx.

Why do all of the worst regimes in the 20th century tend to link back to Hegel? Yet neo-Hegelians out here today ready to do it all again with no real pushback.

actualism is an analytic philosophy hegel was continental philosopher stop talking about shit you know nothing about

@@janehrahan5116 marx was critic of hegel his philosphy was way different stop talking about philosophies you know nothing about

I was thinking the same thing. "Nation" at the very least connotes "Race" as opposed to simply "state" which does not.

Race and Ethnicity are not one and the same.

Austrians are ethnically germans in every way. Genetics, culture, linguistics, history etc.

@@BigHenFor In which capacity? A race is a group of people with shared characteristics (e.g. facial features or skin tone) which are highly prevalent within the group, passed down via genetic legacy; ethnicity is very much the same, as I explain, it depends of the circumstance of your birth to which ethnicity you belong (ethnos and natal) and thus it follows that you must share blood and a genetic lineage with a specific ethnic group to be considered a part of it; this is how nations have been determined for centuries; they are an extended kinship if you will, for instance even in England, People would refer to themselves as 'of the Anglo-Saxon race', which is synonymous with English ethnicity, in the context of Hitler's views concerning ethnic Germans, i think my point stands rather robust against your statement and no counter arguement is given, please elaborate...

@@MartinMartinm I agree, having been to Austria and Germany many times, the only noticeable difference between the two is a dialect and, otherwise the people look the same it may aswell be another Lände.

Well yea in German “Kampf” translates to fight/struggle/battle it depends on context like for “mien kampf” I would say it would translate to struggle but in something like “panzerkampfwagen” it wouldn’t translate too “armored struggle vehicle” it would be “armored fighting/battle vehicle”

@@-Benito_Swagolini- In Dutch it is translated to “Mijn strijd”: “My Fight”. I think struggle is a bit underwhelming.

@@robindemeyer8960 I agree a fight is a struggle both work

If u get called a fascist just laugh it off the people who usually throw that word around are a lot closer to being a fascist then the person they trying to call one

Well, political name-calling is pretty insane today. In my country (Hungary) politicans do nothing but that: call the opposition, their "rivals" (literally anybody who can be used for propaganda, but they go chicken when they actually face with them... orban in the eu. Lol) or people who spoken up against the government "leftists" "liberals" "dollarleft" "pro-war" "anti-hungarian" "traitor" and so on. The future of dictatorships is not in violence, unless they prohibit the use of media. The internet makes people aware of reality... if they get access to the right information. If you own most media (Hungary: fidesz owns 90%, and makes it impossible for any other parties to get access to people trough media. Even irl, people are scared to even get contact with other parties out of fear. We have a few excellent independent newspapers, but they get heavily demonized, and even people who "hate fidesz" believe almost everything they say without noticing and attack this sources. The stupidity and ignorance is astonishing here), you rule the country, because you rule peoples' opinion. And this is where identity politics and "ruling by ideology" comes in. Fidesz doesnt even have a political program, they just say which people believe the easiest, and win. And they will make this easier by ruining education. I was actually tossed against a police car in an education protest. Some where beaten or tear gassed so bad they couldnt stop vomiting (like my ex's 15 yo 45 kg sister...) or threatened with 2 years in prison for throwing an empty water bottle at a policeman's helmet because that 16 yo girl was allegedly "violent" and "dangerous". Hell, young students who protest against the government are called "violent" "dangerous" "brainwashed" "traitors"... even if they are around 14. Im pretty sure they know my name already lol. There are obvious red-flags in rulers, and this is one them. If they say more subjactive things than facts and say that everybody who thinks otherwise is an enemy, they use peoples' natural instinct to be dominant, and who doesnt like to be called smart, right, the best, etc? People will feel enamoured with themselves and adopt rulers' vocabulary which is highly simple, and doesnt even make the slightest sense. Thus they can be manipulated very easily. Fun fact: a fidesz newspaper announced WW3. There are articles. Not even kidding. And yes, it would be the same with a liberal ideology, its just wouldnt be that easy today. If the opposition is weak, like in Hungary, they tend to do the same things as a right-populist to win over dumb liberals.

Exactly.

today fascist just means enemy of the system, it is our system's friend-enemy distinction. the system's neatest trick is that people will rail against "fascists" as if they are bring truly rebellious when in reality they accept the system's terms and so of course they act exactly as the system would prefer.

I would disagree with you the Soviets literally funded coups and ideological warfare all across the globe what do you think the far left of current America is a product of? The kgb use to pay off and sometimes themselves would become college professors to spread communist ideas in america the hippie movement all that was a project of social subversion from the kgb all those who “fear mongered” about communism were completely correct communism of the tyrannical kind almost took over the entire globe it’s just that a lot of people who sympathize with the communist utopian vision are desperate to cling to the idea that you can tip toe on the edge and adopt the good parts while avoiding the negative so if someone generalizes communism they get angry about it

Yea with all the media propaganda there truly is a modern day "fascist scare" going around. Everyone who disagrees must be a fascist.

Lol, what? Give an example of fascism without an outgroup? Are you fucking stupid? Or just a lowly hate monger trying out a new phrase. Your kind will be eliminated

"You're a bigot if you don't like sexual perversion and degeneracy."

Example?

@@mrsleep237well socialists sure are bigots.

"Bigot" is such a gay word

I support this comment with the ferocity of a Tiger.

I get it !

Oh, he abandoned *that* a while ago, in favour of telling lies that made Nazis look better. Remember, if you keep private profits from keeping a war running, Luddendorf goes 'Good for you' and Marx goes 'That's not socialism !'

If by "leftist" you mean jew, then yes.

@@unclesamowitz9922this comment tells all you need to know about what this guys garbage takes attracts. Well I guess someone’s gotta scrape the bottom of the intellectual barrel.

@@Vamashara You say while completely failing to refute that the "leftists" are almost exclusively jews.

​@@VamasharaLow IQ comment can't deal with facts

@@AverageAlien Deal with what facts

Im late but it comes from Nationalsozialist, in english "National" is pronounced as "Nashional" but in german it's "Natzional", hence "Nazi", also before that it was used as a slur against Austrians and Bavarians, because many of them were named Ignaz

In Italy during the fascist era the fascist party wasn't even the largest organisation, but the syndicalists of Edmondo Rossoni which had 3 times as many members

Yeah also the revolutionary republicans of Catalonia during the revolution and civil war against the falangistas, but let’s just conveniently ignore the difference between actual syndicalism (anarcho-syndicalism) and the populist facade of fascism, which one was just a perversion of the other, and the fact that real syndicalists, like socialists in general, was the first ones to be targeted as soon as fascists had the power to do so. It was a counter-revolution against the very movement you’re trying to claim they were a part of. It’s just silly.

@@Vamashara socialist fighting other socialist? Yeah, that never happend before (sarcasm). If you said so I'll asume you are also spanish and know a bare minimun about the civil war, so I don't think it's going to be a surprise mentioning that the republicans in the war started fighting each other in the popular front too, the same way bochevicks and menchevicks were also againts each other in Russia and lots of examples more could be made. Also, ERC (a catalonian pro republic party as you know) was also linked to fascism at the time, in fact their anthem was a fascist one

@@Dario-uj6qo no, fascists aren’t socialists, no matter how much you knights in shining armor rides out to whitewash it. Whatever your motivations may be..

@@Vamashara what are my motivations if I may know? Also, I guess you can prove that they arent, right?

Yet communism that killed way more people, is never talked about, amazing right?

Education and empathy are the best weapons against fascism 💪🏽

If educating people about fascism makes the adoption of fascism more likely, that only says good things about fascism.

@@MaryamofShomal Pathological empathy for hostile outgroups is a maladaptive behavior. There is no future for you except extinction.

"Know thy enemy" A Smart Ancient Fellow

I mean I love both, also the economic side to WW2 made me a lot more interested in the naval aspect

Videos about tanks and frontlines with divisional emblems are cool. And probably bring in the bacon for TIK. But the social economic vids, and especially Hitler being a socialist, are his greatest contribution to history. If it manages to become mainstream it will do far more for his reputation then endless hours of Battlestorm Stalingrad.

Nope, you're definitely not the only one

I see the merit of both, and I don't see why I should be restricted to doing one or another. I do think I have to strike a balance though.

Ive never seen Tiks tank videos, love his political and molitary videos though. Tik covers so many things that we can all find something to disagree with him on but Im 95% in agreement. And Im probably wrong on some of the things I disgree on😬

legit

Thanks for a clarification!!!! However, can u pls explain what powers unions inside of a corporation supposed to have? I mean u have a group of employers and a group of workers. First one cant fire them all, the second go on strike. Because it would hardly hurt the national economy. In that sense I do not really get how the fair salary, working conditions e.t.c. are being established. It seems like they are called syndicates because fascists loved this word. I mean I know its fascist bullshit. But it just does not seem as a system that has a theoretical way of working. For example syndicalism have one. It is simply a corporation where every worker is an owner. They just vote and select the management.

@@KunstPicker So let me give an example, a list of corporations which would be required to control the economic system: A - Primary Products 1. Agricultural 2. Fishing 3. Mining and Fuel 4. Iron and Steel 5. Metal Trade B - Industrial 1. Engineering 2. Printing and Paper Trade 3. Shipbuilding 4. Textiles And so on, you get the idea. These Corporations would, in their turn, be split up into smaller groups functioning in single industries within the main category, but would represent the whole industrial section in relation to the central government. We now turn to the typical Corporation/Syndicate, and see in what manner it is organised and how it will function. There will be represented on the Corporation enployers, workers and consumers. Each group will be given equal representation and equal power, and may not be outvoted by the other two. The employers' representatives will be elected by the owners, partners and directors in the business enterprises of the industry, and by those engaged in a managerial capacity or in executive office. They will represent the organising side and will form an employers' federation. Association to this employers' federation will be compulsory upon every business enterprise, which will contribute a yearly subscription proportional to the number of its employees, and submit itself to the disciplined control of the federation. The workers' representatives will be elected by all employees, whatever their function, including clerical staff. They will form a trade union embracing every worker, but confined entirely to these. The principle of Trade Unionism is entirely retained, and advanced to 100%. Stripped of their obnoxious and irrelevant political activites the Unions will play an essential part in the organisation of the Corporate State. The consumers' representatives cannot be elected like the others, as consumers may very well be a scattered broadcast. Instead the nation itself is the ultimate consumer in the case of most products and, therefore, the Government, as representatives of the nation, is best fitted to nominate the consumers' representatives. Reputable persons will be chosen to represent he interests of the ultimate consumer, and thes ewill hear the grievances and suggestions of anyone who is affected by the working of the industry in question. In many cases other industries are big consumers, then the Government will appoint representatives to be nominated by the Corporations controlling these industries to watch over their interests. It is through these corporate institutions that a rationalised expression of opinion will be realised in keeping with the modern age. For the first time all members of every industry will have their share in the control of the great economic factors of their daily life. The consumers' representatives are in a certain sense, the delegates of central authority, to give warning of any unjustifiable raising of prices or restricting of output. They are, however, backed up by a central economic council which crowns the industrial structure of the Corporate state. The "National Corporation" which comprises representatives from every corporation, and centralises the administration of the whole system. It will be the duty of the National Corporation to co-ordinate activities in the interests of national welfare, and will be elected as other Corporations, each will nominate equal numbers of employers and workers. The number of members from each Corporation will not be equal, but will be weighted in accordance with the importance of the industry to the national welfare. Its function will be executive and administrative, as distinct from the occupationally elected parliament, which will be legislative. All controversies within the individual Corporations, which cannot be settled by compromise, will be referred to the National Corporation for settlement and according to public interest. Disputes between Individual corporations will also come before the National corporation, which will exercise a judicial capacity. Hope this answers your question!

@@nolancer5974 dude, it's hard to express, I really thank u. Best answer I have ever received. Suddenly, it makes a lot of sense. The system is pretty bizarre, nevertheless creative and smart. I think it can even be upgraded to a degree that would make it actually work for the people. I mean basically in this version government decides all the disputes , because consumer can side with either workers or employers. So government each time decides arbitrary whom to make richer - workers or the employers. Like... in a socialist state with the exception that in socialist state employers are just directors appointed by party. However the thing I like is that this framework gives employers and workers ability to ban the government(consumers) intervention in the economy. I mean if taxation would have been considered subject to the jurisdiction of national corporation it would make sense.

@@KunstPicker While I myself am not a Corporatist, it is still extremelt fascinating to look into, and I think we can both agree that even Corporatism is a better alternative to Communism. Again, I highly recommend you acquire the book "The Coming Corporate State" by Alexander Raven Thomson if you truly wanna look into Corporatism straight from the words of a Fascist. What I truly admire about the book is that Thomson literally addresses every single issue in the book and how the Corporate State would handle it: Unemployment, Role of the Government, How Investments would Work...Basically every single part of the economy he addresses in complete detail and how Corporatism would handle it, and easy to understand. Funnily enough I have never seen a Communist ever writing a book like this actually explaining how Communism would work in an economy.

@@nolancer5974 I will give it a try when I will have enough time, thank you for recommendation!!! English is not my first language, so I read complex texts really slow:( . From my point of view, the thing is that communism does not really exist as a model of economy. It never existed actually as a one, it is just an umbrella term to define any society without private property. So there are different communisms. For example, I think some communists in the west believe that we should nationalise all the companies and make them act as if they were controlled by private owners. Or just make an income tax 80-90%. So basically communism=Scandinavian model maximized. And u can not actually right a book describing this communism from economical point of view, because the answers would always refer to how things work in a market economy. A lot of political questions arise too and they are just being thrown away with "if we have democracy, it will make our socialism great". Kinda bad argument, but that s how the things are. Mostly discussions stop here and becomeore historical than political, that there were no democratic communisms. In Russia))) I am from Russia we have a lot of books about communism))) Russian communists believe in so called "plan" historically it was nothing more than the aim established by the party, but somehow they see it as something essential. So we get nationalised companies here too, but(!) there is one entity that defines their purposes , and can destroy some of them and transfer resources to another company or industry. This sounds worse than the previous plan, much worse. So what these books about? How we fix plan? The answer is shizoprenical. A.I. . Yeah the whole idea is there gonna be a supercomputer that will save our communism and would not make any mistakes. Also because it is a computer it will act in a good faith , being the least corrupted economical actor ever. The funniest thing is that some o them(ru communists) believe that one model was even close to being created , but enemies destroyed USSR from inside and so it never was finished.

They liked iranians. Somewhat arabs. Not so much turks. And not sure about egypt

@@PyatPree88 Goofy comment. They support an Iraqi revolt, had a Free Arabian Legion and had support from the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. They met with Pan-Turkic leaders and created Turkish military divisions. Egyptians are just arabs. Hitler liked them all like he liked all races

​@@PyatPree88 They had good relationships with turks, a lot of them volunteered to enter the german army and the SS

I'd love to see a video on this topic. Very interesting.

🇸🇾 Especially

Trash

How can you be not xenophobic even though you're a fascist? Aren't you putting your people first?

You should be a racist, an antisemite, and a xenophobe. That is what is cool right now. Zero white guilt

>not racist, antisemitic or xenophobic ah so your beliefs are entirely worthless and counter revolutionary

​@@imperialhonorguard1483what?

literally nothing wrong with that... its also not a Fascist concept... thank god. England for the English = Naturalisation and Assimilation in to the English. Which is fundamental to any successful immigration system.

The celts of the north and west will descend and retake what is rightfully theirs 😈

He sent those peace letters so he could attack ussr himself.

In any case, he would have wanted Danzig just for himself, which the Poles were not eager to give up. It doesn't really matter how many time you declare your intention to not go to war with Britain, the fact remains that if you have such a size of territory like a Germany that planned on conquering along with the resources and industrial capacity, you are a huge threat to Britain as you can build a power navy and conquer her. TIK has a few videos on this topic.

TIK is the gift sent to help the entire humanity. I'm not sarcastic, he did more than thousands of intellectuals.

Sorry I said thanks instead of thank. Thanks for the heart though.

Hitler's view of a Germanic people were fundamentally rooted in genetics, where as Britishness was more so a system of values. inherently different

@@jacobp7 Citation needed. With link.

@@jacobp7 Hehehe.

ok, *Hitler was pro war because he willingly sparked a global conflict

It is silly. When I bought Mein Kampf, I wondered if my name was added to ze list... And it probably was!

@@TheImperatorKnight Can't believe you would put money in Hitler's pocket smh

If you're interested in the Dutch situation in the interbellum, if it comes to Fascist and National Socialist parties, you might want to read the first volume of "Het Koninkrijk der Nederlanden in de Tweede Wereldoorlog" by Loe de Jong, named 'Voorspel". It gives a good overview of the numerous parties including the NSB ofcourse. I didnt really dive into the NSB history because its frontman Mussert lacked all charisma and was married to his aunt. (!)

Even in the NSDAP there were different factions, the main being the more pro-Russian National 'Socialists' led by the Strasser brothers, they all got purged in the Night of the Long Knives.

Theres also the legionaries in romania

@@schizoid7734 Basic they are all thugs organized to defend capitalism.

It's incredible how scarce information on this subject and only this subject is in the information age. All of the world's collective knowledge at our fingertips and we're not allowed to learn and understand our own history. China censors the [redacted] Square Massacre and it's an afront to freedom. We do the same with our history and it's totally fine.

Here is the thing is that Hitler was backed by industrialists, sent COMMUNISTS and SOCIALISTS to the death camps, and called anything he didn't like Judeo-BOLSHEVIKISM. I mean if you were a communist dictator you wouldn't send the people who agree with you to death camps.