/pnd/ - Politics, News, Debate

>>17390

Should National Socialism arise and redeem our nation, we must ensure that this vicious degeneration does not destroy us once more. Despite being the most radical revolutionaries on the planet, upon enacting our reforms it will be necessary to become the most bitter, unrelenting conservatives and reactionaries the world has ever seen. I do not mean conservative in the modern sense where conservatism is merely a rhetorical ploy in democratic politics. Modern conservatism fails because it uses the arbitrary principle of resisting reforms as its lodestar. It then uses all of its strength to empower this arbitrary principle as virtuous and moral. This is a trick that allows conservatives to resist progressive legislation without having to face the uncomfortable debate of resisting actual progressive principles. This inability to resist progressivism on a moral, foundational level is the reason why conservatives have failed to conserve anything in our nation, and have necessitated that their children become radicals. Our conservatism, contrary to modern conservatism, will be the conservation of ideals. Our state will actually be very active and willing to implement reforms, but we will be staunchly unyielding in the preservation of the National Socialist worldview in our state and people.

Most National Socialists already know the reforms that will be made. The country will be 100% White. Marriage and family will be restored. The rights of religious freedom, property, and to bear arms will be protected. Our foreign policy will be realist, yet devoted to racial brotherhood. Productive enterprise will be encouraged, but the national welfare and state interests will take priority over private sector profit. Honest work will be dignified. What is seldom talked about, however, is the governmental structure of the United States after our reforms have been passed. This is what I wish to discuss.

cont.

>>17391

Democracy is defined as “rule by the people.” Its essential principle is that the people themselves make decisions for the country. The impracticality of direct democracy caused democrats to prefer representative republics, parliamentary democracies. These forms of government operate on the principle that the people can’t keep track of every detail of the state, so they will elect a representative who probably has a history in a related field such as law, business, or the military and that person will devote all their time to the nuances of the state and the administration of the nation. The failure of this form of democracy is that it selects a single man to handle many different affairs at once. He is to handle oversight of an agency responsible for maintaining national parks; he is to care about workers in a company stationed a thousand miles away; he is to impeach officials; he is to wage war; and he is, first and foremost, to be reelected. This one man is expected to somehow be able to listen to and arbitrate between all classes of society, yet his own position in office is incredibly arbitrary. Often times, contrary to the expectation that representatives will be experienced professionals, the man has zero real world experience; he comes from a rich family, goes to law school, and then runs for office upon graduation. His family, and his devotion to the party line, and certain special interests is what gets him a lifelong career in politics, and he goes on to become the representative of tens of millions of people despite having no familiarity with them.

It is impossible to expect such a man to function properly. It is certain the some sectors of society will be ignored and others privileged. The Fascists realized this. This is why their congresses (yes, the Fascists weren’t pure dictatorships; they had congresses) selected their members based on occupation. The word corporatism is often used to describe the control of the government by private companies, called corporations in many countries. This is a distortion of the word. Corporatism comes from the notion of a corporative assembly wherein representatives of various sectors of society, such as steelworkers, doctors, accountants, etc, assemble to discuss issues. This is a powerful system because it ensures that every sector of society can voice its concerns, and no one gets locked out of political discourse purely because they aren’t an important electoral bloc.

cont.

>>17392

The new United States must implement the Fascistic principle of corporatism into its reformed government. I propose that guilds be established for the 18 primary NAICS codes. These guilds will help with the self-management of industry, and they will also be able to send representatives to corporative assemblies. These assemblies will be created at the municipal level, the county level, the state level (replacing the lower chamber of state legislatures), and finally the U.S. House of Representatives shall be corporatist. None of these assemblies will be endowed with powers, or the ability to vote on laws. Rather, they shall be advisory; they shall propose laws. The President of the United States will select the Speaker of the House, and the Speaker will organize the committees, and maintain order in the House.

But the United States follows a bicameral tradition; and even Hitler, in Mein Kampf, wanted both a corporative lower-chamber, and a Senate as an upper chamber. This is why it is imperative to keep our bicameral tradition. Not only to maintain similarity with the current government, thus supporting the notion that we are a continuation of the government, rather than some new entity that happened to gain power, but to act in accordance with National Socialist and Fascist principles.

The composition of this upper chamber should be decided organically. It should flow upwards from democratic decisions at the only level where democracy is acceptable: the local level. This democratic base at the lowest level of government will be municipalities. There are only three offices that members of the public will have the opportunity to vote and run for: city councilman, county commissioner, and supervisor of elections. (The supervisor of elections is elected, but subjected to many levels of oversight. This is to prevent electoral fraud.) Both men and women can register to vote provided that they are at least 18 years old and have fulfilled at least one of the following criteria: served in the military, had a child, or own land. This way all members of the electorate will be devoted to the future of the country; for no man wants a country he fought for to be weak; no parent wants their children to grow up in a worse country; no one wishes to own land in a declining area. Only men at least 30 years of age may serve in elected office, and they must be registered voters.

cont.

>>17394

City councils will have ten members serving ten year terms. It will be staggered so that there is a single city council election every two-years. The mayor and all city councilman will be entitled to present a single issue to the public to vote on in quarterly plebiscites, meaning that the electorate can vote on eleven issues every three months. Restrictions may be placed on these plebiscites in order to prevent financial mismanagement.

A mayor will nominate members of the public, or government, to become county commissioners, but that nomination must get the approval of the city council. However, some county commissioners will be elected outright in order to ensure that unincorporated areas are not completely deprived of county level representation.

Every county will then send a Senator to the State Senate of the state that county resides in. (Note that this intentionally forgoes representation based on population in favor of geographic representation.) A County Executive will nominate the would-be Senator, and the County Commissioners will confirm him. Finally, a state’s governor will nominate two men to the federal Senate. They will be confirmed by the state Senate.

The United States Senate will be the most powerful body of government. With a two-thirds vote it may unilaterally remove the President, or any other official. It may overturn court cases, even those of the Supreme Court. It can pass a law with a two-thirds vote. It will also decide how many representatives the 18 aforementioned guilds may send to the United States House of Representatives.

cont.

>>17398

The Presidency will be independent, operating as a continuous chain from the first President to the last. The President himself will choose his successor. (If the Presidency ever becomes vacant, the Senate will select a replacement.) He can appoint and fire generals and ambassadors at will. He can wage war. He can nominate judges and Supreme Court Justices, but still needs Senate approval. He will also have the ability to pass laws by executive fiat. Laws created in this manner will have a minimum six-month delay before taking effect. This is so that the Senate may, at an unhurried pace, deliberate on the law. With a two-thirds vote, the Senate may veto a law; however, a simple majority vote can authorize the law to come into effect immediately.

While the legislative branch flowed upstream from local level democracy, the executive branch will flow in reverse. It will start at the President and flow downwards to the local level, and every mayor will be able to trace his lineage back to the President himself. The President will nominate state Governors, but must get the consent of the U.S. Senate. State Governors will nominate County Executives, but must get the consent of his state’s Senate. County Executives will nominate mayors, but must get the consent of County Commissioners.

cont.

>>17399

But what is the point of all of this? Why all the upstream, downstream, and cross-stream? The answer is that it allows the whole governmental apparatus to function as an organic whole. Imagine the difficulty of subverting this government. The people at the bottom, being exposed to proper media, and educated in proper schools, and having already proved their commitment to the country, will be fervently loyal to National Socialist ideals. They will elect National Socialists to government, and this will make it difficult for non-National Socialists to climb the ranks of government. Furthermore, the independence of the executive branch, the Presidency, means that the President will always be in a chain of ideological successors to our first post-reformation President. In order to subvert this system you would need control of the media and the schools in order to win elections, and then you would somehow need the consent of the Presidential Lineage in order to rise beyond that. It is impossible to imagine this happening successfully. Yet, the government is not insular; it is always listening to the people, who have much representation; arguably more representation than under the current system, because even minorities will have representation in the government. This allows us to be ideologically conservative, and simultaneously quick to enact reforms and pass laws. This is Fascism: organic, elitist, corporative - representative and democratic, yet authoritarian and dictatorial. We are all within the same body, and we all march together. Both hemispheres of our brain share the same goal, and to implement those goals control the whole body of society.

The founding fathers were not "Fascist" and the fasces have been a symbol of goverment forever. They were liberal and were based upon the same lie the modern left and right of America is.

The equality of man.

National Socialism is built on the creation of a Natural Order based on the fact that men are not equal. And by the nature of removing the voting system and installing core national socialist ideas of "The strong should rule the weak", "National intrest over self-intrest", ect. We destroy degeneration which naturally happens to liberal goverments. Since this degeneration comes from taking liberalism to it's deadly logical conclusion. Marxism, for if humans are the same do they not deserve the same?

We aren't conservitives at all we are builders.

Man is not equal, thus not equally capable of ruling, thus not equally capable of voting for whom to rule. All voting systems are bad and lead to degeneration through self-intrest, mis-managment and all the other ills of Democracy.

If you're National Socialist you're against Democracy. Can people stop trying to water it down with Liberalism that goes against all of the natural laws and our core ideas? Just call yourself a "National-Liberal" or Mosleyite or something because you're not NatSoc.

Take your meds anon

>>17413

I see you on /k/ too, kike.

Can we keep these things into a single "Kenneth Didn't Take His Meds Again" general instead of filling up the catalog with your blog?

I enjoyed your essay, anon. The Founding Fathers were truly visionaries, and Washington is a hero. It's a shame what this country has become.

The USA was always a Judeo-Masonic run country from its very foundation. That doesn't mean it has to continue being that way.

>>17413

Hi, jewish paid shill.

>>17406

>I know nothing

Okay, bye.

God dammit, FringeWizard. Take your meds!

>>17499

The influence was there, but Washington stood against it. American masonry wasn't fully compromised during the revolution.

>>17409

I am fervently anti-democracy. My concern is that we aren't discussing the governmental structure of the country post-revolution.

bump

>>17390

>how (insert) happened?

The jews. Always kill jews, and every problem will be solved.

Murder your local jews.

>>17518

>>17413

All jews and all leftistswill be killed.

There is no future for either.

>>17551

the influence of christcuckery is a part of the basic fabric of western society and it's laws. english common law, which was adopted by the founding fathers, is an inherently christian legal system because common law precedents such as murder being illegal, perjury being illegal, that all christians should be able to expect equal judgment in court as they would before their god, are all christian ideals which spring from the ten commandments and other exclusively christian principles.

>>17392

Democracy was invented in ancient Greece. American democracy is similar. The main difference is that the people whom the Greeks called citizens, we call legislators. The people we call citizens they called slaves.

>>82028

Moses Michael Hays was probably the worst founding father jew. He set up a lot of the first Freemason lodges. He also came up with "all men are created equal"

>In 1775, seventy-six men in Newport were asked to sign a declaration of loyalty to the American colonies that included the phrase "upon the true faith of a Christian." Hays publicly objected to the phrase and refused to sign, standing firm on the philosophy of "all men created equal". Instead he offered a letter affirming his belief that the Revolution was a just cause. Hays signed when the Christian portion of the oath was omitted.

>>17399

>He can wage war.

My only problem with this. If the President has arbitrary declaratory powers, Senate impeachment would not rid the folk of the war. Like in the SPQR, the Senate should have sole power to declare war. Prosecution, of course, is strictly the Chief's prerogative.

>>17390

> ideals

Most people, OP included, don't understand this word.

Ideals are things that are perfect. By definition, that makes them unattainable in reality. Ideals are things which we are supposed to aspire to, even though we will never achieve them. That is why kneeling for the flag is disrespectful. The flag symbolizes the ideals we aspire to, it does not represent things we claim to have obtained. Taking a knee is saying that you don't agree with the ideals, in which case you should find another country to live in whose ideals match up with your own.

This failure to recognize the correct meaning of the word ideals and the role they play in this country is also why Congress is such a non-functional trainwreck. Senators and Representatives across the board have forgotten that you can make concessions and negotiate deals without abandoning the ideals you are aspiring to. Anymore they think that even the tiniest concession will cause them to be accused of abandoning those ideals. But that is idiotic if you understand what ideals are and the fundamental rile they play constitutionally.

>>83176

> rile

*role*

>>83176

Why would anyone ever feel compelled to leave a country (an ideal based upon land) just because they don't follow your slave ideals?

>>58662

The lending of money on interest definitely needs to be phased out, but the anti-central bank thing kind of becomes obsolete once you progress from libertarian to NatSoc. Hitler had a central bank, and he used it well. Furthermore, Jefferson was neck deep in filth and secret society scum. He was the pinnacle of it. Suggesting that Washington was compromised because of his masonry, yet ignoring Jefferson's history is an act of extreme ignorance.

>>83127

Senators can grow passive, they can ignore threats. We need a man of action to head our foreign policy. He needs to be able to quickly and unilaterally react to any threat. He needs the ability to stealthily prepare for war and in a moment's notice throw the full weight of our country against another. Legislative war powers always lead to either unnecessary warmongering or an extreme ineptitude at facing foreign threats. Typically they are only viable in isolated nations with few major threats, or posh hegemonies that have put their wars for survival in the past.

>>83532

>Senators can grow passive, they can ignore threats.

Those senators are consequently removed from their posts by whoever elected them.

>We need a man of action to head our foreign policy. He needs to be able to quickly and unilaterally react to any threat. He needs the ability to stealthily prepare for war and in a moment's notice throw the full weight of our country against another.

Yeah, because unlimited executive overreach in this department definitely isn't a large chunk of what's causing the US' downfall. If Orangeman unilaterally declared war on Iran for Israel and then drafted you to fight it you'd be singing a different tune. If anything, we need to go the other way and have a Covington-style War Prevention Bureau.

>Legislative war powers always lead to either unnecessary warmongering

The history of the US disagrees. Compare our wars to our "conflicts".

>or an extreme ineptitude at facing foreign threats.

Also patently false. See the SPQR.

>Typically they are only viable in isolated nations with few major threats, or posh hegemonies that have put their wars for survival in the past.

We are such an isolated nation and we have such a posh hegemony.