NationaI Socialist

marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/

Who the fuck told you you can wear that flag when you clearly didn't finish your tank training?

Attached: 1412557063656.webm (640x348, 650.22K)

Go to bed Dinesh

Imperialism is an economic relationship. An empire is not just any large political entity.

Nazism was the attempt by the German bourgeoisie to copy and achieve the empires Britain and America possessed.

it wasn't an empire until Kruschev decided to do a 180 and go back to State Capitalism.
before then Stalin simply allied with and funded left wing insurrectionists during WW2. Eastern Europe was already in a state of chaos regardless and probably would have been under 100% Fascist control otherwise.
the difference is that an imperialist targets a collection of land for the sake of the profit of government's domestic business, while an ally is simply geopolitically aligned with another political group for no specific reason (in Russia's case it was the spread of ideology). the former implies but the latter but the latter does not necessarily imply the former.

America: empire
USSR: also empire.
/OurEmpire/, but alas still an empire

Khrushchev's attempt at creating a situation of unequal development throughout the Warsaw Pact (telling Hoxha that Albania would be an "orchard" and not receive any assistance in industrial development) is what made the USSR imperialist, not that they had wars or controlled a lot of land.

Empire is an administrative relationship between states where one entity has absolute authority.

nice

Attached: cdcbcd67bc7bdc1b5218496aaf53f8f94b6f1581c61f18a094a13c4cc2820909.jpg (433x650, 112.8K)

Comrade Stalin on the so called "national socialists"

In our country the German invaders, i.e., the Hitlerites, are usually called fascists. The Hitlerites, it appears, consider this wrong and obstinately continue to call themselves “National Socialists.” Hence the Germans want to assure us that the Hitlerite party, the party of the German invaders, which is plundering Europe and has organized the villainous attack on our socialist State, is a socialist party. Is this possible? What can there be in common between socialism and the bestial Hitlerite invaders who are plundering and oppressing the nations of Europe?

Can the Hitlerites be regarded as nationalists? No, they cannot. Actually, the Hitlerites are now not nationalists but imperialists. As long as the Hitlerites were engaged in assembling the German lands and reuniting the Rhine district, Austria, etc., it was possible with a certain amount of foundation to call them nationalists. But after they seized foreign territories and enslaved European nations-the Czechs, Slovaks, Poles, Norwegians, Danes, Dutch, Belgians, French, Serbs, Greeks, Ukrainians, Byelorussians, the inhabitants of the Baltic countries, etc.—and began to reach out for world domination, the Hitlerite party ceased to be a nationalist party, because from that moment it became an imperialist party, a party of annexation and oppression.

The Hitlerite party is a party of imperialists, and the most rapacious and predatory imperialists among all the imperialists of the world.

Can the Hitlerites be regarded as socialists? No, they cannot. Actually, the Hitlerites are the sworn enemies of socialism, arrant reactionaries and Black-Hundreds who have robbed the working class and the peoples of Europe of the most elementary democratic liberties. In order to cover up their reactionary, Black-Hundred essence, the Hitlerites denounce the internal regimes of Britain and America as plutocratic regimes. But in Britain and the United States there are elementary democratic liberties, there exist trade unions of workers and employees, there exist workers’ parties, there exist parliaments; whereas in Germany, under the Hitler regime, all these institutions have been destroyed. One only needs to compare these two sets of facts to perceive the reactionary nature of the Hitler regime and the utter hypocrisy of the German-fascist pratings about a plutocratic regime in Britain and in America. In point of fact the Hitler regime is a copy of that reactionary regime which existed in Russia under tsardom. It is well known that the Hitlerites suppress the rights of the workers, the rights of the intellectuals and the rights of nations as readily as the tsarist regime suppressed them, and that they organize mediæval Jewish pogroms as readily as the tsarist regime organized them.

The Hitlerite party is a party of enemies of democratic liberties, a party of mediæval reaction and Black-Hundred pogroms.

And if these brazen imperialists and arrant reactionaries still continue to masquerade in the togas of “nationalists” and “socialists,” they do this in order to deceive the people, to fool the simpletons and to hide under the flag of “nationalism” and “socialism” their piratical and imperialist nature.

Crows decked in peacocks’ feathers. . . . But no matter how much crows may deck themselves in peacocks’ feathers they will not cease to be crows.

What a nice thing. On leftypol i come to understand the communists better by the day. Of course hitler would claim he just wanted that road through poland and everything else was defensive pre-emptive strikes (and historical reality does show that germany was really not tooled up properly for what you would have expected them to be if they indeed intended to launch an attack on the rest of the world). I never knew hitler, or stalin, so i will refrain from taking sides ^_^

hitler was a nationalist but he wasn't national like me

I don't believe there's any rule that says you can't be nationalist is you invade people. "We are the strongest, best nation, unfairly robbed of our rightful territory!" and "let's take some land and people!" are not exactly diametrically opposite positions.

user I have some bad news…