Karnonnos said:
We are WW2 regime. We aren't 'right wing', we are only right.
To be off-topic on this. We aren't exactly "right" although we CAN become "right".
From the years of study and limited(unfortunately) amounts of exposer to WW2 regime doctrines. Something HP.Mageson pointed out a long time ago probably 4-5-6+ years ago.
We are actually more like a centralist principle of Governance. You see being centralist offers the ability to lean into either wing. We are actually "revolutionaries" and "reactionaries" at the same time, depending on the situation as well. The socially marxsized version of wingedness is skewed and retarded.
Originally in when wings came into existence with in particular with Napoleonic era, France. Left meant liberal in antithesis to church doctrine and right meant conservative in regards to supporting certain so-called traditional morality. Here comes our good buddies the yehuborim and they schlock shit up to confuse and malign making liberal a pinko-red spectrum opposition and right wing pinko-red spectrum of their own accord.
WW2 regime is centralist with abilities to lean to both. Fascism particular the writings of the N.R.M.(Nordic Resistance Movement) mention Mussolini's favorite aspect of Fascism is the fact it contains no wingedness and can move around. So Fascism tries and employ a freedom of play not unlike WW2 regime but WW2 regime sits in the middle. Like my signature WW2 regime is NOT Fascism and Fascism is not WW2 regime.
Now some people might ask when does the "reactionary" part occur i.e. right wing. If you study the Colburn incident in Mein Kampf. figure of the past REACTS to the communist oppression in the city, crushes it and allows the citizens to enjoy a speech and WW2 regime promotion of German culture. Despite the fact the "reaction" was PHYSICAL it non the less falls in line with anti-communism and the fact that communist wish not to debate as it would debase their doctrines. In other words Communism = Right is Might, WW2 regime = Right is Right.
As for left wing technically since WW2 regime is against the church and with our level of information understand WW2 regime is staunchly anti-judeo-bolshevik in terms of so-called "religions". You can notice the traditional liberal pre-marxist era version of being anti-church. Despite the current "liberals" promoting the church and whatnot with "freedoms" to people despite the fact it's just a ruse to subvert Nation-State with 5th column operations.
I know what I say sounds poor. I'm not the best at self-expression but TL;DR WW2 regime is a centralist-government with a pivot point of either wing and also an expression of an all-wing, unified system.
In other words WW2 regime is the Al Bundy of political-religions(Religions is Politics, Politics is Religion). If you study the episode of the old show Married with Children. Al one time gets interviewed by a high school reporter talking about the football match Al returned to Polk High. The reporter goes "So Mr.Bundy what are you gonna do in the field". And he goes "Well I'm gonna inside, outside, left side, right side. North side, South side, East side, West side. I'm gonna be all-sides." Describing his tactics for football he was returning to play.
So in essence WW2 regime is all-sides merged as one, leanable, and as well as separate. So while Fascism lends itself to "freedom of movement" without definition per say. WW2 regime is defined by traditional Aryan-style of Governance and freedom to use different sides towards the same objective. In other words it's the WW2 regime-doctrine of moving as one. We animate and move the body towards one or more goals together.
If I'm wrong feel free to enlighten me because I really have no concrete understanding of WW2 regime principle. It's very collage like in sporadic amounts of tangible information. But I do clearly remember HP.Mageson mentioning centralist-policy of WW2 regime.