I've been on these boards for some time (4chan in general since 2006), but I've never quite sat well with any particular political ideology. I wasn't strongly in favor of the Libertarian approach, although it did stick with me a fair bit. I wouldn't consider myself a national socialist, either, yet I retain a lot of pro-national ideals. Still, I certainly wouldn't call myself a liberal. Here's a general outline on what I believe, and my solutions for various problems - perhaps some anons can at least pin down or point me in the right direction. Otherwise, feel free to try and change my view on any of this - I'm open to ideas and changing my mind if it can be adequately argued, articulated, and rationalized.
<Immigration and naturalization
Immigration - legal or otherwise- is effectively one of the worst things a nation can do to itself and the strength of its people, if done on a large scale. Allowing immigrants to flood your nation - regardless of its legal status - will cause them to bring their issues with them that caused them to flee their original nation to begin with. It only benefits the extraordinarily rich who can outright avoid living with the immigrants they mandate acceptance for. However, if done on a very small scale - one that exceeds no more than 0.01% of the population of your naturalized citizens - immigration can be mostly benign and possibly beneficial (if for no other reason than to bring in external workers). But, this process must be thoroughly curated, quarantined, and vigorously gripped. They should be placed into, effectively, a charter school - kept separate from the rest of society during their period of immigration, but of course are allowed to leave back to their original nation to begin with. They should be trained on your nation's language, its culture, and given the resources to do so. If, at any point, they are seen to be non-beneficial, they are rejected without appeal. There would have to be magnitudes of orders of operations in order to accomplish this, and ultimately would only be sensible for a nation that is already extremely well-off already- which then defeats the purpose of "needing" external workers to begin with. Thus, immigration is virtually useless for its home nation, and only seeks to benefit those who would reap the benefits sowed by another. It should then only be done as a service toward those the nation seeks to help unanimously - those who already show allegiance to this nation and this nation alone, and reject their previous identity altogether.
<Deportation, conservation of traditions
Any idea of immigration (pro or against) is ultimately useless unless you consider your view on what should be done with citizens who "break the law" or otherwise go against the grain of society. However, it's not enough to merely deport immigrants - you must be willing to export or exile those who actively seek to disrupt your nation through various actions. While any one subtle action shouldn't be taken as a legal offense, large quantities of these "small actions" - exercising "free speech" to slander, libel, etc at almost all hours of the day - should result in a total consideration of retaining citizenship. Basically, if an individually were to utilize things otherwise seen as "legal" for the express purpose of undermining their host nation, they should be exiled through a verifiable set of rules and regulations. Thus, rather than merely considering the identity of a person or with whom they associate, their actions are merely considered as a whole - their character is called into judgement, rather than any one singular action. This allows for the legality of extremely important rights such as free speech, but still allows your nation to crack down - under no mere arbitration, but rule of law - on any who would abuse these rights. When detached from identities, it allows nobody to simply re-brand themselves and evade your system. When you ban communists, they simply come back as "socialists" or "leftists". The key here is distinguishing that each time you cut the head off of a corrupt group, they merely expand their influence and identity so you can no longer pinpoint them - a hydra, of sorts. I feel as though is extremely important to retain and conserve your nation's traditions because of this.
Currency should be based around the production of goods within the borders of its home nation - but these goods must be useful goods. They must allow the nation to survive - food, medical care, etc are all elements that should bolster the value of individuals who provide them. When you allow something as vague as "GDP" or even "GNP" to determine the value of goods, you let yourself become a nation of useless creations. Any nation which ties itself to debt and the creation of such is controlled under the most oppressive form of slavery known to man.