Fifth EmpireBoard

Brekekk wrote:

Lulz. It's an "adjective" not a "subjective".

sub·jec·tive
/səbˈjektiv/
adjective
adjective: subjective

1.
based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.
"his views are highly subjective"
synonyms: personal, individual, emotional, instinctive, intuitive
"a subjective analysis"
antonyms: objective

Xozanero wrote:

Yes true, individualism does create a certain spice in life, which is good, but shouldn't we also promote that of a more collectivist society? Were we don't crush ones individuality but we promote that of a unified country. A place were we all believe in the same God, church, state, and that of authority. A place were people can go around and be themselves, but were their are strict social boundaries that are put up in place by not only the media (which would always agree with the government, not out of force but choice) but also the people. Wouldn't it be great to see people put their values and beliefs in the same general vasinity as those around them? Yes, individualism will always be a part of the human race, but we can take their want of safety and order and use it to our advantage to turning a state of individuals into that of a more collective one.

You assume that individualism and collectivism are mutually exclusive when this is not the case at all.

For example, look at America. It's a melting pot of various cultures, beliefs, races, ethnicities, religions, sexualities, genders, sexes, ideologies, philosophies, and so on. They embrace their individuality, and at the same time, the majority of them manage to work together in a collective society, because most of them consider themselves first and foremost, American, and so also view their fellow Americans as such.

I'm gonna disagree with you points on believing in the same God, church, and authority. Freedom of Worship is something I happen to be quite fond of, and I don't think anyone should be told what they're allowed to believe in.

And while I understand that as fascists you support authoritarianism, I'll draw the line by saying that sometimes the authority is major douche who shouldn't be obeyed by so much as a dog, let alone an entire nation of people. Authoritarianism only works when the authority is worth worshiping.

I will say though, even though I disagree with a lot of what you guys say and think, it's nice being able to actually discuss with people of differing viewpoints with people on this site for once without it turning into a cancerfest like on NSG. It's seem all the rational people capable of holding civilized arguments stay as far away from NSG as possible, probably because of all the inane sh*tposters who think they're right all the time flock to General in droves.

Atsuria wrote:

Fascism is collectivist, some would argue that even more so than comunism.
I don't see any problem in collectivism.Don't tell me you prefer the Invididualistic me,me,me thinking over botherhood and unity ? Would you like if blacks, gays and cripples would be segregated for theri personal characteristics ?

Segregation isn't individualism, it's discrimination. Also, we don't have a lot of blacks here in the Land of the Rus'.

Furthermore, individualism has nothing to do with "Me, me, me" thinking. That's self-centeredism which, admittedly, can fester and breed easily in an individualist society, but only if is encouraged in childhood by parents, teachers, media, and the government, so it isn't a unavoidable consequence of individualism so much as it is a completely avoidable regression caused by coddling and participation trophies.

Atsuria wrote:

In a Fascist society marked by union and brotherhood, there's no one left alone to manage.You can count on the fact that there's always a brother to help you get on your feet.To guide you if you're lost and so on.
Collectivism is power and at the root of the Fascist philosophy is the thought that united we are stronger.To tackle the hardships of life and to move forward.You have to remember that collectivism alone kept the USSR alive for so long.When everything else sank into s*it under the communist dystopia, collectivism kept the red carrier afloat.

Mmmm, I'm gonna disagree with you on that. The USSR lasted so long because it was built for brutality, though Lenin himself didn't realize it at the time. Stalin, however, did realize it, and so he was the perfect leader for the Soviet Union. He was cruel, psychotic, and oppressive beyond all imagination, and this is what the USSR needed to survive. Pure collectivism in such a large expanse of territory is impossible to maintain for the same reason that anarchism or communism in such a large expanse of territory is impossible to maintain: No matter how hard you try to force people to work together, unless they have a heart of gold or know them personally, odds are they won't want to unless they absolutely have to.

In a small town where everyone knows each other, they'll gladly stop and help out a neighbor, but in a big city you may very well be on your own. It's a mixture of selfishness and distrust inherit in human society since the dawn of man. Not everyone is going to help each other, and while it should be encouraged, it can't be enforced. Pure collectivism encourages people to rely on others for assistance rather than themselves, and pure individualism encourages people to rely on themselves for assistance rather than other people. Neither of these are good for society, and while people should absolutely be encouraged to help out their neighbor, the neighbor should likewise be encouraged to be able to act on his own as well. Help should be appreciated, but not necessary.

Another reason the USSR lasted so long is it managed to live off vast resources, several puppet governments, and the spoils of one of the greatest wars in all history, not because society worked together.

Even still, the USSR was doomed to fail from the start.

Atsuria wrote:

I fail to see any correlation between your claim that collectivism would be more dull and boring.People are known to have more fun and be more happy in strong groups than where people bicker over pointless personal "taste" differences.

No, extroverts are known to be more fun and happy in strong groups. Not everyone is an extrovert though.

Bickering of taste in clothing, food, TV shows, etc. is all stupidly pointless and has nothing to do with individualism and more to do with just plain being a jackass who can't understand not everybody shares the same taste as him.

Atsuria wrote:

"slavery of the mind" as you say it.Is only acceptable to prevent large scale dissent against the state and treason.You have to look at the state from a different point of view.The state isn't just a creation of the man but rather the end product from our combined collectivist thought process.To have a strong state equals welfare and prosperity.To show dissent means to put cracks into the common cornucopia..

When discourage dissent, you encourage oppression. A population bred not to object will allow itself to plowed over by bullies out of sheer fear of being punished. This is exactly how North Korea works.

Power changes hands in all government forms, and can even change minds. Good leaders can become psychopaths over night, and when you tell the people enjoying margaritas on a sunny beach not to object to any authority, they won't object at all, even when said authority is shooting anybody who asks questions.

A government must earn it's peoples' obedience, not enforce it.

Atsuria wrote:

Don't worry, Fascism values the welfare of the people, not oppression.There will be means to remove malevolent leaders from power without dissent.

Yes, I believe there were many Nazi officials who believed that Hitler was a malevolent ruler who must be stopped. It didn't work out too well for them last I checked.

There is no perfect government, and no matter how good you may think your failsafe is, it's never enough. The Constitution of the Turkish Republic allows the Turkish Military to overthrow the government if it grows increasingly Islamist, and yet, here we are with an increasingly Islamist Turkish government, a failed coup that was likely a false-flag by said government, and an entire armed forces loyal to the word of one man and one man alone.

This is what the Founding Fathers of the United States feared, and this why the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution exists, to prevent these kind of things from happening.

Atsuria wrote:

Invididualism can be seen pretty much everywhere.At school, at work etc..In order to purge it we need to promote respect and the honor of brotherhood.

I'm saying it shouldn't be purged, because it would only lead to a nation full of a sheep, and a nation full of sheep can't defend itself when the shepherd gets drunk and mistakes one of the woolly mammal for an attractive and slutty woman.

Atsuria wrote:

The problem with Invididualism is that it promotes the Invididual over the State and Society, this already makes it very unfascist in nature.The State is an all powerfull entity that empowers us rather than oppress us, in the same way a soldier is empowered when placed into a squad.

Except it doesn't do that at all. Individualism promotes self-reliance so that the support of the state and society isn't required. This in turn prevents total reliance on the state, which leads to laziness and a career in welfare. A good deal of self-reliance is necessary for the survival of society, the government can't always be there to bail society out and people need to learn this.

Furthermore, I think that if the state supports the people (to an extent) instead of just telling them what to do, then the people will in turn support the state.

Nikolai the russian guy wrote:

And while I understand that as fascists you support authoritarianism, I'll draw the line by saying that sometimes the authority is major douche who shouldn't be obeyed by so much as a dog, let alone an entire nation of people. Authoritarianism only works when the authority is worth worshiping.

That's true yes but mind you that Fascism doesn't actively try to be a "douche".

It just sometimes happens so that even the persons with the most noble of Ideas will get corrupt.Falangist spain was a good example of how things got from a good start towards a not so good active principle.

Fascist Italy did do well for it's people.Even it's justice system was more spot on that what we get today.
You can't blame nationalsocialist germany for being a douche to it's people now can you ? Apart from the obvious and unnecessary "final" solution and gas showers for gays etc.. Natsoc germany provided jobs, cheap cars, cheap electronics, cheap utility items, high-level of healthcare, worker protection, anti-smoking campaigns etc..

I think that even without goebbel's high level of propaganda the people would have been more than happy to die for their leader.

Nikolai the russian guy wrote:

Segregation isn't individualism, it's discrimination. Also, we don't have a lot of blacks here in the Land of the Rus'.
Furthermore, individualism has nothing to do with "Me, me, me" thinking.

Segregation is a result from Invididualism and the neolib trumpeted consumerism.Unless you promote the "we" spirit there will always be those who will not be treated equally for their difference.As for blacks in Russian, In a way it's good that you don't have, makes it much easier to achieve stability.

That's self-centeredism which, admittedly, can fester and breed easily in an individualist society, but only if is encouraged in childhood by parents, teachers, media, and the government, so it isn't a unavoidable consequence of individualism so much as it is a completely avoidable regression caused by coddling and participation trophies.

So ? Good luck trying to get rid of it in a Invididualistic society.When you get the Idea that your child is somehow unique and different than others, it's more than obvious that the child will hear/experience it too.I don't say that parents shouldn't be proud of their children or to not encourage them to grow on their special traits but rather to make it clear to the child that he's not the only one with a caring family and that he's not no more unique than the others.

Also, Allocentrism is a collectivistic personality attribute whereby people center their attention and actions on other people rather than themselves.[1][2] It is a psychological dimension which corresponds to the general cultural dimension of collectivism

While in turn Allocentrism is contrasted with idiocentrism, the psychological manifestation of individualism

Idiocentric people tend to focus more on their own goals and needs rather than in-group ones.

And this exactly is a possible problem for society.When you have an Idiocentric way of life, your own goals and your own benefit can be at crossroads with that of the wider society.

Nikolai the russian guy wrote:

Mmmm, I'm gonna disagree with you on that. The USSR lasted so long because it was built for brutality, though Lenin himself didn't realize it at the time. Stalin, however, did realize it, and so he was the perfect leader for the Soviet Union. He was cruel, psychotic, and oppressive beyond all imagination, and this is what the USSR needed to survive. Pure collectivism in such a large expanse of territory is impossible to maintain for the same reason that anarchism or communism in such a large expanse of territory is impossible to maintain: No matter how hard you try to force people to work together, unless they have a heart of gold or know them personally, odds are they won't want to unless they absolutely have to.
In a small town where everyone knows each other, they'll gladly stop and help out a neighbor, but in a big city you may very well be on your own. It's a mixture of selfishness and distrust inherit in human society since the dawn of man. Not everyone is going to help each other, and while it should be encouraged, it can't be enforced.
Another reason the USSR lasted so long is it managed to live off vast resources, several puppet governments, and the spoils of one of the greatest wars in all history, not because society worked together.
Even still, the USSR was doomed to fail from the start.

Sure, I know.
TBH I just thought that it was more relevant to only mention collectivism, when the topic was about Invididualism.

In a small town where everyone knows each other, they'll gladly stop and help out a neighbor, but in a big city you may very well be on your own. It's a mixture of selfishness and distrust inherit in human society since the dawn of man. Not everyone is going to help each other, and while it should be encouraged, it can't be enforced.Pure collectivism encourages people to rely on others for assistance rather than themselves, and pure individualism encourages people to rely on themselves for assistance rather than other people. Neither of these are good for society, and while people should absolutely be encouraged to help out their neighbor, the neighbor should likewise be encouraged to be able to act on his own as well. Help should be appreciated, but not necessary.

Unfortunately, yes.Luckily, we can however alter society and yes, enforce helping.
If you don't think enforcing will cut it then there's the alternative to get rid of the elements who disrupt what we're trying to build.Better or not ? I dunno.

*ahem* I think I DID say that "to help get back on feet" or something like that.
There's nothing wrong with self-motivation, while a total nanny state is a forgeit for it.likewise, the law of the jungle is no better than a nanny state.

If your neighbours house burns down, you'll provide housing for him until he can find a permanent place to stay, if there are no alternatives.
(remote areas for example)

Nikolai the russian guy wrote:

No, extroverts are known to be more fun and happy in strong groups. Not everyone is an extrovert though.
Bickering of taste in clothing, food, TV shows, etc. is all stupidly pointless and has nothing to do with individualism and more to do with just plain being a jackass who can't understand not everybody shares the same taste as him..

Even the most shyest of persons can enjoy himself when playing football with a good team spirit..

Nikolai the russian guy wrote:

When discourage dissent, you encourage oppression. A population bred not to object will allow itself to plowed over by bullies out of sheer fear of being punished. This is exactly how North Korea works.
Power changes hands in all government forms, and can even change minds. Good leaders can become psychopaths over night, and when you tell the people enjoying margaritas on a sunny beach not to object to any authority, they won't object at all, even when said authority is shooting anybody who asks questions.
A government must earn it's peoples' obedience, not enforce it.

Clearly you haven't read my older posts.

Fascism recognizes the Importance of criticism.However, it ought to be done trough official means and trough the government.Any Internet back door slander is unacceptable as it just creates cracks in time.

Nikolai the russian guy wrote:

Yes, I believe there were many Nazi officials who believed that Hitler was a malevolent ruler who must be stopped. It didn't work out too well for them last I checked.
There is no perfect government, and no matter how good you may think your failsafe is, it's never enough. The Constitution of the Turkish Republic allows the Turkish Military to overthrow the government if it grows increasingly Islamist, and yet, here we are with an increasingly Islamist Turkish government, a failed coup that was likely a false-flag by said government, and an entire armed forces loyal to the word of one man and one man alone.

Belief is not worth the knowledge.Any person with anti-Hitler sentiments belonged to a silent minority in natsoc Germany.
Natsoc germany anyways is not a good example as it lacked any proper ways to remove Hitler from power.

Constitution is not always enough.Turkey is a good reason why there needs to be a tribunal of ordinary, well legally educated citizens who can deliver swift justice and arrest troublemakers on the spot.As they have knowledge of the lex they will be held accountable accordingly.

In this case, the Turkish could have legally started an uprising against a state that toils under elements not wanted by the Turkish.

Nikolai the russian guy wrote:

I'm saying it shouldn't be purged, because it would only lead to a nation full of a sheep, and a nation full of sheep can't defend itself when the shepherd gets drunk and mistakes one of the woolly mammal for an attractive and slutty woman.
Except it doesn't do that at all. Individualism promotes self-reliance so that the support of the state and society isn't required. This in turn prevents total reliance on the state, which leads to laziness and a career in welfare. A good deal of self-reliance is necessary for the survival of society, the government can't always be there to bail society out and people need to learn this.
Furthermore, I think that if the state supports the people (to an extent) instead of just telling them what to do, then the people will in turn support the state.

When you promote self-reliance over community power and lessen the role of the state you effectively become less of a Fascist.Still, you have to remember that Fascism does also value self-reliance, any state will value self reliance as it's more beneficial to the State.

Third position in neofascist movements (such as us) in economical terms, follows a path beyond left and right.

Capitalism is better than socialism or communism b|c it's effective but in the end just as corrosive.Capitalism lacks the morality of socialism (welfare state) and statism that comes with it.

So what we do is we take self-motivation and a certain amount of private ownership from the right and fuse it with the concept of welfare state and the providing of basic needs.We apply this to Autarky and promote class harmony trough corporatism.

Fascist Italy economically speaking was more of a "authoritarian capitalism" than anything beyond the spectrum.

Furthermore, I think that if the state supports the people (to an extent) instead of just telling them what to do, then the people will in turn support the state.

That's one possibility yes.
The state doesn't exist for the people but rather exists from the people.The state is the creation of our collectivist thought process.The created will always look out for it's creator.

Nikolai the russian guy wrote:

I will say though, even though I disagree with a lot of what you guys say and think, it's nice being able to actually discuss with people of differing viewpoints with people on this site for once without it turning into a cancerfest like on NSG.

Mutual respect is the key.
Mind you, I wasn't always a fascist.

This is also very beneficial to us in the long run.

With the poll of Comrade-Minister of Improvement :Neu tyrol in mind, I have followed it's advice and decided to stick with the new anthem for the time being.

mob rule in action

3 positive and 1 semi positive votes against two negative votes, not inclduing that one neutral vote.

Following the collapse of our comrade region The Fascist Order due to the treacherous action of a former leader, Fifth Empire armed forces were instrumental in acting and assisting the TFO in securing the region from the living dead of the Leftard/Libtard bandwagon.

Now protected, TFO has re-established itself in The Fascist State.

Those interested in joining our illustrious paramilitary forces should contact Atsuria and take the time to check out Red Guards for a list of recent conquests.

Neu tyrol wrote:

Comrade-Autarch Brekekk has departed us for the Graveyard, for whatever reason. Stay calm, this will all be sorted out.

He retired

press F to pay respects

F

Sorry for being so quiet, but figured I might as well say this. I enjoyed my time here. But the thing is, I'm really not a political person myself. As you can probably tell by... my nation, I don't really take politics seriously. I soon learned NationStates was really not the type of the place I wanted to be in. It was great being with you guys, but I guess this is goodbye.

¤¤ MAP UPDATE ¤¤ (a bigger update for once)

-Removed Haritopia
-Removed Brekekk
-Added the capital of Neu tyrol "Neu Innsbruck
-Added the capital of P0rtvgal "Porto Invictus"
-Added extra areas to Neu tyrol in the north to fix the unrealistic heart shape caused by Brekekk's removal.

ill do it when im alittle more free