Oh, so the problem is that you think the Jews deserved it?
Discussion
No if that is what I meant I would have said it very clearly, stop assuming things and read again what I wrote.
I wrote that they got expelled 109 times for various reasons through out history, now what were those reasons and what did they do ?
If you can not hold a neutral debate/conversation about highly sensitive topics you should get your emotions under control or you will never get a straight answer to what and why it happened.
You can of course keep copying the pre written narrative that all germans one day woke up and started hating jewish people for no reason but that is not the entire story.
Once Judea declared war on germany and started boycotting their goods on an international scale it gave them all the reason to treat them as foreign agents and prop up the propaganda against them and their collaborateurs
Some people only follow the narrative no matter what..
They only go superficial..
Okay... So it sounds like you're saying Jewish people declared an economic war on the German people & the holocaust was a retaliation...?
As a thought experiment... If the socialist BLM movement in the US were to continue growing & eventually destroy the property rights of rich whites, would that be because whites started an economic war with blacks, or would it be because socialists always aim to steal from those with more (especially during hard times)? And since a culture that carries with it some finacial education will do better than cultures lacking financial knowledge, socialist targets may be easy to separate along racial/cultural lines?
"Better financial education" usury was forbiden in most kingdoms, fraud and and manipulative behavior is not " better financial education" come an man
Did I say anything about the holocaust? No I did not.
I just gave you the answer on why anti jewish sentiment grew stronger in germany after these books were published as it was used in the propaganda narrative.
You have to stop assuming things especially with these topics, it's either yoy are consciously trying to fram me as an antisemite (which I am not) or you are so conditioned to the narrative teached in your school that you can not rationally discuss certain topics without taking any side here.
It's what most people are doing or are conditioned to do and this is a very dangerous path to go.
But hey, never question the party only what the party tells you is right.
I formally tried to explain that both sides wages war at each other to get a better picture on why everything escalated and you are accusing me of things I never said to win an argument
Did Jews get rich by stealing from people or were they facilitating trade? What sort of war were they waging & how? What does it look like to the monetarily ignorant if someone is trying to manage trade & currency exchanges during times of hyper inflation? Maybe they really were, it just seems more likely to me that idiots who don't understand money would assume people not suffering during hard times might be stealing from them. I think it's similarly plausible that Bitcoiners might get labeled economic terrorists during the coming dollar hyperinflatoin.
The convo was about right vs left. Given that they either want bigger govt, or for all individuals to otherwise be totally subservient to some collective I tend to think of all socialists as leftwing. Hitler said things along those very lines. He thought the collective was more important than the individual. When economic times are bad people don't like the idea of individual responsibility so it is easy to blame some group & spread ideas about sacrificing some to save the masses.
Call it left, right, or neither, I don't really care. It just seems weird that I'm being insulted for calling national socialists leftwing & pointing out that they generally oppose capitalism. While also being told that I'm just repeating the stock narrative.
First of all you are not beeing insulted, if you took it as such I'm sorry it was not my intention to insult you.
Second I completely agree with the first paragraph you wrote, especially the latter part where speculators are beeing blamed for currency collapse.
Further into it I have to disagree, Hitlers Ideology was based on the individual first which then can fully support the collective but private property for the german citizens of the Reich were protected.
In your way of argumentation you leave out the marxist revolutionaries which were to the largest part "jewish" and commited also horrendous crimes.
You leave out the sexual revolutionary movement which was started by "jewish" people.
The term Genderideology and the idea of multiple genders beyond male and female springs from the babylonian Talmud which teaches it until this day.
What books did they burn in 33? I assume you are not a big fan of modern child sex transitioning and pedophilia so you most definitly would not have supported it back at that time.
They burned down the instutut für Sexualwissenschaft first in case you did not know.
It's the reason why modern leftists frame everyone opposing their delusions as nazis.
The german mark completeley collapsed ans during that time the average citizens struggled getting bread on the table whike foreign bankers with their stronger currencies entered the country and bough all property and buisness effectively enslaving the local population.
The NS movement started as a individualist worker movement whos aim was to protect the native german population and gathered nationalists and patriots and ww1 veterans alike.
The Dolchstoß myth was a very commonly believed world view at that time remember that.
They also very strictly opposed vaccines from "jews" remember that also.
The initial idea of the movement was founded on positive christianity to combat marxist satanist revolutionaries.
They were, as I wrote individualist patriotic people which when they abolished the old government became the state and therefore a socialist leftwing party.
Read Ernst Nolte's - European Civil War. For more information about both sides during that time marxist terror vs ns terror.
Once they started arresting the bankers things escalated internationally but I don't want to lay out the entire international banking network beginning even before the FED was created.
Trade with germany was interrupted and things went downhill very fast from there.
Rabbit quote is better than that 🤣🤣 
Just for clarification to make sense of what you say, are you considering yourself an anarcho capitalist?
Yes. I believe the primary mode of human interaction is & should be voluntary & that all forced funding is criminal
Let me play the devils advocate by claiming that the problem that arrises with this, is that bad men tend to exploit stupid/gullible people.
Eventually when those men accrue enough power they take away your freedom.
It would be ideal of everyone was decent and like minded. But unfortunately, that's not the case. (Thus making the case for nazis defending certain norms and keeping people in check)
Hm yeah I get it, I had this thoughts aswell until I cam to the conclusion it is complete fantasy ans wishfull thinking except we get a sudden rise in consciousness ans intelligence.
I like Rothbards approach in Anatomy of the state, short and on point
We don't need everyone to agree or for everyone to get smarter in order for anarcho-capitalism to become the dominant way of life for most people.
IMO it's much more of a technological problem. It is currently very easy for a few people to steal from billions. But that can't be done without also weakening their tool of theft. A sound money that is easy to secure, hard or impossible to censor, which will forever grow stronger as other currencies are devalued changes some very fundamental incentives.
The current system is also built on a mountain of lies & fraud which could only be maintained via controlled communications channels. When our better money is combined with decentralized communication & trade networks that are similarly difficult to censor, much of what makes these massive govts possible will be gone.
Their influence and ability to deceive grew enormously with fractional banking. If anything, that system needs to go.
Agreed but that is a far way to go.
But even if you think it through in a complete state of anarchy you need to form communities to survive, community grows into a village -> city -> and eventually a state again.
I mean we had anarcho capitalism and it brought us to where we are today no ?
The best option would be the approach of free private cities which are proposed already
Communities & villages & cities do not require coercive & force funded governments. They only require ways for people to easily coordinate & a way to charge people for the services & infrastructure they need or use. Micropayments make charging for what is used a much simpler process.
Govt is a naturally destructive & parasitic force. If the goal was actually to serve, rather than steal, then the idea of all voluntary funding wouldn't bother anyone.
In theory yes, in a practical sense it is not as easy it becomes more problematic once your community enlarges >1000 inhabitants.
Trust me I grew up and lived in a community as you describe it for a large part of my life which functions almost exactly as you explained it. Therefore I know it could work well if strategically well organised.
Government if you mean by the state yes, but also local smaller communities have government where the process of democratic elections really work for a head or a council which make certain critical decisions for the community as there is also accountability because they are not out of reach for the rest of the community.
Anarcho-capitalism has no democratic process, no public councils, & no political leaders of any kind. All services would be privately supplied & funded, & anyone who does not like a particular service would be able to support a competitor or start their own.
I suspect that getting from here to there will involve a lot of active local disregard for federal & state laws & any other dictates of larger institutions. And I think those larger institutions will increasingly lack the resources & political will needed to enforce any decent sort of justice or order. This seems likely to happen at all levels at once, & I think we can already see it happening with States & counties defying federal demands around covid, States effectively nullifying federal drug & gun laws, etc. Uber, is actually a decent example; it started in direct defiance of taxi monopolies in most major cities, but they were too popular to kill by the time legal action was attempted. Uber isn't even decentralized. I think we will see truly decentralized versions of all sorts of services that will undermine all sorts of laws & regulations. Eventually the political institutions that remain will just be seen as irrelevant groups of incompetent authoritarian weinies hurling empty threats to annoy the people who are actually doing something productive.
Smaller communities may be more successful in the short to medium term. I suspect major cities will continue to degrade into socialist hellholes, as has been the trend for some time.
Well described potential scenario.
I guess a key factor is going to be just how much violence and coercion the decaying institutions are going to be able to muster? I suspect this is going to vary a lot, in some places they are going to fight brutally (see France, parts of the US recently), in others there is going to be little resistance.
A smaller population will have, potentially, more success at maintaining social norms. Personal responsibility being one of the most critical for fostering an environment where anarcho-capitalism can succeed.
I suspect some sort of web of trust style reputation system will also emerge in order to scale accountability or personal responsibility in some form to larger populations.
Which would, in turn, require enforcement.
Reputations don't have to be "enforced," you may just be unable to access certain services without a certain number of other positive dealings with people trusted by a certain seller. For example, I may sell you a car part that you pay for upfront, but I may not sell you installation of said part unless you have a certain number of positive dealings with people within my social network. Reputation just follows you around like a credit score. A "social credit system" is a perfectly reasonable governance tool so long as it isn't centralized & you can't be black listed by some monopoly institution. There may very well be competing social credit syatems with different standards that people care about.
You are correct. "Reputations don't require enforcement"
But the system that tracks and recognizes them does.
Enforcement from and by whom and how is certainly up for debate, but it will require enforcement nonetheless.
Not enforcement of reputation but of the rules and methods by which it is quantified and tracked.
Just need some sort of standard developed so that people can rate each other in different ways & those ratings can be weighted in some sane & helpful fashion. Lots of social graph problems to be solved in decentralized systems.
Which is why small communities are far more likely to accomplish and maintain a system that will work.
Any larger system will fail in the face of human nature.
Nah, I think, like Bitcoin & the internet in general we will see certain standards emerge that will spread & scale to facilitate the development of robust global trade networks
I'm still curious how they would approach respecting individual property/rights. Seems to me it's quite impossible.
Well they didn't as we know, yet homeownership was supported all though through the means of the state and subventions, If you had 1 child the state paid 25℅ of your downpayment this stacked multiple times all though as mentioned earlier only for native reichs citizens
