# Hitler and the right



## Ravi

Doubt that Hitler had the support of the conservative right wing?

1. "Hitler found his greatest support in *traditionally conservative small towns. He campaigned with attacks on Marxism, making it clear that by Marxism he meant the Social Democrats. Hitler appealed to morality, attacking free love and what he inferred was the immorality of Berlin and some other major cities. He promised to stamp out big city corruption. He called for a spiritual revolution, for a "positive Christianity" and a spirit of national pride. Hitler repeatedly called for national renewal. *He and his National Socialists benefited from the recent upheaval in the Soviet Union and the rise in fear and disgust for Bolshevism. His party's posters read:

*    If you want your country to go Bolshevik, vote Communist. If you want to remain free Germans, vote for the National Socialists.*"

Hitler and Germany: 1928 to 1935

2. Neville Chamberlain, appeaser in chief, after the Sudetenland was handed over to Hitler, "But the Conservative leader has always expressed his desire to find a *peaceful solution to the Fuehrer's wish to create a new - and enlarged - German homeland in Europe.*"

BBC ON THIS DAY | 30 | 1938: 'Peace for our time' - Chamberlain

3. The French right admired Hitler, "When Socialists and Communists formed a Popular front Government in 1936 there were many French conservatives who boldly announced that *Hitler was preferrable to the leadership of the French socialist Leon Blum*."

Road to War

4. "right-to-work" anti-labor conservatives were also pro-Hitler. "There were a mulitude of other racists jumping on the Fascist bandwagon. Joseph P. Kamp printed over two million copies of his anti-labor pamphlet, "Join the C.I.O. and Help Build a Soviet America" which he advertised with the Ku Klux Klan. *Millionaire John Kirby in Houston began publishing the anti-black, anti-labor Christian American in support of "right to work" legislation"*

Support for Hitler (or Fascism) in the United States | Radical Reference

5. Foreshadowing Republican views on the Clinton being concerned about bin laden as a distraction from Lewinsky, "The former president, Herbert Hoover, had become the Republican Party's chief spokesman in foreign affairs, and when Germany seized Moravia and Bohemia, *Hoover declared that no clear and present danger existed* and that Britain, France and others in Europe would be able to defend themselves should there be war. Hoover spoke of Roosevelt's "dangerous adventures" and argued that Roosevelt was trying to divert people's attention from his failure to end the depression"

The United States, War Preparation, China, and Jewish Immigration: 1938-39


----------



## Oddball




----------



## Charles_Main

Partisan Hackery Alert. Engage at your own risk. The Author of this Thread has no interest in Real Debate. 

She is 100% sure of her Premise and is simply looking for a chance to call you some names.


----------



## Remodeling Maidiac




----------



## BDBoop

And Squallball, right on time.


----------



## syrenn

Sorry ravi...if anyone gives me the hitler feeling.... its obama.


----------



## hjmick

Christ, you Godwined your own thread... IN THE TITLE!


----------



## The T

And what did HITLER ultimately end up doing just as the Soviets did?

USE the useful idiots until they got ultimate power, and outlawed EVERYTHING that could be perceived as a threat to thier power and control.

Use liberty...then cut it off at the neck.

BAD analogy.

TRY AGAIN


----------



## BDBoop

No, it's a great analogy.


----------



## Oddball

hjmick said:


> Christ, you Godwined your own thread... IN THE TITLE!


----------



## Buford

Hitler was a reich winger.


----------



## Buford

How about Hitler and his Mosque of Agony.  Not too many know about that.


----------



## Ravi

Charles_Main said:


> Partisan Hackery Alert. Engage at your own risk. The Author of this Thread has no interest in Real Debate.
> 
> She is 100% sure of her Premise and is simply looking for a chance to call you some names.



In other words, you have no rebuttal.

History has shown the truth....the conservatives at the time either welcomed Hitler or wanted to appease him.


----------



## BDBoop

Ravi said:


> Charles_Main said:
> 
> 
> 
> Partisan Hackery Alert. Engage at your own risk. The Author of this Thread has no interest in Real Debate.
> 
> She is 100% sure of her Premise and is simply looking for a chance to call you some names.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, you have no rebuttal.
> 
> History has shown the truth....the conservatives at the time either welcomed Hitler or wanted to appease him.
Click to expand...


In other words - yes.


----------



## Ravi

You have to wonder how history would have changed if "conservatives" were in charge of the US back then.

It is also interesting to note that the french resistance was made up of Catholics, communists, liberals, and Jews while the Vichy was made up of conservatives.


----------



## blackhawk

The person who came the closest in this country to doing anything remotely Hitler like was FDR when he set up the internment camps for Japanese Americans.


----------



## hjmick

blackhawk said:


> The person who came the closest in this country to doing anything remotely Hitler like was FDR when he set up the internment camps for Japanese Americans.



And Italians and Germans...


----------



## Si modo

Some folks can never grasp that there is fiscal conservatism and there is social conservatism. And, that a Classical Liberals are not one of the two.


----------



## JakeStarkey

blackhawk said:


> The person who came the closest in this country to doing anything remotely Hitler like was FDR when he set up the internment camps for Japanese Americans.



Summary executions?  Bread and water?  Hangings in the compound?  Shooting rifles for sport?  Crematoria?  Bone crushing machines?  And so forth?

No honest historian from con to lib would piss on you to put out a fire.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Si modo said:


> Some folks can never grasp that there is fiscal conservatism and there is social conservatism. And, that a Classical Liberals are not one of the two.



And you are not a CL.


----------



## Si modo

JakeStarkey said:


> Si modo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some folks can never grasp that there is fiscal conservatism and there is social conservatism. And, that a Classical Liberals are not one of the two.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And you are not a CL.
Click to expand...

Actually, I am.

"Classical liberalism is a political ideology that advocates limited government, constitutionalism, rule of law, due process, individual liberties including freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and free markets."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism


----------



## JakeStarkey

You and the wikipedia definition are frauds.

Come on, give us something real then show us how you match it.


----------



## Si modo

JakeStarkey said:


> You and the wikipedia definition are frauds.
> 
> Come on, give us something real then show us how you match it.


Sorry, you're not making much sense.

So, you'll have to clarify what your issue is.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Si modo said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> You and the wikipedia definition are frauds.
> 
> Come on, give us something real then show us how you match it.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, you're not making much sense.
> 
> So, you'll have to clarify what your issue is.
Click to expand...


Come on, Si Modo, wikipedia is not accepted by competent professionals or business folks or academics because folks like you or I can edit it.

For heaven's sake, I bet if you look on wikipedia you will have folks saying that Washington was libertarians.

So (1) give us a competent source that defines classical liberalism and (2) how you match it.


----------



## Si modo

JakeStarkey said:


> Si modo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> You and the wikipedia definition are frauds.
> 
> Come on, give us something real then show us how you match it.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, you're not making much sense.
> 
> So, you'll have to clarify what your issue is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Come on, Si Modo, wikipedia is not accepted by competent professionals or business folks or academics because folks like you or I can edit it.
> 
> For heaven's sake, I bet if you look on wikipedia you will have folks saying that Washington was libertarians.
> 
> So (1) give us a competent source that defines classical liberalism and (2) how you match it.
Click to expand...

Okie doke.

Central to the classical liberalism of the nineteenth century is a commitment to the liberty of individual citizens.  Freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of assembly were core commitments of classical liberalism, as was the underlying conception of the proper role of just government as the protection of liberties of individual citizens.​
Reference [1] in the wiki piece.  Modern Political Philosophy (1999,) Richard Hudelson, p. 37-38


----------



## koshergrl

"
"Living With Hitler" attempts to answer these questions by looking at the experiences of German liberals -- namely the leaders of Germany's liberal Democratic Party -- during the twelve years of Hitler's rule.
It shows, first, that German liberals shared many beliefs with their Nazi rivals, and therefore favored some of Hitler's policies even as they opposed National Socialism in other respects. Like the Nazis, the liberals detested Communism and the Versailles Treaty, advocated a right to national self-determination for all ethnic Germans, and possessed nearly unbounded optimism toward science and technology. They supported the Third Reich's Keynesian response to the Great Depression, a moderately interventionist welfare state, and corporatist arrangement between capital and labor. In terms of women's issues, health care, and family policy, there were more than passing affinities between liberal and Nazi programs as well."

Liberals under Nazism: lessons for today? - Short Stack


----------



## blackhawk

JakeStarkey said:


> blackhawk said:
> 
> 
> 
> The person who came the closest in this country to doing anything remotely Hitler like was FDR when he set up the internment camps for Japanese Americans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Summary executions?  Bread and water?  Hangings in the compound?  Shooting rifles for sport?  Crematoria?  Bone crushing machines?  And so forth?
> 
> No honest historian from con to lib would piss on you to put out a fire.
Click to expand...

You are familiar with the meaning of the word remotely are you not?


----------



## edthecynic

syrenn said:


> Sorry ravi...if anyone gives me the hitler feeling.... its obama.


Nah, MessiahRushie and Hitler were twin sons of different mothers. 

The leader of genius must have the ability to make different opponents appear as if they belonged to one category. 
Adolf Hitler 

May 12, 2008
RUSH:  I maintain that moderates and independents are Democrats.  Because, by definition, if someone or some organization is not conservative, it's by definition going to be liberal, not moderate, not independent, it's going to be liberal


----------



## Trajan

Ravi said:


> Doubt that Hitler had the support of the conservative right wing?
> 
> 1. "Hitler found his greatest support in *traditionally conservative small towns. He campaigned with attacks on Marxism, making it clear that by Marxism he meant the Social Democrats. Hitler appealed to morality, attacking free love and what he inferred was the immorality of Berlin and some other major cities. He promised to stamp out big city corruption. He called for a spiritual revolution, for a "positive Christianity" and a spirit of national pride. Hitler repeatedly called for national renewal. *He and his National Socialists benefited from the recent upheaval in the Soviet Union and the rise in fear and disgust for Bolshevism. His party's posters read:
> 
> *    If you want your country to go Bolshevik, vote Communist. If you want to remain free Germans, vote for the National Socialists.*"
> 
> Hitler and Germany: 1928 to 1935
> 
> 2. Neville Chamberlain, appeaser in chief, after the Sudetenland was handed over to Hitler, "But the Conservative leader has always expressed his desire to find a *peaceful solution to the Fuehrer's wish to create a new - and enlarged - German homeland in Europe.*"
> 
> BBC ON THIS DAY | 30 | 1938: 'Peace for our time' - Chamberlain
> 
> 3. The French right admired Hitler, "When Socialists and Communists formed a Popular front Government in 1936 there were many French conservatives who boldly announced that *Hitler was preferrable to the leadership of the French socialist Leon Blum*."
> 
> Road to War
> 
> 4. "right-to-work" anti-labor conservatives were also pro-Hitler. "There were a mulitude of other racists jumping on the Fascist bandwagon. Joseph P. Kamp printed over two million copies of his anti-labor pamphlet, "Join the C.I.O. and Help Build a Soviet America" which he advertised with the Ku Klux Klan. *Millionaire John Kirby in Houston began publishing the anti-black, anti-labor Christian American in support of "right to work" legislation"*
> 
> Support for Hitler (or Fascism) in the United States | Radical Reference
> 
> 5. Foreshadowing Republican views on the Clinton being concerned about bin laden as a distraction from Lewinsky, "The former president, Herbert Hoover, had become the Republican Party's chief spokesman in foreign affairs, and when Germany seized Moravia and Bohemia, *Hoover declared that no clear and present danger existed* and that Britain, France and others in Europe would be able to defend themselves should there be war. Hoover spoke of Roosevelt's "dangerous adventures" and argued that Roosevelt was trying to divert people's attention from his failure to end the depression"
> 
> The United States, War Preparation, China, and Jewish Immigration: 1938-39



you forgot Preston Bush.....


----------



## edthecynic

Trajan said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doubt that Hitler had the support of the conservative right wing?
> 
> 1. "Hitler found his greatest support in *traditionally conservative small towns. He campaigned with attacks on Marxism, making it clear that by Marxism he meant the Social Democrats. Hitler appealed to morality, attacking free love and what he inferred was the immorality of Berlin and some other major cities. He promised to stamp out big city corruption. He called for a spiritual revolution, for a "positive Christianity" and a spirit of national pride. Hitler repeatedly called for national renewal. *He and his National Socialists benefited from the recent upheaval in the Soviet Union and the rise in fear and disgust for Bolshevism. His party's posters read:
> 
> *    If you want your country to go Bolshevik, vote Communist. If you want to remain free Germans, vote for the National Socialists.*"
> 
> Hitler and Germany: 1928 to 1935
> 
> 2. Neville Chamberlain, appeaser in chief, after the Sudetenland was handed over to Hitler, "But the Conservative leader has always expressed his desire to find a *peaceful solution to the Fuehrer's wish to create a new - and enlarged - German homeland in Europe.*"
> 
> BBC ON THIS DAY | 30 | 1938: 'Peace for our time' - Chamberlain
> 
> 3. The French right admired Hitler, "When Socialists and Communists formed a Popular front Government in 1936 there were many French conservatives who boldly announced that *Hitler was preferrable to the leadership of the French socialist Leon Blum*."
> 
> Road to War
> 
> 4. "right-to-work" anti-labor conservatives were also pro-Hitler. "There were a mulitude of other racists jumping on the Fascist bandwagon. Joseph P. Kamp printed over two million copies of his anti-labor pamphlet, "Join the C.I.O. and Help Build a Soviet America" which he advertised with the Ku Klux Klan. *Millionaire John Kirby in Houston began publishing the anti-black, anti-labor Christian American in support of "right to work" legislation"*
> 
> Support for Hitler (or Fascism) in the United States | Radical Reference
> 
> 5. Foreshadowing Republican views on the Clinton being concerned about bin laden as a distraction from Lewinsky, "The former president, Herbert Hoover, had become the Republican Party's chief spokesman in foreign affairs, and when Germany seized Moravia and Bohemia, *Hoover declared that no clear and present danger existed* and that Britain, France and others in Europe would be able to defend themselves should there be war. Hoover spoke of Roosevelt's "dangerous adventures" and argued that Roosevelt was trying to divert people's attention from his failure to end the depression"
> 
> The United States, War Preparation, China, and Jewish Immigration: 1938-39
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you forgot Preston Bush.....
Click to expand...

It's Prescott Bush.


----------



## Peach

Grampa Murked U said:


>



No historical comparison. I will try not write a long essay, here a a few important points :

1. Germany had, in the past chosen dictatorial leaders, i.e. Bismark, Note, "Blood & Iron".

2. Geography & topography; the Great Depression left a much higher percentage of Germans living without adequate food than Americans that suffered. Though living conditions were poor in the US, the number of farms, coastal lands and gardens kept many of those in the US fed, perhaps on a less than enjoyable diet, but still FED. Goods and services could be traded for food also. Now the work of FDR (hated by the right) comes in. There were massive relief efforts, FDR helped make the feel guilty. Some opposed to him did likewise, aiding their countrymen in order to compete.

3. Lebensraum: not a concept conceived in the 1920's or even in the 20th century, some Germans had long held hopes of Empire, and the desire for Anschluss began long before Hitler also.

3. Hindenburg was weak, the opposition splintered to a degree the US has yet to experience.

Conclusion, comparing the US to post WWI, pre WWII Germany, is ridiculous.


----------



## Dr.House

JakeStarkey said:


> Si modo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> You and the wikipedia definition are frauds.
> 
> Come on, give us something real then show us how you match it.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, you're not making much sense.
> 
> So, you'll have to clarify what your issue is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Come on, Si Modo, wikipedia is not accepted by competent professionals or business folks or academics because folks like you or I can edit it.
Click to expand...


So why would you source it previously in other threads?


----------



## del

Dr.House said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Si modo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, you're not making much sense.
> 
> So, you'll have to clarify what your issue is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Come on, Si Modo, wikipedia is not accepted by competent professionals or business folks or academics because folks like you or I can edit it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So why would you source it previously in other threads?
Click to expand...


because he's an asshat


----------



## Political Junky

edthecynic said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doubt that Hitler had the support of the conservative right wing?
> 
> 1. "Hitler found his greatest support in *traditionally conservative small towns. He campaigned with attacks on Marxism, making it clear that by Marxism he meant the Social Democrats. Hitler appealed to morality, attacking free love and what he inferred was the immorality of Berlin and some other major cities. He promised to stamp out big city corruption. He called for a spiritual revolution, for a "positive Christianity" and a spirit of national pride. Hitler repeatedly called for national renewal. *He and his National Socialists benefited from the recent upheaval in the Soviet Union and the rise in fear and disgust for Bolshevism. His party's posters read:
> 
> *    If you want your country to go Bolshevik, vote Communist. If you want to remain free Germans, vote for the National Socialists.*"
> 
> Hitler and Germany: 1928 to 1935
> 
> 2. Neville Chamberlain, appeaser in chief, after the Sudetenland was handed over to Hitler, "But the Conservative leader has always expressed his desire to find a *peaceful solution to the Fuehrer's wish to create a new - and enlarged - German homeland in Europe.*"
> 
> BBC ON THIS DAY | 30 | 1938: 'Peace for our time' - Chamberlain
> 
> 3. The French right admired Hitler, "When Socialists and Communists formed a Popular front Government in 1936 there were many French conservatives who boldly announced that *Hitler was preferrable to the leadership of the French socialist Leon Blum*."
> 
> Road to War
> 
> 4. "right-to-work" anti-labor conservatives were also pro-Hitler. "There were a mulitude of other racists jumping on the Fascist bandwagon. Joseph P. Kamp printed over two million copies of his anti-labor pamphlet, "Join the C.I.O. and Help Build a Soviet America" which he advertised with the Ku Klux Klan. *Millionaire John Kirby in Houston began publishing the anti-black, anti-labor Christian American in support of "right to work" legislation"*
> 
> Support for Hitler (or Fascism) in the United States | Radical Reference
> 
> 5. Foreshadowing Republican views on the Clinton being concerned about bin laden as a distraction from Lewinsky, "The former president, Herbert Hoover, had become the Republican Party's chief spokesman in foreign affairs, and when Germany seized Moravia and Bohemia, *Hoover declared that no clear and present danger existed* and that Britain, France and others in Europe would be able to defend themselves should there be war. Hoover spoke of Roosevelt's "dangerous adventures" and argued that Roosevelt was trying to divert people's attention from his failure to end the depression"
> 
> The United States, War Preparation, China, and Jewish Immigration: 1938-39
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you forgot Preston Bush.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's Prescott Bush.
Click to expand...

Yes, he got some heavy fines for helping Hitler, didn't he?


----------



## Dr.House

del said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Come on, Si Modo, wikipedia is not accepted by competent professionals or business folks or academics because folks like you or I can edit it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So why would you source it previously in other threads?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> because he's an asshat
Click to expand...


Well, yeah....

but......








Never mind...   Asshat works....


----------



## Trajan

edthecynic said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doubt that Hitler had the support of the conservative right wing?
> 
> 1. "Hitler found his greatest support in *traditionally conservative small towns. He campaigned with attacks on Marxism, making it clear that by Marxism he meant the Social Democrats. Hitler appealed to morality, attacking free love and what he inferred was the immorality of Berlin and some other major cities. He promised to stamp out big city corruption. He called for a spiritual revolution, for a "positive Christianity" and a spirit of national pride. Hitler repeatedly called for national renewal. *He and his National Socialists benefited from the recent upheaval in the Soviet Union and the rise in fear and disgust for Bolshevism. His party's posters read:
> 
> *    If you want your country to go Bolshevik, vote Communist. If you want to remain free Germans, vote for the National Socialists.*"
> 
> Hitler and Germany: 1928 to 1935
> 
> 2. Neville Chamberlain, appeaser in chief, after the Sudetenland was handed over to Hitler, "But the Conservative leader has always expressed his desire to find a *peaceful solution to the Fuehrer's wish to create a new - and enlarged - German homeland in Europe.*"
> 
> BBC ON THIS DAY | 30 | 1938: 'Peace for our time' - Chamberlain
> 
> 3. The French right admired Hitler, "When Socialists and Communists formed a Popular front Government in 1936 there were many French conservatives who boldly announced that *Hitler was preferrable to the leadership of the French socialist Leon Blum*."
> 
> Road to War
> 
> 4. "right-to-work" anti-labor conservatives were also pro-Hitler. "There were a mulitude of other racists jumping on the Fascist bandwagon. Joseph P. Kamp printed over two million copies of his anti-labor pamphlet, "Join the C.I.O. and Help Build a Soviet America" which he advertised with the Ku Klux Klan. *Millionaire John Kirby in Houston began publishing the anti-black, anti-labor Christian American in support of "right to work" legislation"*
> 
> Support for Hitler (or Fascism) in the United States | Radical Reference
> 
> 5. Foreshadowing Republican views on the Clinton being concerned about bin laden as a distraction from Lewinsky, "The former president, Herbert Hoover, had become the Republican Party's chief spokesman in foreign affairs, and when Germany seized Moravia and Bohemia, *Hoover declared that no clear and present danger existed* and that Britain, France and others in Europe would be able to defend themselves should there be war. Hoover spoke of Roosevelt's "dangerous adventures" and argued that Roosevelt was trying to divert people's attention from his failure to end the depression"
> 
> The United States, War Preparation, China, and Jewish Immigration: 1938-39
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you forgot Preston Bush.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's Prescott Bush.
Click to expand...


I knew some moonbat would look it up.....and Joe Kennedy? or is he a stretch for you?


----------



## Si modo

Pol Pot and the left.

Jebus, Ravs.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

Ravi said:


> Doubt that Hitler had the support of the conservative right wing?
> 
> 1. "Hitler found his greatest support in *traditionally conservative small towns. He campaigned with attacks on Marxism, making it clear that by Marxism he meant the Social Democrats. Hitler appealed to morality, attacking free love and what he inferred was the immorality of Berlin and some other major cities. He promised to stamp out big city corruption. He called for a spiritual revolution, for a "positive Christianity" and a spirit of national pride. Hitler repeatedly called for national renewal. *He and his National Socialists benefited from the recent upheaval in the Soviet Union and the rise in fear and disgust for Bolshevism. His party's posters read:
> 
> *    If you want your country to go Bolshevik, vote Communist. If you want to remain free Germans, vote for the National Socialists.*"
> 
> Hitler and Germany: 1928 to 1935
> 
> 2. Neville Chamberlain, appeaser in chief, after the Sudetenland was handed over to Hitler, "But the Conservative leader has always expressed his desire to find a *peaceful solution to the Fuehrer's wish to create a new - and enlarged - German homeland in Europe.*"
> 
> BBC ON THIS DAY | 30 | 1938: 'Peace for our time' - Chamberlain
> 
> 3. The French right admired Hitler, "When Socialists and Communists formed a Popular front Government in 1936 there were many French conservatives who boldly announced that *Hitler was preferrable to the leadership of the French socialist Leon Blum*."
> 
> Road to War
> 
> 4. "right-to-work" anti-labor conservatives were also pro-Hitler. "There were a mulitude of other racists jumping on the Fascist bandwagon. Joseph P. Kamp printed over two million copies of his anti-labor pamphlet, "Join the C.I.O. and Help Build a Soviet America" which he advertised with the Ku Klux Klan. *Millionaire John Kirby in Houston began publishing the anti-black, anti-labor Christian American in support of "right to work" legislation"*
> 
> Support for Hitler (or Fascism) in the United States | Radical Reference
> 
> 5. Foreshadowing Republican views on the Clinton being concerned about bin laden as a distraction from Lewinsky, "The former president, Herbert Hoover, had become the Republican Party's chief spokesman in foreign affairs, and when Germany seized Moravia and Bohemia, *Hoover declared that no clear and present danger existed* and that Britain, France and others in Europe would be able to defend themselves should there be war. Hoover spoke of Roosevelt's "dangerous adventures" and argued that Roosevelt was trying to divert people's attention from his failure to end the depression"
> 
> The United States, War Preparation, China, and Jewish Immigration: 1938-39



This guy certainly sounds like a reliable source.



> In 1963 I entered U.C.L.A.  			as a junior, majoring in sociology. Upper division work in sociology I  found too  abstract. I shifted to the greater specificity of history  while remaining associated with the University of California at the U.C.
> With the little money that I had saved and an inheritance from the  sale of a modest piece of property between Los Angeles  and Palmdale I  continued traveling, to Europe again, Eastern Europe, across the Soviet  Union, to Japan and the South Seas. Always getting my job back when I  returned to Berkeley.
> I left Berkeley in 1973,  			and, to satisfy the insistence of my Ph.D. candidate wife, I graduated  			from California State University, East Bay -- at the age of forty-three  			-- with Dean's List honors and a B.A. in History. One of my professors  			tried to acquire  a scholarship for me from his Alma Mater, Stanford, but without    success, and I had to go back to earning a living.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

hjmick said:


> Christ, you Godwined your own thread... IN THE TITLE!



I knew someone would notice that. Congratulations on being the first.


----------



## Si modo

Quantum Windbag said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doubt that Hitler had the support of the conservative right wing?
> 
> 1. "Hitler found his greatest support in *traditionally conservative small towns. He campaigned with attacks on Marxism, making it clear that by Marxism he meant the Social Democrats. Hitler appealed to morality, attacking free love and what he inferred was the immorality of Berlin and some other major cities. He promised to stamp out big city corruption. He called for a spiritual revolution, for a "positive Christianity" and a spirit of national pride. Hitler repeatedly called for national renewal. *He and his National Socialists benefited from the recent upheaval in the Soviet Union and the rise in fear and disgust for Bolshevism. His party's posters read:
> 
> *    If you want your country to go Bolshevik, vote Communist. If you want to remain free Germans, vote for the National Socialists.*"
> 
> Hitler and Germany: 1928 to 1935
> 
> 2. Neville Chamberlain, appeaser in chief, after the Sudetenland was handed over to Hitler, "But the Conservative leader has always expressed his desire to find a *peaceful solution to the Fuehrer's wish to create a new - and enlarged - German homeland in Europe.*"
> 
> BBC ON THIS DAY | 30 | 1938: 'Peace for our time' - Chamberlain
> 
> 3. The French right admired Hitler, "When Socialists and Communists formed a Popular front Government in 1936 there were many French conservatives who boldly announced that *Hitler was preferrable to the leadership of the French socialist Leon Blum*."
> 
> Road to War
> 
> 4. "right-to-work" anti-labor conservatives were also pro-Hitler. "There were a mulitude of other racists jumping on the Fascist bandwagon. Joseph P. Kamp printed over two million copies of his anti-labor pamphlet, "Join the C.I.O. and Help Build a Soviet America" which he advertised with the Ku Klux Klan. *Millionaire John Kirby in Houston began publishing the anti-black, anti-labor Christian American in support of "right to work" legislation"*
> 
> Support for Hitler (or Fascism) in the United States | Radical Reference
> 
> 5. Foreshadowing Republican views on the Clinton being concerned about bin laden as a distraction from Lewinsky, "The former president, Herbert Hoover, had become the Republican Party's chief spokesman in foreign affairs, and when Germany seized Moravia and Bohemia, *Hoover declared that no clear and present danger existed* and that Britain, France and others in Europe would be able to defend themselves should there be war. Hoover spoke of Roosevelt's "dangerous adventures" and argued that Roosevelt was trying to divert people's attention from his failure to end the depression"
> 
> The United States, War Preparation, China, and Jewish Immigration: 1938-39
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This guy certainly sounds like a reliable source.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In 1963 I entered U.C.L.A.  			as a junior, majoring in sociology. Upper division work in sociology I  found too  abstract. I shifted to the greater specificity of history  while remaining associated with the University of California at the U.C.
> With the little money that I had saved and an inheritance from the  sale of a modest piece of property between Los Angeles  and Palmdale I  continued traveling, to Europe again, Eastern Europe, across the Soviet  Union, to Japan and the South Seas. Always getting my job back when I  returned to Berkeley.
> I left Berkeley in 1973,  			and, to satisfy the insistence of my Ph.D. candidate wife, I graduated  			from California State University, East Bay -- at the age of forty-three  			-- with Dean's List honors and a B.A. in History. One of my professors  			tried to acquire  a scholarship for me from his Alma Mater, Stanford, but without    success, and I had to go back to earning a living.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## Papageorgio

Hitler and his love for Progressives and eugenics, is well documented, President Wilson was a big supporter of eugenics and his racist attitude was well known. 

That said, Hitler used whatever he could to get power, he was a mix of various ideologies, whatever he could to advance his agenda. He used racism and fear to get his agenda pushed through. I look at both parties and their recent tactics and Hitler would approve of both parties tactics.


----------



## JakeStarkey

del said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Come on, Si Modo, wikipedia is not accepted by competent professionals or business folks or academics because folks like you or I can edit it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So why would you source it previously in other threads?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> because he's an asshat
Click to expand...


Says neg asshat himself 

Here, educate yourselves.  http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/liberalism/  Under 2.1 we read,

_Although classical liberals agree on the fundamental importance of private property to a free society, the classical liberal tradition itself refracts into a spectrum of views, from near-anarchist to those that attribute a significant role to the state in economic and social policy (on this spectrum, see Mack and Gaus, 2004). Towards the most extreme &#8216;libertarian&#8217; end of the classical liberal spectrum are views of justified states as legitimate monopolies that may with justice charge for their necessary rights-protection services: taxation is legitimate so long as it is necessary to protect liberty and property rights. As we go further &#8216;leftward&#8217; we encounter classical liberal views that allow taxation for (other) public goods and social infrastructure and, moving yet further &#8216;left&#8217;, some classical liberal views allow for a modest social minimum.(e.g., Hayek, 1976: 87). Most nineteenth century classical liberal economists endorsed a variety of state policies, encompassing not only the criminal law and enforcement of contracts, but the licensing of professionals, health, safety and fire regulations, banking regulations, commercial infrastructure (roads, harbors and canals) and often encouraged unionization (Gaus, 1983b). Although today classical liberalism is often associated with extreme forms of libertarianism, the classical liberal tradition was centrally concerned with bettering the lot of the working class. The aim, as Bentham put it, was to make the poor richer, not the rich poorer (Bentham, 1952 [1795]: vol. 1, 226n). Consequently, classical liberals reject the redistribution of wealth as a legitimate aim of government._


----------



## Quantum Windbag

JakeStarkey said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> So why would you source it previously in other threads?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> because he's an asshat
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Says neg asshat himself
> 
> Here, educate yourselves.  Liberalism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)  Under 2.1 we read,
> 
> _Although classical liberals agree on the fundamental importance of private property to a free society, the classical liberal tradition itself refracts into a spectrum of views, from near-anarchist to those that attribute a significant role to the state in economic and social policy (on this spectrum, see Mack and Gaus, 2004). Towards the most extreme libertarian end of the classical liberal spectrum are views of justified states as legitimate monopolies that may with justice charge for their necessary rights-protection services: taxation is legitimate so long as it is necessary to protect liberty and property rights. As we go further leftward we encounter classical liberal views that allow taxation for (other) public goods and social infrastructure and, moving yet further left, some classical liberal views allow for a modest social minimum.(e.g., Hayek, 1976: 87). Most nineteenth century classical liberal economists endorsed a variety of state policies, encompassing not only the criminal law and enforcement of contracts, but the licensing of professionals, health, safety and fire regulations, banking regulations, commercial infrastructure (roads, harbors and canals) and often encouraged unionization (Gaus, 1983b). Although today classical liberalism is often associated with extreme forms of libertarianism, the classical liberal tradition was centrally concerned with bettering the lot of the working class. The aim, as Bentham put it, was to make the poor richer, not the rich poorer (Bentham, 1952 [1795]: vol. 1, 226n). Consequently, classical liberals reject the redistribution of wealth as a legitimate aim of government._
> 
> Before you guys get all excited, read it out loud and slowly.
Click to expand...


Here is the source for the Wiki article Si posted.

Modern Political Philosophy - Richard Hudelson - Google Books


----------



## JakeStarkey

Hudelson is an interesting guy, a Marxist historian.

_Marxism and philosophy in the twentieth century: a defense of vulgar Marxism_

Richard Hudelson
0 Reviews
Praeger, Oct 1, 1990 - 251 pages
Useful to both students and scholars of the social sciences and humanities, this book provides a guide to fundamental issues in twentieth-century Marxist thought. Outlining the two distinct and incompatible critiques of "vulgar Marxism"-- Marxist-Leninism and humanistic Marxism--that gained prominence in the aftermath of World War I, this book presents both an historical overview of these two dominant traditions and a critical analysis of their philosophical roots. Challenging the viewpoints of Marxist thought which have prevailed in this century, Richard Hudelson, argues that the supposed philosophical breakthroughs claimed by both Marxist-Leninism and humanistic Marxism rest upon flawed reasoning. *With a careful critique of these prevailing views he presents his own view which while receptive to the social scientific work of current analytical Marxism, de-emphasizes the importance of philosophy in the study of Marxism. *Hudelson contends that developments in contemporary philosophy of science will allow for an appreciation of the "scientific" Marxism of the Second International without recourse to the philosophical theories of humanistic Marxism and Marxist-Leninism. Also, using some of the more recent developments in the philosophy of science, this book makes possible a fruitful exchange between analytical Marxism and Marxist-Leninism.

Marxism and philosophy in the twentieth century: a defense of vulgar Marxism - Richard Hudelson - Google Books


----------



## Dr.House

JakeStarkey said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> So why would you source it previously in other threads?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> because he's an asshat
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Says neg asshat himself
Click to expand...


He's right....  You are an asshat...

And you've sourced wikipedia in the past....

It's why you continue to be *Joke*Starkey....


----------



## del

JakeStarkey said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> So why would you source it previously in other threads?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> because he's an asshat
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Says neg asshat himself
> 
> Here, educate yourselves.  Liberalism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)  Under 2.1 we read,
> 
> _Although classical liberals agree on the fundamental importance of private property to a free society, the classical liberal tradition itself refracts into a spectrum of views, from near-anarchist to those that attribute a significant role to the state in economic and social policy (on this spectrum, see Mack and Gaus, 2004). Towards the most extreme libertarian end of the classical liberal spectrum are views of justified states as legitimate monopolies that may with justice charge for their necessary rights-protection services: taxation is legitimate so long as it is necessary to protect liberty and property rights. As we go further leftward we encounter classical liberal views that allow taxation for (other) public goods and social infrastructure and, moving yet further left, some classical liberal views allow for a modest social minimum.(e.g., Hayek, 1976: 87). Most nineteenth century classical liberal economists endorsed a variety of state policies, encompassing not only the criminal law and enforcement of contracts, but the licensing of professionals, health, safety and fire regulations, banking regulations, commercial infrastructure (roads, harbors and canals) and often encouraged unionization (Gaus, 1983b). Although today classical liberalism is often associated with extreme forms of libertarianism, the classical liberal tradition was centrally concerned with bettering the lot of the working class. The aim, as Bentham put it, was to make the poor richer, not the rich poorer (Bentham, 1952 [1795]: vol. 1, 226n). Consequently, classical liberals reject the redistribution of wealth as a legitimate aim of government._
Click to expand...


you've always been an asshat, jake, from the moment you got here.

that's the facts, jack

boom shaka laka laka etc


----------



## Neotrotsky

"We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, 
with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility 
and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions."


----------



## Quantum Windbag

Hitler was so far right he sounded like Obama.



> 11. The abolition of incomes unearned by work.
> 
> 13. We demand the nationalization of all businesses which have been formed into corporations (trusts).
> 14. We demand profit-sharing in large industrial enterprises.
> 15. We demand the extensive development of insurance for old age.
> 16.  We demand the creation and maintenance of a healthy middle class, the immediate communalizing of big department stores, and their lease at a  cheap rate to small traders, and that the utmost consideration shall be shown to all small traders in the placing of State and municiple orders.
> 
> 
> 
> 25. To put the whole of this programme into effect, we demand the creation of a strong central state power for the Reich; the unconditional authority of the political central Parliament over the entire Reich and its organizations; and the formation of Corporations based on estate and occupation for the purpose of carrying out the general legislation passed by the Reich in the various German states.


Programme of the NSDAP, 24 February 1920


----------



## Oddball

> 16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a healthy middle class, the immediate communalizing of big department stores, and their lease at a cheap rate to small traders, and that the utmost consideration shall be shown to all small traders in the placing of State and municiple orders.



Except for huge traders, like Krupp, Messerschmitt, Daimler.....


----------



## Political Junky

Neotrotsky said:


> "We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak,
> with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility
> and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions."


"The Liberal State is a mask behind which there is no face; it is a scaffolding behind which there is no building."  
  - Benito Mussolini


----------



## Political Junky

Political Junky said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> "We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak,
> with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility
> and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions."
> 
> 
> 
> "The Liberal State is a mask behind which there is no face; it is a scaffolding behind which there is no building."
> - Benito Mussolini
Click to expand...

"Socialism is a fraud, a comedy, a phantom, a blackmail." 
  - Benito Mussolini


----------



## Amelia

Trajan said:


> edthecynic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> you forgot Preston Bush.....
> 
> 
> 
> It's Prescott Bush.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I knew some moonbat would look it up.....and Joe Kennedy? or is he a stretch for you?
Click to expand...




You heart Paul Krugman?  I never would have guessed that.


----------



## Neotrotsky

Political Junky said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> "We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak,
> with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility
> and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions."
> 
> 
> 
> "The Liberal State is a mask behind which there is no face; it is a scaffolding behind which there is no building."
> - Benito Mussolini
Click to expand...


Speaking of ...

Mussolini liked to affirm that Marx was his spiritual father
(Mussolini y el Fascismo," in Que sais je. (in Spanish), page 31.)

Against individualism, the Fascist conception is for the State; and it is for the individual in so far as he coincides with the State,

Everything in the State, nothing against the State, nothing outside the State."- Mussolini
(Der Nationalsozialismos, die Weltanschauung des 20. Jahrhunderts)​
Fascism, socialism are both Centrally Planned Economies.
They are part of the Rousseauian vision. It holds that the collective comes before the individual, our rights come from the group not from God or are innate  
that the tribe is the source of all morality, and the general will is the ultimate religious construct and so therefore the needs &#8212; and aims &#8212; of the group come before those of the individual. 

Fascism, Communism, Socialism, Progressivism and all the other collectivist groups are all based on the Rousseauian vision

They have more in common than not


----------



## Political Junky

Neotrotsky said:


> Political Junky said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> "We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak,
> with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility
> and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions."
> 
> 
> 
> "The Liberal State is a mask behind which there is no face; it is a scaffolding behind which there is no building."
> - Benito Mussolini
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Speaking of ...
> 
> Mussolini liked to affirm that Marx was his spiritual father
> (Mussolini y el Fascismo," in Que sais je. (in Spanish), page 31.)
> 
> Against individualism, the Fascist conception is for the State; and it is for the individual in so far as he coincides with the State,
> 
> Everything in the State, nothing against the State, nothing outside the State."- Mussolini
> (Der Nationalsozialismos, die Weltanschauung des 20. Jahrhunderts)​
> Fascism, socialism are both Centrally Planned Economies.
> They are part of the Rousseauian vision. It holds that the collective comes before the individual, our rights come from the group not from God or are innate
> that the tribe is the source of all morality, and the general will is the ultimate religious construct and so therefore the needs &#8212; and aims &#8212; of the group come before those of the individual.
> 
> Fascism, Communism, Socialism, Progressivism and all the other collectivist groups are all based on the Rousseauian vision
> 
> They have more in common than not
Click to expand...

Mussolini was a socialist before he was a Fascist.


----------



## Neotrotsky

Political Junky said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Political Junky said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The Liberal State is a mask behind which there is no face; it is a scaffolding behind which there is no building."
> - Benito Mussolini
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking of ...
> 
> Mussolini liked to affirm that Marx was his spiritual father
> (Mussolini y el Fascismo," in Que sais je. (in Spanish), page 31.)
> 
> Against individualism, the Fascist conception is for the State; and it is for the individual in so far as he coincides with the State,
> 
> Everything in the State, nothing against the State, nothing outside the State."- Mussolini
> (Der Nationalsozialismos, die Weltanschauung des 20. Jahrhunderts)​
> Fascism, socialism are both Centrally Planned Economies.
> They are part of the Rousseauian vision. It holds that the collective comes before the individual, our rights come from the group not from God or are innate
> that the tribe is the source of all morality, and the general will is the ultimate religious construct and so therefore the needs &#8212; and aims &#8212; of the group come before those of the individual.
> 
> Fascism, Communism, Socialism, Progressivism and all the other collectivist groups are all based on the Rousseauian vision
> 
> They have more in common than not
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Mussolini was a socialist before he was a Fascist.
Click to expand...


true
but he still had that "gorgeous smile"

If you ever get a chance (maybe you have) see some of the old history
on him before the war and the press that followed him, here and in Europe.
He was in power for a long time before the war. 

He was actually looked upon quite fondly


----------



## Political Junky

Political Junky said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Political Junky said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The Liberal State is a mask behind which there is no face; it is a scaffolding behind which there is no building."
> - Benito Mussolini
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking of ...
> 
> Mussolini liked to affirm that Marx was his spiritual father
> (Mussolini y el Fascismo," in Que sais je. (in Spanish), page 31.)
> 
> Against individualism, the Fascist conception is for the State; and it is for the individual in so far as he coincides with the State,
> 
> Everything in the State, nothing against the State, nothing outside the State."- Mussolini
> (Der Nationalsozialismos, die Weltanschauung des 20. Jahrhunderts)​
> Fascism, socialism are both Centrally Planned Economies.
> They are part of the Rousseauian vision. It holds that the collective comes before the individual, our rights come from the group not from God or are innate
> that the tribe is the source of all morality, and the general will is the ultimate religious construct and so therefore the needs &#8212; and aims &#8212; of the group come before those of the individual.
> 
> Fascism, Communism, Socialism, Progressivism and all the other collectivist groups are all based on the Rousseauian vision
> 
> They have more in common than not
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Mussolini was a socialist before he was a Fascist.*
Click to expand...

Benito Amilcare Andrea Mussolini (Italian pronunciation: [be&#712;ni&#720;to mus&#720;o&#712;li&#720;ni]; 29 July 1883 &#8211; 28 April 1945) was an Italian politician who led the National Fascist Party, ruling the country from 1922 to his ousting in 1943, and is credited with being one of the key figures in the creation of fascism.
Originally a member of the Italian Socialist Party and editor of the Avanti! from 1912 to 1914, Mussolini fought in World War I as an ardent nationalist and created the Fasci di Combattimento in 1919, catalyzing his nationalist and socialist beliefs in the Fascist Manifesto, published in 1921. Following the March on Rome in October 1922 he became the 27th Prime Minister of Italy and began using the title Il Duce by 1925, about which time he had established dictatorial authority by both legal and extraordinary means, aspiring to create a totalitarian state. After 1936, his official title was Sua Eccellenza Benito Mussolini, Capo del Governo, Duce del Fascismo e Fondatore dell'Impero ("His Excellency Benito Mussolini, Head of Government, Duce of Fascism, and Founder of the Empire")[1] Mussolini also created and held the supreme military rank of First Marshal of the Empire along with King Victor Emmanuel III, which gave him and the King joint supreme control over the military of Italy. Mussolini remained in power until he was replaced in 1943; for a short period after this until his death, he was the leader of the Italian Social Republic.
Mussolini was among the founders of Italian Fascism, which included elements of nationalism, corporatism, national syndicalism, expansionism, social progress, and anti-communism in combination with censorship of subversives and state propaganda. In the years following his creation of the Fascist ideology, Mussolini influenced, or achieved admiration from, a wide variety of political figures.[2]
<more at>
Benito Mussolini - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Neotrotsky

Sure

If the war never happened and the German Nazi's never came to power
Mussolini might even be looked upon favorably today.

Before the war, Western leaders desperate to get out of the Great Depression
looked at his big gov't ways for guidance 


For example...

FDR said:


_There seems to be no question that [Mussolini] is really interested in what we are doing and I am much interested and deeply impressed by what he has accomplished and by his evidenced honest purpose of restoring Italy._​
Comment in early 1933 about Benito Mussolini to US Ambassador to Italy Breckinridge Long, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31


_I don't mind telling you in confidence that I am keeping in fairly close touch with that admirable Italian gentleman._​

Comment on Benito Mussolini in 1933, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


While he might be an interesting historical figure
He did say


"The Fascist conception of life, stresses the importance of the State and accepts the individual only 
in so far as his interests coincide with the State. It is opposed to classical liberalism [which] denied the 
State in the name of the individual; Fascism reasserts the rights of the State as expressing the real essence of the individual."


Really, to me, just another "run of the mill" statist 
who pushes gov't over people.


----------



## The Infidel

Charles_Main said:


> Partisan Hackery Alert. Engage at your own risk. The Author of this Thread has no interest in Real Debate.
> 
> She is 100% sure of her Premise and is simply looking for a chance to call you some names.


----------



## barry1960

Quantum Windbag said:


> Hitler was so far right he sounded like Obama.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 11. The abolition of incomes unearned by work.
> 
> 13. We demand the nationalization of all businesses which have been formed into corporations (trusts).
> 14. We demand profit-sharing in large industrial enterprises.
> 15. We demand the extensive development of insurance for old age.
> 16.  We demand the creation and maintenance of a healthy middle class, the immediate communalizing of big department stores, and their lease at a  cheap rate to small traders, and that the utmost consideration shall be shown to all small traders in the placing of State and municiple orders.
> 
> 
> 
> 25. To put the whole of this programme into effect, we demand the creation of a strong central state power for the Reich; the unconditional authority of the political central Parliament over the entire Reich and its organizations; and the formation of Corporations based on estate and occupation for the purpose of carrying out the general legislation passed by the Reich in the various German states.
> 
> 
> 
> Programme of the NSDAP, 24 February 1920
Click to expand...


You have quoted the 25 points of the Nationalist Socilaist party in 1920. A lot happened from 1920 to 1933 when the nazis came to power. Namely, the Nazis pretty much dropped the socialist part of their ideology. Hitler learned that in order to come to power by legal means he needed to court the powers that be - the military and big business. Hitler did so by promising rearmament and the destruction of organized labor, both of which he quickly did after assuming power.

Ever wonder what happened to Gregory and Otto Strasser, two leaders of the Nazi movement who leaned towards socilalism. They were booted from the party. What about those millions of stormtroopers who helped Hitler obtain absolute power? The brownshirts were dismantled because they advocated a continuous revolution and Hitler wanted to preserve the existing power structures of the military and business to begin his road to comquest.

The Nazis never won a majority in an election. Hitler was appointed chancelor of a conservative coalition government. The social democrats and the communists were left out of this coalition.The conservatives had nothing but contempt for the democratic ideals of the Weimar Republic. They also feared the communism of the left.

Despite their name, the Nazis had little to do with sociialism. They were a party of the far right. There is no comparison to Obama and Nazi Germany in ideology or principle.


----------



## The Infidel

del said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> del said:
> 
> 
> 
> because he's an asshat
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Says neg asshat himself
> 
> Here, educate yourselves.  Liberalism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)  Under 2.1 we read,
> 
> _Although classical liberals agree on the fundamental importance of private property to a free society, the classical liberal tradition itself refracts into a spectrum of views, from near-anarchist to those that attribute a significant role to the state in economic and social policy (on this spectrum, see Mack and Gaus, 2004). Towards the most extreme libertarian end of the classical liberal spectrum are views of justified states as legitimate monopolies that may with justice charge for their necessary rights-protection services: taxation is legitimate so long as it is necessary to protect liberty and property rights. As we go further leftward we encounter classical liberal views that allow taxation for (other) public goods and social infrastructure and, moving yet further left, some classical liberal views allow for a modest social minimum.(e.g., Hayek, 1976: 87). Most nineteenth century classical liberal economists endorsed a variety of state policies, encompassing not only the criminal law and enforcement of contracts, but the licensing of professionals, health, safety and fire regulations, banking regulations, commercial infrastructure (roads, harbors and canals) and often encouraged unionization (Gaus, 1983b). Although today classical liberalism is often associated with extreme forms of libertarianism, the classical liberal tradition was centrally concerned with bettering the lot of the working class. The aim, as Bentham put it, was to make the poor richer, not the rich poorer (Bentham, 1952 [1795]: vol. 1, 226n). Consequently, classical liberals reject the redistribution of wealth as a legitimate aim of government._
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you've always been an asshat, jake, from the moment you got here.
> 
> that's the facts, jack
> 
> boom shaka laka laka etc
Click to expand...


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fk1jLoJP6vs]Boom-shakalaka! - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## dilloduck

Ravi said:


> Doubt that Hitler had the support of the conservative right wing?
> 
> 1. "Hitler found his greatest support in *traditionally conservative small towns. He campaigned with attacks on Marxism, making it clear that by Marxism he meant the Social Democrats. Hitler appealed to morality, attacking free love and what he inferred was the immorality of Berlin and some other major cities. He promised to stamp out big city corruption. He called for a spiritual revolution, for a "positive Christianity" and a spirit of national pride. Hitler repeatedly called for national renewal. *He and his National Socialists benefited from the recent upheaval in the Soviet Union and the rise in fear and disgust for Bolshevism. His party's posters read:
> 
> *    If you want your country to go Bolshevik, vote Communist. If you want to remain free Germans, vote for the National Socialists.*"
> 
> Hitler and Germany: 1928 to 1935
> 
> 2. Neville Chamberlain, appeaser in chief, after the Sudetenland was handed over to Hitler, "But the Conservative leader has always expressed his desire to find a *peaceful solution to the Fuehrer's wish to create a new - and enlarged - German homeland in Europe.*"
> 
> BBC ON THIS DAY | 30 | 1938: 'Peace for our time' - Chamberlain
> 
> 3. The French right admired Hitler, "When Socialists and Communists formed a Popular front Government in 1936 there were many French conservatives who boldly announced that *Hitler was preferrable to the leadership of the French socialist Leon Blum*."
> 
> Road to War
> 
> 4. "right-to-work" anti-labor conservatives were also pro-Hitler. "There were a mulitude of other racists jumping on the Fascist bandwagon. Joseph P. Kamp printed over two million copies of his anti-labor pamphlet, "Join the C.I.O. and Help Build a Soviet America" which he advertised with the Ku Klux Klan. *Millionaire John Kirby in Houston began publishing the anti-black, anti-labor Christian American in support of "right to work" legislation"*
> 
> Support for Hitler (or Fascism) in the United States | Radical Reference
> 
> 5. Foreshadowing Republican views on the Clinton being concerned about bin laden as a distraction from Lewinsky, "The former president, Herbert Hoover, had become the Republican Party's chief spokesman in foreign affairs, and when Germany seized Moravia and Bohemia, *Hoover declared that no clear and present danger existed* and that Britain, France and others in Europe would be able to defend themselves should there be war. Hoover spoke of Roosevelt's "dangerous adventures" and argued that Roosevelt was trying to divert people's attention from his failure to end the depression"
> 
> The United States, War Preparation, China, and Jewish Immigration: 1938-39




Goebbels ?  Is that you using Ravi as a sock again ?


----------



## conservationism

I always assumed that liberalism = forced equality, conservatism = social Darwinism, and it's just degrees of difference between the different types.


----------



## Ravi

barry1960 said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hitler was so far right he sounded like Obama.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 11. The abolition of incomes unearned by work.
> 
> 13. We demand the nationalization of all businesses which have been formed into corporations (trusts).
> 14. We demand profit-sharing in large industrial enterprises.
> 15. We demand the extensive development of insurance for old age.
> 16.  We demand the creation and maintenance of a healthy middle class, the immediate communalizing of big department stores, and their lease at a  cheap rate to small traders, and that the utmost consideration shall be shown to all small traders in the placing of State and municiple orders.
> 
> 
> 
> 25. To put the whole of this programme into effect, we demand the creation of a strong central state power for the Reich; the unconditional authority of the political central Parliament over the entire Reich and its organizations; and the formation of Corporations based on estate and occupation for the purpose of carrying out the general legislation passed by the Reich in the various German states.
> 
> 
> 
> Programme of the NSDAP, 24 February 1920
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have quoted the 25 points of the Nationalist Socilaist party in 1920. A lot happened from 1920 to 1933 when the nazis came to power. Namely, the Nazis pretty much dropped the socialist part of their ideology. Hitler learned that in order to come to power by legal means he needed to court the powers that be - the military and big business. Hitler did so by promising rearmament and the destruction of organized labor, both of which he quickly did after assuming power.
> 
> Ever wonder what happened to Gregory and Otto Strasser, two leaders of the Nazi movement who leaned towards socilalism. They were booted from the party. What about those millions of stormtroopers who helped Hitler obtain absolute power? The brownshirts were dismantled because they advocated a continuous revolution and Hitler wanted to preserve the existing power structures of the military and business to begin his road to comquest.
> 
> The Nazis never won a majority in an election. Hitler was appointed chancelor of a conservative coalition government. The social democrats and the communists were left out of this coalition.The conservatives had nothing but contempt for the democratic ideals of the Weimar Republic. They also feared the communism of the left.
> 
> Despite their name, the Nazis had little to do with sociialism. They were a party of the far right. There is no comparison to Obama and Nazi Germany in ideology or principle.
Click to expand...


All very true. I wouldn't claim that Hitler was a conservative in the true sense of the word but he certainly drew the support of a lot of conservatives.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

Ravi said:


> barry1960 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hitler was so far right he sounded like Obama.
> 
> 
> Programme of the NSDAP, 24 February 1920
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have quoted the 25 points of the Nationalist Socilaist party in 1920. A lot happened from 1920 to 1933 when the nazis came to power. Namely, the Nazis pretty much dropped the socialist part of their ideology. Hitler learned that in order to come to power by legal means he needed to court the powers that be - the military and big business. Hitler did so by promising rearmament and the destruction of organized labor, both of which he quickly did after assuming power.
> 
> Ever wonder what happened to Gregory and Otto Strasser, two leaders of the Nazi movement who leaned towards socilalism. They were booted from the party. What about those millions of stormtroopers who helped Hitler obtain absolute power? The brownshirts were dismantled because they advocated a continuous revolution and Hitler wanted to preserve the existing power structures of the military and business to begin his road to comquest.
> 
> The Nazis never won a majority in an election. Hitler was appointed chancelor of a conservative coalition government. The social democrats and the communists were left out of this coalition.The conservatives had nothing but contempt for the democratic ideals of the Weimar Republic. They also feared the communism of the left.
> 
> Despite their name, the Nazis had little to do with sociialism. They were a party of the far right. There is no comparison to Obama and Nazi Germany in ideology or principle.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All very true. I wouldn't claim that Hitler was a conservative in the true sense of the word but he certainly drew the support of a lot of conservatives.
Click to expand...


He also drew the support of a lot of progressives, including George Bernard Shaw.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQvsf2MUKRQ]George Bernard Shaw Defends Hitler, Mass Murder - YouTube[/ame]

Go ahead, try to tell me that Shaw, a noted socialist and member of the Fabian Society, was a conservative.


----------



## Ravi

You're finding individuals. I am showing you entire groups of the far right that supported Hitler.


----------



## editec

Thinking that the our modern left v right debate has anything to do with Hitler is just plain silly.

Claiming that Hitlerism is either a good example socialism OR capitalism gone wrong misses the point entirely.

Of course thinking that our major US political parties are either socialists or facsicsts is equally the stuff of clueless partisans, too, isn't it?


----------



## JakeStarkey

del said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> del said:
> 
> 
> 
> because he's an asshat
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Says neg asshat himself
> 
> Here, educate yourselves.  Liberalism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)  Under 2.1 we read,
> 
> _Although classical liberals agree on the fundamental importance of private property to a free society, the classical liberal tradition itself refracts into a spectrum of views, from near-anarchist to those that attribute a significant role to the state in economic and social policy (on this spectrum, see Mack and Gaus, 2004). Towards the most extreme &#8216;libertarian&#8217; end of the classical liberal spectrum are views of justified states as legitimate monopolies that may with justice charge for their necessary rights-protection services: taxation is legitimate so long as it is necessary to protect liberty and property rights. As we go further &#8216;leftward&#8217; we encounter classical liberal views that allow taxation for (other) public goods and social infrastructure and, moving yet further &#8216;left&#8217;, some classical liberal views allow for a modest social minimum.(e.g., Hayek, 1976: 87). Most nineteenth century classical liberal economists endorsed a variety of state policies, encompassing not only the criminal law and enforcement of contracts, but the licensing of professionals, health, safety and fire regulations, banking regulations, commercial infrastructure (roads, harbors and canals) and often encouraged unionization (Gaus, 1983b). Although today classical liberalism is often associated with extreme forms of libertarianism, the classical liberal tradition was centrally concerned with bettering the lot of the working class. The aim, as Bentham put it, was to make the poor richer, not the rich poorer (Bentham, 1952 [1795]: vol. 1, 226n). Consequently, classical liberals reject the redistribution of wealth as a legitimate aim of government._
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you've always been an asshat, jake, from the moment you got here.
> 
> that's the facts, jack
> 
> boom shaka laka laka etc
Click to expand...


I can handle it.  And you are entitled to a wrong opinion.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Neotrotsky said:


> "We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak,
> with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility
> and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions."



(Speech of May 1, 1927. Quoted by Toland, 1976, p. 306).  Yet they destroyed the socialists, the communists, the democrats, cozied up to the capitalists, never nationalized industry, and so forth.


----------



## JakeStarkey

The Infidel said:


> Charles_Main said:
> 
> 
> 
> Partisan Hackery Alert. Engage at your own risk. The Author of this Thread has no interest in Real Debate.
> 
> She is 100% sure of her Premise and is simply looking for a chance to call you some names.
Click to expand...


The trolls of the far right look extremely stupid on this topic.  Nothing new here.


----------



## Artevelde

Ravi said:


> Doubt that Hitler had the support of the conservative right wing?
> 
> 1. "Hitler found his greatest support in *traditionally conservative small towns. He campaigned with attacks on Marxism, making it clear that by Marxism he meant the Social Democrats. Hitler appealed to morality, attacking free love and what he inferred was the immorality of Berlin and some other major cities. He promised to stamp out big city corruption. He called for a spiritual revolution, for a "positive Christianity" and a spirit of national pride. Hitler repeatedly called for national renewal. *He and his National Socialists benefited from the recent upheaval in the Soviet Union and the rise in fear and disgust for Bolshevism. His party's posters read:
> 
> *    If you want your country to go Bolshevik, vote Communist. If you want to remain free Germans, vote for the National Socialists.*"
> 
> Hitler and Germany: 1928 to 1935
> 
> 2. Neville Chamberlain, appeaser in chief, after the Sudetenland was handed over to Hitler, "But the Conservative leader has always expressed his desire to find a *peaceful solution to the Fuehrer's wish to create a new - and enlarged - German homeland in Europe.*"
> 
> BBC ON THIS DAY | 30 | 1938: 'Peace for our time' - Chamberlain
> 
> 3. The French right admired Hitler, "When Socialists and Communists formed a Popular front Government in 1936 there were many French conservatives who boldly announced that *Hitler was preferrable to the leadership of the French socialist Leon Blum*."
> 
> Road to War
> 
> 4. "right-to-work" anti-labor conservatives were also pro-Hitler. "There were a mulitude of other racists jumping on the Fascist bandwagon. Joseph P. Kamp printed over two million copies of his anti-labor pamphlet, "Join the C.I.O. and Help Build a Soviet America" which he advertised with the Ku Klux Klan. *Millionaire John Kirby in Houston began publishing the anti-black, anti-labor Christian American in support of "right to work" legislation"*
> 
> Support for Hitler (or Fascism) in the United States | Radical Reference
> 
> 5. Foreshadowing Republican views on the Clinton being concerned about bin laden as a distraction from Lewinsky, "The former president, Herbert Hoover, had become the Republican Party's chief spokesman in foreign affairs, and when Germany seized Moravia and Bohemia, *Hoover declared that no clear and present danger existed* and that Britain, France and others in Europe would be able to defend themselves should there be war. Hoover spoke of Roosevelt's "dangerous adventures" and argued that Roosevelt was trying to divert people's attention from his failure to end the depression"
> 
> The United States, War Preparation, China, and Jewish Immigration: 1938-39



A few facts:

1. Hitler was contemptuous of traditions and of the traditional conservative elite in Germany. He always considered his seizure of power a revolution. And he did indeed revolutionize Germany.

2. Hitler introduced large-scale and imperative economic planning, massive public works projects, and other "progressive" projects to jump-start the German economy and fight unemployment.

3. During the first phase of the Second World War (1939-1941) Hitler's most valuable ally and support on the international stage was the Soviet Union.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

edthecynic said:


> syrenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry ravi...if anyone gives me the hitler feeling.... its obama.
> 
> 
> 
> Nah, MessiahRushie and Hitler were twin sons of different mothers.
> 
> The leader of genius must have the ability to make different opponents appear as if they belonged to one category.
> Adolf Hitler
> 
> May 12, 2008
> RUSH:  I maintain that moderates and independents are Democrats.  Because, by definition, if someone or some organization is not conservative, it's by definition going to be liberal, not moderate, not independent, it's going to be liberal
Click to expand...


When Rush becomes a political leader such as president you can start worrying. But right now I would be more concerned that obama has the authority to kill any American citizen he so chooses.


----------



## Charles_Main

Ravi said:


> Charles_Main said:
> 
> 
> 
> Partisan Hackery Alert. Engage at your own risk. The Author of this Thread has no interest in Real Debate.
> 
> She is 100% sure of her Premise and is simply looking for a chance to call you some names.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, you have no rebuttal.
> 
> History has shown the truth....the conservatives at the time either welcomed Hitler or wanted to appease him.
Click to expand...


No, In other words your childishly simplistic view of the world is not even worth debating.

I mean come on, you do not even know the history. Are you calling Chamberlin, or Joe Kennedy Conservatives? Those were the appeasers of Hitler.

You don't even play with facts, why would anyone engage you in debate.


----------



## Charles_Main

JakeStarkey said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> "We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak,
> with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility
> and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Speech of May 1, 1927. Quoted by Toland, 1976, p. 306).  Yet they destroyed the socialists, the communists, the democrats, cozied up to the capitalists, never nationalized industry, and so forth.
Click to expand...


What History you reading? They did indeed nationalize much Of Germany Industry.


----------



## Ravi

Charles_Main said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charles_Main said:
> 
> 
> 
> Partisan Hackery Alert. Engage at your own risk. The Author of this Thread has no interest in Real Debate.
> 
> She is 100% sure of her Premise and is simply looking for a chance to call you some names.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, you have no rebuttal.
> 
> History has shown the truth....the conservatives at the time either welcomed Hitler or wanted to appease him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, In other words your childishly simplistic view of the world is not even worth debating.
> 
> I mean come on, you do not even know the history. Are you calling Chamberlin, or Joe Kennedy Conservatives? Those were the appeasers of Hitler.
> 
> You don't even play with facts, why would anyone engage you in debate.
Click to expand...

 Chamberlain was a conservative. Woot at getting lectured on facts by an idiot such as yourself.


----------



## koshergrl

barry1960 said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hitler was so far right he sounded like Obama.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 11. The abolition of incomes unearned by work.
> 
> 13. We demand the nationalization of all businesses which have been formed into corporations (trusts).
> 14. We demand profit-sharing in large industrial enterprises.
> 15. We demand the extensive development of insurance for old age.
> 16.  We demand the creation and maintenance of a healthy middle class, the immediate communalizing of big department stores, and their lease at a  cheap rate to small traders, and that the utmost consideration shall be shown to all small traders in the placing of State and municiple orders.
> 
> 
> 
> 25. To put the whole of this programme into effect, we demand the creation of a strong central state power for the Reich; the unconditional authority of the political central Parliament over the entire Reich and its organizations; and the formation of Corporations based on estate and occupation for the purpose of carrying out the general legislation passed by the Reich in the various German states.
> 
> 
> 
> Programme of the NSDAP, 24 February 1920
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have quoted the 25 points of the Nationalist Socilaist party in 1920. A lot happened from 1920 to 1933 when the nazis came to power. Namely, the Nazis pretty much dropped the socialist part of their ideology. Hitler learned that in order to come to power by legal means he needed to court the powers that be - the military and big business. Hitler did so by promising rearmament and the destruction of organized labor, both of which he quickly did after assuming power.
> 
> Ever wonder what happened to Gregory and Otto Strasser, two leaders of the Nazi movement who leaned towards socilalism. They were booted from the party. What about those millions of stormtroopers who helped Hitler obtain absolute power? The brownshirts were dismantled because they advocated a continuous revolution and Hitler wanted to preserve the existing power structures of the military and business to begin his road to comquest.
> 
> The Nazis never won a majority in an election. Hitler was appointed chancelor of a conservative coalition government. The social democrats and the communists were left out of this coalition.The conservatives had nothing but contempt for the democratic ideals of the Weimar Republic. They also feared the communism of the left.
> 
> Despite their name, the Nazis had little to do with sociialism. They were a party of the far right. There is no comparison to Obama and Nazi Germany in ideology or principle.
Click to expand...


Of course there is.

Promotion of birth control and abortion, for example, among despised classes of people...the Nazis started out targeting the Poles, Obama targets poor black people.

Both Nazis and dems believe it is the responsibility of the State to provide a livelihood for citizens.

Both want to get rid of income earned by work. In other words, get rid of those who have earned more than others.

Nationalization of businesses that have become trusts/corporations.

Profit sharing in industry.

Mandatory insurance.

Prosecution of those whose activities pose a threat to the common interest....

Education that focuses on teaching children to support the state, and all above-average or gifted students' education be funded by, and determined by, the state.

Both believe the nation''s health standards be raised by protecting mothers and infants, by prohibiting child labor. 

The creation of a strong central power (in the case of Nazis.."for the Reich").

The  primary tenets of Nazism.

Also embraced by democrats in the US, and progressives worldwide.

Oh, and lest we forget...they also believed in providing the Reich the authority to take whatever land it wanted, for the "public" good.

So while they did lip service to capitalism, in reality, they were structured as a progressive state. Which is why Progressives flocked to them, and still support the backbone of the Nazi party....selective breeding, abortion, culling.

Internet History Sourcebooks


----------



## JakeStarkey

Artevelde said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doubt that Hitler had the support of the conservative right wing?
> 
> 1. "Hitler found his greatest support in *traditionally conservative small towns. He campaigned with attacks on Marxism, making it clear that by Marxism he meant the Social Democrats. Hitler appealed to morality, attacking free love and what he inferred was the immorality of Berlin and some other major cities. He promised to stamp out big city corruption. He called for a spiritual revolution, for a "positive Christianity" and a spirit of national pride. Hitler repeatedly called for national renewal. *He and his National Socialists benefited from the recent upheaval in the Soviet Union and the rise in fear and disgust for Bolshevism. His party's posters read:
> 
> *    If you want your country to go Bolshevik, vote Communist. If you want to remain free Germans, vote for the National Socialists.*"
> 
> Hitler and Germany: 1928 to 1935
> 
> 2. Neville Chamberlain, appeaser in chief, after the Sudetenland was handed over to Hitler, "But the Conservative leader has always expressed his desire to find a *peaceful solution to the Fuehrer's wish to create a new - and enlarged - German homeland in Europe.*"
> 
> BBC ON THIS DAY | 30 | 1938: 'Peace for our time' - Chamberlain
> 
> 3. The French right admired Hitler, "When Socialists and Communists formed a Popular front Government in 1936 there were many French conservatives who boldly announced that *Hitler was preferrable to the leadership of the French socialist Leon Blum*."
> 
> Road to War
> 
> 4. "right-to-work" anti-labor conservatives were also pro-Hitler. "There were a mulitude of other racists jumping on the Fascist bandwagon. Joseph P. Kamp printed over two million copies of his anti-labor pamphlet, "Join the C.I.O. and Help Build a Soviet America" which he advertised with the Ku Klux Klan. *Millionaire John Kirby in Houston began publishing the anti-black, anti-labor Christian American in support of "right to work" legislation"*
> 
> Support for Hitler (or Fascism) in the United States | Radical Reference
> 
> 5. Foreshadowing Republican views on the Clinton being concerned about bin laden as a distraction from Lewinsky, "The former president, Herbert Hoover, had become the Republican Party's chief spokesman in foreign affairs, and when Germany seized Moravia and Bohemia, *Hoover declared that no clear and present danger existed* and that Britain, France and others in Europe would be able to defend themselves should there be war. Hoover spoke of Roosevelt's "dangerous adventures" and argued that Roosevelt was trying to divert people's attention from his failure to end the depression"
> 
> The United States, War Preparation, China, and Jewish Immigration: 1938-39
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A few facts:
> 
> 1. Hitler was contemptuous of traditions and of the traditional conservative elite in Germany. He always considered his seizure of power a revolution. And he did indeed revolutionize Germany.
> 
> 2. Hitler introduced large-scale and imperative economic planning, massive public works projects, and other "progressive" projects to jump-start the German economy and fight unemployment.
> 
> 3. During the first phase of the Second World War (1939-1941) Hitler's most valuable ally and support on the international stage was the Soviet Union.
Click to expand...


1.  Hitler was contemptuous of everybody not Hitler.

2.  Progressive projects were national reactions to the Great Depression: nothing new.  This demonstrates that progressivism has left and right wings of active statism.

3.  Immaterial.  He would have allied with you if that was necessary.  Or the devil.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Charles_Main said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> "We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak,
> with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility
> and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Speech of May 1, 1927. Quoted by Toland, 1976, p. 306).  Yet they destroyed the socialists, the communists, the democrats, cozied up to the capitalists, never nationalized industry, and so forth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What History you reading? They did indeed nationalize much Of Germany Industry.
Click to expand...


Not as socialists.  They worked with not nationalized German industry.  They were corporatist fascists of the right wing.


----------



## Liability

Troll said something -- again?


----------



## JakeStarkey

Ravi said:


> Charles_Main said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, you have no rebuttal.
> 
> History has shown the truth....the conservatives at the time either welcomed Hitler or wanted to appease him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, In other words your childishly simplistic view of the world is not even worth debating.
> 
> I mean come on, you do not even know the history. Are you calling Chamberlin, or Joe Kennedy Conservatives? Those were the appeasers of Hitler.
> 
> You don't even play with facts, why would anyone engage you in debate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Chamberlain was a conservative. Woot at getting lectured on facts by an idiot such as yourself.
Click to expand...


Chamberlain and Kennedy were strongly conservative.  Many appeasers of Hitler were conservative.  Look at Charles Lindbergh.


----------



## L.K.Eder

ah, a hitler thread.


----------



## edthecynic

Quantum Windbag said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> barry1960 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have quoted the 25 points of the Nationalist Socilaist party in 1920. A lot happened from 1920 to 1933 when the nazis came to power. Namely, the Nazis pretty much dropped the socialist part of their ideology. Hitler learned that in order to come to power by legal means he needed to court the powers that be - the military and big business. Hitler did so by promising rearmament and the destruction of organized labor, both of which he quickly did after assuming power.
> 
> Ever wonder what happened to Gregory and Otto Strasser, two leaders of the Nazi movement who leaned towards socilalism. They were booted from the party. What about those millions of stormtroopers who helped Hitler obtain absolute power? The brownshirts were dismantled because they advocated a continuous revolution and Hitler wanted to preserve the existing power structures of the military and business to begin his road to comquest.
> 
> The Nazis never won a majority in an election. Hitler was appointed chancelor of a conservative coalition government. The social democrats and the communists were left out of this coalition.The conservatives had nothing but contempt for the democratic ideals of the Weimar Republic. They also feared the communism of the left.
> 
> Despite their name, the Nazis had little to do with sociialism. They were a party of the far right. There is no comparison to Obama and Nazi Germany in ideology or principle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All very true. I wouldn't claim that Hitler was a conservative in the true sense of the word but he certainly drew the support of a lot of conservatives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He also drew the support of a lot of progressives, including George Bernard Shaw.
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQvsf2MUKRQ]George Bernard Shaw Defends Hitler, Mass Murder - YouTube[/ame]
> 
> Go ahead, try to tell me that Shaw, a noted socialist and member of the Fabian Society, was a conservative.
Click to expand...

Don't you mindless brainwashed assholes ever check CON$ervoFascist lies for yourselves? Satirist Shaw was MOCKING Eugenicists in that video, as all you lying scum know full well!!

But if you really want someone spouting the Nazi rhetoric, here is your guy!

May 25, 2012
RUSH:  And I know that 88 million Americans are not working but they're eating, and it's a statistic that worries me.
It's quite telling that 88 million are not working but they're eating.


----------



## Ravi

edthecynic said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> All very true. I wouldn't claim that Hitler was a conservative in the true sense of the word but he certainly drew the support of a lot of conservatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He also drew the support of a lot of progressives, including George Bernard Shaw.
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQvsf2MUKRQ]George Bernard Shaw Defends Hitler, Mass Murder - YouTube[/ame]
> 
> Go ahead, try to tell me that Shaw, a noted socialist and member of the Fabian Society, was a conservative.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Don't you mindless brainwashed assholes ever check CON$ervoFascist lies for yourselves? Satirist Shaw was MOCKING Eugenicists in that video, as all you lying scum know full well!!
> 
> But if you really want someone spouting the Nazi rhetoric, here is your guy!
> 
> May 25, 2012
> RUSH:  And I know that 88 million Americans are not working but they're eating, and it's a statistic that worries me.
> It's quite telling that 88 million are not working but they're eating.
Click to expand...


LMAO! I did not know that but you'll never be able to convince Windbag. Once he thinks up a "fact" there is no going back with him.


----------



## edthecynic

Ravi said:


> edthecynic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> 
> He also drew the support of a lot of progressives, including George Bernard Shaw.
> 
> George Bernard Shaw Defends Hitler, Mass Murder - YouTube
> 
> Go ahead, try to tell me that Shaw, a noted socialist and member of the Fabian Society, was a conservative.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't you mindless brainwashed assholes ever check CON$ervoFascist lies for yourselves? Satirist Shaw was MOCKING Eugenicists in that video, as all you lying scum know full well!!
> 
> But if you really want someone spouting the Nazi rhetoric, here is your guy!
> 
> May 25, 2012
> RUSH:  And I know that 88 million Americans are not working but they're eating, and it's a statistic that worries me.
> It's quite telling that 88 million are not working but they're eating.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LMAO! I did not know that but you'll never be able to convince Windbag. Once he thinks up a "fact" there is no going back with him.
Click to expand...

CON$ know nothing about Shaw except the misinformation of GOP hate pundits who deliberately take Shaw's SATIRE out of context, in spite of the fact that in Shavian Eugenics women subconsciously select the mates most likely to give them superior children. So Shaw's eugenics was purely the elective choice made by women of who they mate with, with no murder at all. 

Unless you believe women kill their mates.


----------



## Ravi

edthecynic said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edthecynic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't you mindless brainwashed assholes ever check CON$ervoFascist lies for yourselves? Satirist Shaw was MOCKING Eugenicists in that video, as all you lying scum know full well!!
> 
> But if you really want someone spouting the Nazi rhetoric, here is your guy!
> 
> May 25, 2012
> RUSH:  And I know that 88 million Americans are not working but they're eating, and it's a statistic that worries me.
> It's quite telling that 88 million are not working but they're eating.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LMAO! I did not know that but you'll never be able to convince Windbag. Once he thinks up a "fact" there is no going back with him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> CON$ know nothing about Shaw except the misinformation of GOP hate pundits who deliberately take Shaw's SATIRE out of context, in spite of the fact that in Shavian Eugenics women subconsciously select the mates most likely to give them superior children. So Shaw's eugenics was purely the elective choice made by women of who they mate with, with no murder at all.
> 
> Unless you believe women kill their mates.
Click to expand...

heh....I just looked him up on "conservapedia" the wikipedia for rightwing koolaid drinkers. It's filled with lies about him, taking his satrical speeches as something the were certainly not. 

It's no wonder rightwingloons are ignorant.


----------



## Dot Com

welcome back Ravi


----------



## Ernie S.

Ravi said:


> You're finding individuals. I am showing you entire groups of the far right that supported Hitler.



Hitler was not Stalin. Simple as that


----------



## JakeStarkey

Ernie S. said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're finding individuals. I am showing you entire groups of the far right that supported Hitler.
> 
> 
> 
> Hitler was not Stalin. Simple as that
Click to expand...

  They were both evil dictators, Ernie S.  Hitler destroyed the left and used the right in Germany.  Then he dictated to the remainder.  Period.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JakeStarkey said:


> Ernie S. said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're finding individuals. I am showing you entire groups of the far right that supported Hitler.
> 
> 
> 
> Hitler was not Stalin. Simple as that
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They were both evil dictators, Ernie S.  Hitler destroyed the left and used the right in Germany.  Then he dictated to the remainder.  Period.
Click to expand...


Why are you so god damn stupid and force me to to jump all over your ass and kick evey thing you say to the crub.

Hitler was a dictator that used socialism to gain control and after gaining control killed his political rivals. He didn't kill every socialist, leftist or communist he killed anyone that was his rival. Now are you finished saying your stupid shit?


----------



## L.K.Eder

bigrebnc1775 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ernie S. said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hitler was not Stalin. Simple as that
> 
> 
> 
> They were both evil dictators, Ernie S.  Hitler destroyed the left and used the right in Germany.  Then he dictated to the remainder.  Period.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why are you so god damn stupid and force me to to jump all over your ass and kick evey thing you say to the crub.
> 
> Hitler was a dictator that used socialism to gain control and after gaining control killed his political rivals. He didn't kill every socialist, leftist or communist he killed anyone that was his rival. Now are you finished saying your stupid shit?
Click to expand...


you mad, birfer?


----------



## JakeStarkey

bigrebnc1775 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ernie S. said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hitler was not Stalin. Simple as that
> 
> 
> 
> They were both evil dictators, Ernie S.  Hitler destroyed the left and used the right in Germany.  Then he dictated to the remainder.  Period.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why are you so god damn stupid and force me to to jump all over your ass and kick evey thing you say to the crub.  Hitler was a dictator that used socialism to gain control and after gaining control killed his political rivals. He didn't kill every socialist, leftist or communist he killed anyone that was his rival. Now are you finished saying your stupid shit?
Click to expand...


Yeah, he is pissed on being put down yesterday for some stuff he was trying to do. That's all the above is: he is pissed.

Bigreb, in the meantime, show us all where Hitler used 'socialism.'  Show us the nationalization of industries, for one.  I am glad that you are copying what you have learned from me in your last sentence.  You are learning, but still unethical and dishonest.

You can't show at all how he used 'socialism.'  You are just creepy.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JakeStarkey said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> They were both evil dictators, Ernie S.  Hitler destroyed the left and used the right in Germany.  Then he dictated to the remainder.  Period.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you so god damn stupid and force me to to jump all over your ass and kick evey thing you say to the crub.  Hitler was a dictator that used socialism to gain control and after gaining control killed his political rivals. He didn't kill every socialist, leftist or communist he killed anyone that was his rival. Now are you finished saying your stupid shit?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, he is pissed on being put down yesterday for some stuff he was trying to do. That's all the above is: he is pissed.
> 
> Bigreb, in the meantime, show us all where Hitler used 'socialism.'  Show us the nationalization of industries, for one.  I am glad that you are copying what you have learned from me in your last sentence.  You are learning, but still unethical and dishonest.
> 
> You can't show at all how he used 'socialism.'  You are just creepy.
Click to expand...




> Bigreb, in the meantime, show us all where Hitler used 'socialism.'


He joined the god damn National Socialist German Workers' Party you fucking moron

What hitler wanted before he became dictator 

The History Place - Rise of Hitler: The 25 Points of Hitler's Nazi Party

This is what you call using dictator using socialism to gain control


----------



## bigrebnc1775

snip



> My purpose today is to make just two main points: (1) To show why Nazi Germany was a socialist state, not a capitalist one. And (2) to show why socialism, understood as an economic system based on government ownership of the means of production, positively requires a totalitarian dictatorship.



Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian - George Reisman - Mises Daily


----------



## JakeStarkey

bigrebnc1775 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you so god damn stupid and force me to to jump all over your ass and kick evey thing you say to the crub.  Hitler was a dictator that used socialism to gain control and after gaining control killed his political rivals. He didn't kill every socialist, leftist or communist he killed anyone that was his rival. Now are you finished saying your stupid shit?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, he is pissed on being put down yesterday for some stuff he was trying to do. That's all the above is: he is pissed.
> 
> Bigreb, in the meantime, show us all where Hitler used 'socialism.'  Show us the nationalization of industries, for one.  I am glad that you are copying what you have learned from me in your last sentence.  You are learning, but still unethical and dishonest.
> 
> You can't show at all how he used 'socialism.'  You are just creepy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bigreb, in the meantime, show us all where Hitler used 'socialism.'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He joined the god damn National Socialist German Workers' Party you fucking moron
> 
> What hitler wanted before he became dictator
> 
> The History Place - Rise of Hitler: The 25 Points of Hitler's Nazi Party
> 
> This is what you call using dictator using socialism to gain control
Click to expand...


Not what we wanted, bigrebnc.  Show us how he used socialism.  Did he nationalize industry, for instance, or some other type of socialist behavior?

*One *example, please.


----------



## JakeStarkey

bigrebnc1775 said:


> snip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My purpose today is to make just two main points: (1) To show why Nazi Germany was a socialist state, not a capitalist one. And (2) to show why socialism, understood as an economic system based on government ownership of the means of production, positively requires a totalitarian dictatorship.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian - George Reisman - Mises Daily
Click to expand...


Mises Daily is a corrupt rag from the extremist right and libertarian wings of unreality.

bigreb, you guys are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts or definitions.

Give us something reputable, please.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JakeStarkey said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, he is pissed on being put down yesterday for some stuff he was trying to do. That's all the above is: he is pissed.
> 
> Bigreb, in the meantime, show us all where Hitler used 'socialism.'  Show us the nationalization of industries, for one.  I am glad that you are copying what you have learned from me in your last sentence.  You are learning, but still unethical and dishonest.
> 
> You can't show at all how he used 'socialism.'  You are just creepy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bigreb, in the meantime, show us all where Hitler used 'socialism.'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He joined the god damn National Socialist German Workers' Party you fucking moron
> 
> What hitler wanted before he became dictator
> 
> The History Place - Rise of Hitler: The 25 Points of Hitler's Nazi Party
> 
> This is what you call using dictator using socialism to gain control
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not what we wanted, bigrebnc.  Show us how he used socialism.  Did he nationalize industry, for instance, or some other type of socialist behavior?
> 
> *One *example, please.
Click to expand...


I don't give a fuck what you wanted you got what Hitler did, so eat shit you lying ass bitch.


----------



## JakeStarkey

So Hitler did not use socialism in taking over or governing Germany.  Thank you.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

koshergrl said:


> barry1960 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hitler was so far right he sounded like Obama.
> 
> Programme of the NSDAP, 24 February 1920
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have quoted the 25 points of the Nationalist Socilaist party in 1920. A lot happened from 1920 to 1933 when the nazis came to power. Namely, the Nazis pretty much dropped the socialist part of their ideology. Hitler learned that in order to come to power by legal means he needed to court the powers that be - the military and big business. Hitler did so by promising rearmament and the destruction of organized labor, both of which he quickly did after assuming power.
> 
> Ever wonder what happened to Gregory and Otto Strasser, two leaders of the Nazi movement who leaned towards socilalism. They were booted from the party. What about those millions of stormtroopers who helped Hitler obtain absolute power? The brownshirts were dismantled because they advocated a continuous revolution and Hitler wanted to preserve the existing power structures of the military and business to begin his road to comquest.
> 
> The Nazis never won a majority in an election. Hitler was appointed chancelor of a conservative coalition government. The social democrats and the communists were left out of this coalition.The conservatives had nothing but contempt for the democratic ideals of the Weimar Republic. They also feared the communism of the left.
> 
> Despite their name, the Nazis had little to do with sociialism. They were a party of the far right. There is no comparison to Obama and Nazi Germany in ideology or principle.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course there is.
> 
> Promotion of birth control and abortion, for example, among despised classes of people...the Nazis started out targeting the Poles, Obama targets poor black people.
> 
> Both Nazis and dems believe it is the responsibility of the State to provide a livelihood for citizens.
> 
> Both want to get rid of income earned by work. In other words, get rid of those who have earned more than others.
> 
> Nationalization of businesses that have become trusts/corporations.
> 
> Profit sharing in industry.
> 
> Mandatory insurance.
> 
> Prosecution of those whose activities pose a threat to the common interest....
> 
> Education that focuses on teaching children to support the state, and all above-average or gifted students' education be funded by, and determined by, the state.
> 
> Both believe the nation''s health standards be raised by protecting mothers and infants, by prohibiting child labor.
> 
> The creation of a strong central power (in the case of Nazis.."for the Reich").
> 
> The  primary tenets of Nazism.
> 
> Also embraced by democrats in the US, and progressives worldwide.
> 
> Oh, and lest we forget...they also believed in providing the Reich the authority to take whatever land it wanted, for the "public" good.
> 
> So while they did lip service to capitalism, in reality, they were structured as a progressive state. Which is why Progressives flocked to them, and still support the backbone of the Nazi party....selective breeding, abortion, culling.
> 
> Internet History Sourcebooks
Click to expand...

koshergrl
Some can't comprehend this one thing I am about to post
barry1960 said


> You have quoted the 25 points of the Nationalist Socilaist party in 1920. A lot happened from 1920 to 1933 when the nazis came to power. Namely, the Nazis pretty much dropped the socialist part of their ideology.



This is what you call a dictator using socialism  to gain control.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JakeStarkey said:


> So Hitler did not use socialism in taking over or governing Germany.  Thank you.



Only if you could be right you might have something.


----------



## GHook93

National  *SOCIALIST* German Workers Party!!!

LOL to you conservatives are the Al Qaeda religious radicals that want a government controls all police state.

Hitler was a socialist, he EXPANDED THE STATE 1000 FOLD, he took private property from citizens (not just Jews) and gave them to the State, he nationalized many industries, he was EXTREMIST animal rightist that would make PETA proud, one of his first acts was TOTAL gun control and contrary to accounts he wasn't religious. He would be more accurately characterized as a atheist or agnostic! He used religion when it suited his purpose, since many of his soldiers were Christians.

Hitler was a leftist dictator! He targeted  communist, because he needed a scapegoat for his plans to take over the country. He had the Jews, Romas, Communist, Gays and Dissenters!


----------



## Ravi

JakeStarkey said:


> So Hitler did not use socialism in taking over or governing Germany.  Thank you.


I don't see how he could have attracted all those conservative supporters if he did.

Buggerreb is just a nutcase.


----------



## Staidhup

Ravi said:


> Doubt that Hitler had the support of the conservative right wing?
> 
> 1. "Hitler found his greatest support in *traditionally conservative small towns. He campaigned with attacks on Marxism, making it clear that by Marxism he meant the Social Democrats. Hitler appealed to morality, attacking free love and what he inferred was the immorality of Berlin and some other major cities. He promised to stamp out big city corruption. He called for a spiritual revolution, for a "positive Christianity" and a spirit of national pride. Hitler repeatedly called for national renewal. *He and his National Socialists benefited from the recent upheaval in the Soviet Union and the rise in fear and disgust for Bolshevism. His party's posters read:
> 
> *    If you want your country to go Bolshevik, vote Communist. If you want to remain free Germans, vote for the National Socialists.*"
> 
> Hitler and Germany: 1928 to 1935
> 
> 2. Neville Chamberlain, appeaser in chief, after the Sudetenland was handed over to Hitler, "But the Conservative leader has always expressed his desire to find a *peaceful solution to the Fuehrer's wish to create a new - and enlarged - German homeland in Europe.*"
> 
> BBC ON THIS DAY | 30 | 1938: 'Peace for our time' - Chamberlain
> 
> 3. The French right admired Hitler, "When Socialists and Communists formed a Popular front Government in 1936 there were many French conservatives who boldly announced that *Hitler was preferrable to the leadership of the French socialist Leon Blum*."
> 
> Road to War
> 
> 4. "right-to-work" anti-labor conservatives were also pro-Hitler. "There were a mulitude of other racists jumping on the Fascist bandwagon. Joseph P. Kamp printed over two million copies of his anti-labor pamphlet, "Join the C.I.O. and Help Build a Soviet America" which he advertised with the Ku Klux Klan. *Millionaire John Kirby in Houston began publishing the anti-black, anti-labor Christian American in support of "right to work" legislation"*
> 
> Support for Hitler (or Fascism) in the United States | Radical Reference
> 
> 5. Foreshadowing Republican views on the Clinton being concerned about bin laden as a distraction from Lewinsky, "The former president, Herbert Hoover, had become the Republican Party's chief spokesman in foreign affairs, and when Germany seized Moravia and Bohemia, *Hoover declared that no clear and present danger existed* and that Britain, France and others in Europe would be able to defend themselves should there be war. Hoover spoke of Roosevelt's "dangerous adventures" and argued that Roosevelt was trying to divert people's attention from his failure to end the depression"
> 
> The United States, War Preparation, China, and Jewish Immigration: 1938-39



*Well Bitch, I see your at it again, still haven't done any research yet have you? Maybe you should spend more time in the library than playing hunt and peck on your computer. Ignorance is bliss is it not?*


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Ravi said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> So Hitler did not use socialism in taking over or governing Germany.  Thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see how he could have attracted all those conservative supporters if he did.
> 
> Buggerreb is just a nutcase.
Click to expand...


That hat is to tight for your fat head take it off so you can get some blood to that pea size nugget you call a brain.


----------



## Ravi

Staidhup said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doubt that Hitler had the support of the conservative right wing?
> 
> 1. "Hitler found his greatest support in *traditionally conservative small towns. He campaigned with attacks on Marxism, making it clear that by Marxism he meant the Social Democrats. Hitler appealed to morality, attacking free love and what he inferred was the immorality of Berlin and some other major cities. He promised to stamp out big city corruption. He called for a spiritual revolution, for a "positive Christianity" and a spirit of national pride. Hitler repeatedly called for national renewal. *He and his National Socialists benefited from the recent upheaval in the Soviet Union and the rise in fear and disgust for Bolshevism. His party's posters read:
> 
> *    If you want your country to go Bolshevik, vote Communist. If you want to remain free Germans, vote for the National Socialists.*"
> 
> Hitler and Germany: 1928 to 1935
> 
> 2. Neville Chamberlain, appeaser in chief, after the Sudetenland was handed over to Hitler, "But the Conservative leader has always expressed his desire to find a *peaceful solution to the Fuehrer's wish to create a new - and enlarged - German homeland in Europe.*"
> 
> BBC ON THIS DAY | 30 | 1938: 'Peace for our time' - Chamberlain
> 
> 3. The French right admired Hitler, "When Socialists and Communists formed a Popular front Government in 1936 there were many French conservatives who boldly announced that *Hitler was preferrable to the leadership of the French socialist Leon Blum*."
> 
> Road to War
> 
> 4. "right-to-work" anti-labor conservatives were also pro-Hitler. "There were a mulitude of other racists jumping on the Fascist bandwagon. Joseph P. Kamp printed over two million copies of his anti-labor pamphlet, "Join the C.I.O. and Help Build a Soviet America" which he advertised with the Ku Klux Klan. *Millionaire John Kirby in Houston began publishing the anti-black, anti-labor Christian American in support of "right to work" legislation"*
> 
> Support for Hitler (or Fascism) in the United States | Radical Reference
> 
> 5. Foreshadowing Republican views on the Clinton being concerned about bin laden as a distraction from Lewinsky, "The former president, Herbert Hoover, had become the Republican Party's chief spokesman in foreign affairs, and when Germany seized Moravia and Bohemia, *Hoover declared that no clear and present danger existed* and that Britain, France and others in Europe would be able to defend themselves should there be war. Hoover spoke of Roosevelt's "dangerous adventures" and argued that Roosevelt was trying to divert people's attention from his failure to end the depression"
> 
> The United States, War Preparation, China, and Jewish Immigration: 1938-39
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Well Bitch, I see your at it again, still haven't done any research yet have you? Maybe you should spend more time in the library than playing hunt and peck on your computer. Ignorance is bliss is it not?*
Click to expand...


Sorry mom!

I see you had no rebuttal, as usual.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Ravi said:


> Staidhup said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doubt that Hitler had the support of the conservative right wing?
> 
> 1. "Hitler found his greatest support in *traditionally conservative small towns. He campaigned with attacks on Marxism, making it clear that by Marxism he meant the Social Democrats. Hitler appealed to morality, attacking free love and what he inferred was the immorality of Berlin and some other major cities. He promised to stamp out big city corruption. He called for a spiritual revolution, for a "positive Christianity" and a spirit of national pride. Hitler repeatedly called for national renewal. *He and his National Socialists benefited from the recent upheaval in the Soviet Union and the rise in fear and disgust for Bolshevism. His party's posters read:
> 
> *    If you want your country to go Bolshevik, vote Communist. If you want to remain free Germans, vote for the National Socialists.*"
> 
> Hitler and Germany: 1928 to 1935
> 
> 2. Neville Chamberlain, appeaser in chief, after the Sudetenland was handed over to Hitler, "But the Conservative leader has always expressed his desire to find a *peaceful solution to the Fuehrer's wish to create a new - and enlarged - German homeland in Europe.*"
> 
> BBC ON THIS DAY | 30 | 1938: 'Peace for our time' - Chamberlain
> 
> 3. The French right admired Hitler, "When Socialists and Communists formed a Popular front Government in 1936 there were many French conservatives who boldly announced that *Hitler was preferrable to the leadership of the French socialist Leon Blum*."
> 
> Road to War
> 
> 4. "right-to-work" anti-labor conservatives were also pro-Hitler. "There were a mulitude of other racists jumping on the Fascist bandwagon. Joseph P. Kamp printed over two million copies of his anti-labor pamphlet, "Join the C.I.O. and Help Build a Soviet America" which he advertised with the Ku Klux Klan. *Millionaire John Kirby in Houston began publishing the anti-black, anti-labor Christian American in support of "right to work" legislation"*
> 
> Support for Hitler (or Fascism) in the United States | Radical Reference
> 
> 5. Foreshadowing Republican views on the Clinton being concerned about bin laden as a distraction from Lewinsky, "The former president, Herbert Hoover, had become the Republican Party's chief spokesman in foreign affairs, and when Germany seized Moravia and Bohemia, *Hoover declared that no clear and present danger existed* and that Britain, France and others in Europe would be able to defend themselves should there be war. Hoover spoke of Roosevelt's "dangerous adventures" and argued that Roosevelt was trying to divert people's attention from his failure to end the depression"
> 
> The United States, War Preparation, China, and Jewish Immigration: 1938-39
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Well Bitch, I see your at it again, still haven't done any research yet have you? Maybe you should spend more time in the library than playing hunt and peck on your computer. Ignorance is bliss is it not?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sorry mom!
> 
> I see you had no rebuttal, as usual.
Click to expand...


Still wearing that tight ass hat.


----------



## JakeStarkey

bigrebnc1775 said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> barry1960 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have quoted the 25 points of the Nationalist Socilaist party in 1920. A lot happened from 1920 to 1933 when the nazis came to power. Namely, the Nazis pretty much dropped the socialist part of their ideology. Hitler learned that in order to come to power by legal means he needed to court the powers that be - the military and big business. Hitler did so by promising rearmament and the destruction of organized labor, both of which he quickly did after assuming power.
> 
> Ever wonder what happened to Gregory and Otto Strasser, two leaders of the Nazi movement who leaned towards socilalism. They were booted from the party. What about those millions of stormtroopers who helped Hitler obtain absolute power? The brownshirts were dismantled because they advocated a continuous revolution and Hitler wanted to preserve the existing power structures of the military and business to begin his road to comquest.
> 
> The Nazis never won a majority in an election. Hitler was appointed chancelor of a conservative coalition government. The social democrats and the communists were left out of this coalition.The conservatives had nothing but contempt for the democratic ideals of the Weimar Republic. They also feared the communism of the left.
> 
> Despite their name, the Nazis had little to do with sociialism. They were a party of the far right. There is no comparison to Obama and Nazi Germany in ideology or principle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course there is.
> 
> Promotion of birth control and abortion, for example, among despised classes of people...the Nazis started out targeting the Poles, Obama targets poor black people.
> 
> Both Nazis and dems believe it is the responsibility of the State to provide a livelihood for citizens.
> 
> Both want to get rid of income earned by work. In other words, get rid of those who have earned more than others.
> 
> Nationalization of businesses that have become trusts/corporations.
> 
> Profit sharing in industry.
> 
> Mandatory insurance.
> 
> Prosecution of those whose activities pose a threat to the common interest....
> 
> Education that focuses on teaching children to support the state, and all above-average or gifted students' education be funded by, and determined by, the state.
> 
> Both believe the nation''s health standards be raised by protecting mothers and infants, by prohibiting child labor.
> 
> The creation of a strong central power (in the case of Nazis.."for the Reich").
> 
> The  primary tenets of Nazism.
> 
> Also embraced by democrats in the US, and progressives worldwide.
> 
> Oh, and lest we forget...they also believed in providing the Reich the authority to take whatever land it wanted, for the "public" good.
> 
> So while they did lip service to capitalism, in reality, they were structured as a progressive state. Which is why Progressives flocked to them, and still support the backbone of the Nazi party....selective breeding, abortion, culling.
> 
> Internet History Sourcebooks
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> koshergrl
> Some can't comprehend this one thing I am about to post
> barry1960 said
> 
> 
> 
> You have quoted the 25 points of the Nationalist Socilaist party in 1920. A lot happened from 1920 to 1933 when the nazis came to power. Namely, the Nazis pretty much dropped the socialist part of their ideology.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is what you call a dictator using socialism  to gain control.
Click to expand...


Only to a goof ball, not to folks who live in reality.  Show us one thing he used as  a socialist to get control.


----------



## JakeStarkey

GHook93 said:


> National Workers *SOCIALIST* Party!!!
> 
> LOL to you conservatives are the Al Qaeda religious radicals that want a government controls all police state.
> 
> Hitler was a socialist, he EXPANDED THE STATE 1000 FOLD, he took private property from citizens (not just Jews) and gave them to the State, he nationalized many industries, he was EXTREMIST animal rightist that would make PETA proud, one of his first acts was TOTAL gun control and contrary to accounts he wasn't religious. He would be more accurately characterized as a atheist or agnostic! He used religion when it suited his purpose, since many of his soldiers were Christians.
> 
> Hitler was a leftist dictator! He targeted  communist, because he needed a scapegoat for his plans to take over the country. He had the Jews, Romas, Communist, Gays and Dissenters!



You are a goof ball.

You are describing a dictator, not a socialist.

No, he was not a leftist dictator, and, no, you have no idea what you are talking about.


----------



## JakeStarkey

bigreb has provided no credible evidence.  The far right extremists yell but provide no credible evidence.

They fail.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JakeStarkey said:


> GHook93 said:
> 
> 
> 
> National Workers *SOCIALIST* Party!!!
> 
> LOL to you conservatives are the Al Qaeda religious radicals that want a government controls all police state.
> 
> Hitler was a socialist, he EXPANDED THE STATE 1000 FOLD, he took private property from citizens (not just Jews) and gave them to the State, he nationalized many industries, he was EXTREMIST animal rightist that would make PETA proud, one of his first acts was TOTAL gun control and contrary to accounts he wasn't religious. He would be more accurately characterized as a atheist or agnostic! He used religion when it suited his purpose, since many of his soldiers were Christians.
> 
> Hitler was a leftist dictator! He targeted  communist, because he needed a scapegoat for his plans to take over the country. He had the Jews, Romas, Communist, Gays and Dissenters!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are a goof ball.
> 
> You are describing a dictator, not a socialist.
> 
> No, he was not a leftist dictator, and, no, you have no idea what you are talking about.
Click to expand...


you're a dumb son of a bitch. That's all there is too it.


----------



## JakeStarkey

bigrebnc1775 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GHook93 said:
> 
> 
> 
> National Workers *SOCIALIST* Party!!!
> 
> LOL to you conservatives are the Al Qaeda religious radicals that want a government controls all police state.
> 
> Hitler was a socialist, he EXPANDED THE STATE 1000 FOLD, he took private property from citizens (not just Jews) and gave them to the State, he nationalized many industries, he was EXTREMIST animal rightist that would make PETA proud, one of his first acts was TOTAL gun control and contrary to accounts he wasn't religious. He would be more accurately characterized as a atheist or agnostic! He used religion when it suited his purpose, since many of his soldiers were Christians.
> 
> Hitler was a leftist dictator! He targeted  communist, because he needed a scapegoat for his plans to take over the country. He had the Jews, Romas, Communist, Gays and Dissenters!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are a goof ball.
> 
> You are describing a dictator, not a socialist.
> 
> No, he was not a leftist dictator, and, no, you have no idea what you are talking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you're a dumb son of a bitch. That's all there is too it.
Click to expand...


That is a sweet way of saying you have no credible evidence that Hitler used socialism to become dictator.

You are a goof ball.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JakeStarkey said:


> bigreb has provided no credible evidence.  The far right extremists yell but provide no credible evidence.
> 
> They fail.



What in the fuck is wrong with you? You fucking dumb son of a bitch? I can't help you to comprehend the facts that's up to you.
I need me a new pair of boots this kicking your shit too the curb is fucking my boots up.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JakeStarkey said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are a goof ball.
> 
> You are describing a dictator, not a socialist.
> 
> No, he was not a leftist dictator, and, no, you have no idea what you are talking about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you're a dumb son of a bitch. That's all there is too it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is a sweet way of saying you have no credible evidence that Hitler used socialism to become dictator.
> 
> You are a goof ball.
Click to expand...


I can't help you with the comprehension skills


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JakeStarkey said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course there is.
> 
> Promotion of birth control and abortion, for example, among despised classes of people...the Nazis started out targeting the Poles, Obama targets poor black people.
> 
> Both Nazis and dems believe it is the responsibility of the State to provide a livelihood for citizens.
> 
> Both want to get rid of income earned by work. In other words, get rid of those who have earned more than others.
> 
> Nationalization of businesses that have become trusts/corporations.
> 
> Profit sharing in industry.
> 
> Mandatory insurance.
> 
> Prosecution of those whose activities pose a threat to the common interest....
> 
> Education that focuses on teaching children to support the state, and all above-average or gifted students' education be funded by, and determined by, the state.
> 
> Both believe the nation''s health standards be raised by protecting mothers and infants, by prohibiting child labor.
> 
> The creation of a strong central power (in the case of Nazis.."for the Reich").
> 
> The  primary tenets of Nazism.
> 
> Also embraced by democrats in the US, and progressives worldwide.
> 
> Oh, and lest we forget...they also believed in providing the Reich the authority to take whatever land it wanted, for the "public" good.
> 
> So while they did lip service to capitalism, in reality, they were structured as a progressive state. Which is why Progressives flocked to them, and still support the backbone of the Nazi party....selective breeding, abortion, culling.
> 
> Internet History Sourcebooks
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl
> Some can't comprehend this one thing I am about to post
> barry1960 said
> 
> 
> 
> You have quoted the 25 points of the Nationalist Socilaist party in 1920. A lot happened from 1920 to 1933 when the nazis came to power. Namely, the Nazis pretty much dropped the socialist part of their ideology.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is what you call a dictator using socialism  to gain control.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only to a goof ball, not to folks who live in reality.  Show us one thing he used as  a socialist to get control.
Click to expand...


There's that comprehension fail again.


----------



## Wry Catcher

Oddball said:


>



Another glib remark Odd-dude?  That appears to be all you have in your bag of tricks, that an personal attacks.  Dig out your thesaurus now so you appear to be smarter than the average kook, but those who 'know' you recognize your posts are never substantive and even average kooks are able to offer counter points once in a while.


----------



## JakeStarkey

bigrebnc1775 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> bigreb has provided no credible evidence.  The far right extremists yell but provide no credible evidence.
> 
> They fail.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What in the fuck is wrong with you? You fucking dumb son of a bitch? I can't help you to comprehend the facts that's up to you.
> I need me a new pair of boots this kicking your shit too the curb is fucking my boots up.
Click to expand...


You have no credible evidence. 

Go ahead: show us what Hitler did as a socialist to take power or after he took power.


----------



## dilloduck

editec said:


> Thinking that the our modern left v right debate has anything to do with Hitler is just plain silly.
> 
> Claiming that Hitlerism is either a good example socialism OR capitalism gone wrong misses the point entirely.
> 
> Of course thinking that our major US political parties are either socialists or facsicsts is equally the stuff of clueless partisans, too, isn't it?



Ravi is silly. It explains the whole thread.


----------



## JakeStarkey

bigrebnc1775 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> you're a dumb son of a bitch. That's all there is too it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is a sweet way of saying you have no credible evidence that Hitler used socialism to become dictator.
> 
> You are a goof ball.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can't help you with the comprehension skills
Click to expand...


Says the imbecile.


----------



## JakeStarkey

bigrebnc1775 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl
> Some can't comprehend this one thing I am about to post
> barry1960 said
> 
> 
> This is what you call a dictator using socialism  to gain control.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only to a goof ball, not to folks who live in reality.  Show us one thing he used as  a socialist to get control.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There's that comprehension fail again.
Click to expand...


Show us one thing, please, he used as a socialist to gain power.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Wry Catcher said:


> Oddball said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another glib remark Odd-dude?  That appears to be all you have in your bag of tricks, that an personal attacks.  Dig out your thesaurus now so you appear to be smarter than the average kook, but those who 'know' you recognize your posts are never substantive and even average kooks are able to offer counter points once in a while.
Click to expand...


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JakeStarkey said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> bigreb has provided no credible evidence.  The far right extremists yell but provide no credible evidence.
> 
> They fail.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What in the fuck is wrong with you? You fucking dumb son of a bitch? I can't help you to comprehend the facts that's up to you.
> I need me a new pair of boots this kicking your shit too the curb is fucking my boots up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have no credible evidence.
> 
> Go ahead: show us what Hitler did as a socialist to take power or after he took power.
Click to expand...


You repeating the same thing over and over will never change the facts.
First thing hitler did was join the National Socialist German Workers' Party

Then gains control of the National Socialist German Workers' Party and kills his political rivals. Does he kill all socialist? No he doesn't just his rivals.


----------



## Ravi

In Nazi Germany, wealthy individuals owned businesses. Hitler's "Charter of Labor" made employees virtual slaves to their master employees.

More rightwing stuff you need to know!


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JakeStarkey said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only to a goof ball, not to folks who live in reality.  Show us one thing he used as  a socialist to get control.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's that comprehension fail again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Show us one thing, please, he used as a socialist to gain power.
Click to expand...


don't let me stop you show everybody how stupid you are.


----------



## MikeK

The same militant, authoritarian mentality which accommodated the emergence of the Third Reich is abundantly present here in the U.S. and would unhesitatingly fall in line to support the rise of a radical demagogue whose fanatical ideology includes the forceful suppression of opposing political views.  And there is no shortage of uniformed goons who would thoughtlessly and obediently crack the skulls of any who would actively resist.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Ravi said:


> In Nazi Germany, wealthy individuals owned businesses. Hitler's "Charter of Labor" made employees virtual slaves to their master employees.
> 
> More rightwing stuff you need to know!



As for the Nazis, they generally did not have to kill in order to seize the property of Germans other than Jews. This was because, as we have seen, they established socialism by stealth, through price controls, which served to maintain the outward guise and appearance of private ownership. The private owners were thus deprived of their property without knowing it and thus felt no need to defend it by force.

Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian - George Reisman - Mises Daily


----------



## koshergrl

That is way too deep for Ravi's pea brain to wrap around.


----------



## koshergrl

edthecynic said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> All very true. I wouldn't claim that Hitler was a conservative in the true sense of the word but he certainly drew the support of a lot of conservatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He also drew the support of a lot of progressives, including George Bernard Shaw.
> 
> [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQvsf2MUKRQ"]George Bernard Shaw Defends Hitler, Mass Murder - YouTube[/ame]
> 
> Go ahead, try to tell me that Shaw, a noted socialist and member of the Fabian Society, was a conservative.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Don't you mindless brainwashed assholes ever check CON$ervoFascist lies for yourselves? Satirist Shaw was MOCKING Eugenicists in that video, as all you lying scum know full well!!
> 
> But if you really want someone spouting the Nazi rhetoric, here is your guy!
> 
> May 25, 2012
> RUSH: And I know that 88 million Americans are not working but they're eating, and it's a statistic that worries me.
> It's quite telling that 88 million are not working but they're eating.
Click to expand...

 
Yeah cuz it's fascist to expect people to work for money, instead of being fed and bred by the state.


----------



## L.K.Eder

bigrebnc1775 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> There's that comprehension fail again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Show us one thing, please, he used as a socialist to gain power.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> don't let me stop you show everybody how stupid you are.
Click to expand...



here, for big depp:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/media/143219-a-historical-film-on-hitler-15.html#post3013705


----------



## JakeStarkey

bigrebnc1775 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What in the fuck is wrong with you? You fucking dumb son of a bitch? I can't help you to comprehend the facts that's up to you.
> I need me a new pair of boots this kicking your shit too the curb is fucking my boots up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have no credible evidence.
> 
> Go ahead: show us what Hitler did as a socialist to take power or after he took power.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You repeating the same thing over and over will never change the facts.
> First thing hitler did was join the National Socialist German Workers' Party
> 
> Then gains control of the National Socialist German Workers' Party and kills his political rivals. Does he kill all socialist? No he doesn't just his rivals.
Click to expand...


That is the work of a dictator, not a socialist.  He did not nationalize industries, he made workers subservient to the bosses.  He killed communists and socialists and leftists.

Show us what he DID as a socialist to gain power: nothing.


----------



## JakeStarkey

bigrebnc1775 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> There's that comprehension fail again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Show us one thing, please, he used as a socialist to gain power.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> don't let me stop you show everybody how stupid you are.
Click to expand...


Au contraire.


----------



## JakeStarkey

MikeK said:


> The same militant, authoritarian mentality which accommodated the emergence of the Third Reich is abundantly present here in the U.S. and would unhesitatingly fall in line to support the rise of a radical demagogue whose fanatical ideology includes the forceful suppression of opposing political views.  And there is no shortage of uniformed *goons who would thoughtlessly and obediently crack the skulls of any who would actively resist*.



Yes, we witness it daily with the likes of bigreb, etc.


----------



## JakeStarkey

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> In Nazi Germany, wealthy individuals owned businesses. Hitler's "Charter of Labor" made employees virtual slaves to their master employees.
> 
> More rightwing stuff you need to know!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As for the Nazis, they generally did not have to kill in order to seize the property of Germans other than Jews. This was because, as we have seen, they established socialism by stealth, through price controls, which served to maintain the outward guise and appearance of private ownership. The private owners were thus deprived of their property without knowing it and thus felt no need to defend it by force.
> 
> Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian - George Reisman - Mises Daily
Click to expand...


Mises Daily doesn't count and you know it.  But you have admitted that it was not socialism.


----------



## Wry Catcher

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oddball said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another glib remark Odd-dude?  That appears to be all you have in your bag of tricks, that an personal attacks.  Dig out your thesaurus now so you appear to be smarter than the average kook, but those who 'know' you recognize your posts are never substantive and even average kooks are able to offer counter points once in a while.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Thank you, imitation is one of the highest forms of flattery.  Not on par with an actual and substantive response, but still a noble effort.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

L.K.Eder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Show us one thing, please, he used as a socialist to gain power.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> don't let me stop you show everybody how stupid you are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> here, for big depp:
> 
> http://www.usmessageboard.com/media/143219-a-historical-film-on-hitler-15.html#post3013705
Click to expand...


Back again to get your ass kicked derp boy? This is a good day.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Wry Catcher said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> 
> Another glib remark Odd-dude?  That appears to be all you have in your bag of tricks, that an personal attacks.  Dig out your thesaurus now so you appear to be smarter than the average kook, but those who 'know' you recognize your posts are never substantive and even average kooks are able to offer counter points once in a while.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thank you, imitation is one of the highest forms of flattery.  Not on par with an actual and substantive response, but still a noble effort.
Click to expand...

But obama in the back rooms laughing his ass off at his supporters should tell you something.


----------



## Ravi

> After the war Hitler was stationed in Munich, the capital of Bavaria. While Hitler was in Munich, the capital of Bavaria, Kurt Eisner, leader of the Independent Socialist Party, declared Bavaria a Socialist Republic. Hitler was appalled by the revolution. As a German Nationalist he disagreed with the socialist belief in equality.
> 
> Hitler saw socialism as part of a Jewish conspiracy. Many of the socialist leaders in Germany, including Kurt Eisner, Rosa Luxemburg, Ernst Toller and Eugen Levine were Jews. So also were many of the leaders of the October Revolution in Russia. This included Leon Trotsky, Gregory Zinoviev, Lev Kamenev, Dimitri Bogrov, Karl Radek, Yakov Sverdlov, Maxim Litvinov, Adolf Joffe, and Moisei Uritsky. It had not escaped Hitler's notice that Karl Marx, the prophet of socialism, had also been a Jew.
> 
> It was no coincidence that Jews had joined socialist and communist parties in Europe. Jews had been persecuted for centuries and therefore were attracted to a movement that proclaimed that all men and women deserved to be treated as equals. This message was reinforced when on 10th July, 1918, the Bolshevik government in Russia passed a law that abolished all discrimination between Jews and non-Jews.
> 
> It was not until May, 1919 that the German Army entered Munich and overthrew the Bavarian Socialist Republic. Hitler was arrested with other soldiers in Munich and was accused of being a socialist. Hundreds of socialists were executed without trial but Hitler was able to convince them that he had been an opponent of the regime. To prove this he volunteered to help to identify soldiers who had supported the Socialist Republic. The authorities agreed to this proposal and Hitler was transferred to the commission investigating the revolution.



Adolf Hitler : Biography

He sounds like buggerreb's hero.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JakeStarkey said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have no credible evidence.
> 
> Go ahead: show us what Hitler did as a socialist to take power or after he took power.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You repeating the same thing over and over will never change the facts.
> First thing hitler did was join the National Socialist German Workers' Party
> 
> Then gains control of the National Socialist German Workers' Party and kills his political rivals. Does he kill all socialist? No he doesn't just his rivals.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is the work of a dictator, not a socialist.  He did not nationalize industries, he made workers subservient to the bosses.  He killed communists and socialists and leftists.
> 
> Show us what he DID as a socialist to gain power: nothing.
Click to expand...


You're a fucking idiot Think about what I have been saying and what you just wrote.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Ravi said:


> After the war Hitler was stationed in Munich, the capital of Bavaria. While Hitler was in Munich, the capital of Bavaria, Kurt Eisner, leader of the Independent Socialist Party, declared Bavaria a Socialist Republic. Hitler was appalled by the revolution. As a German Nationalist he disagreed with the socialist belief in equality.
> 
> Hitler saw socialism as part of a Jewish conspiracy. Many of the socialist leaders in Germany, including Kurt Eisner, Rosa Luxemburg, Ernst Toller and Eugen Levine were Jews. So also were many of the leaders of the October Revolution in Russia. This included Leon Trotsky, Gregory Zinoviev, Lev Kamenev, Dimitri Bogrov, Karl Radek, Yakov Sverdlov, Maxim Litvinov, Adolf Joffe, and Moisei Uritsky. It had not escaped Hitler's notice that Karl Marx, the prophet of socialism, had also been a Jew.
> 
> It was no coincidence that Jews had joined socialist and communist parties in Europe. Jews had been persecuted for centuries and therefore were attracted to a movement that proclaimed that all men and women deserved to be treated as equals. This message was reinforced when on 10th July, 1918, the Bolshevik government in Russia passed a law that abolished all discrimination between Jews and non-Jews.
> 
> It was not until May, 1919 that the German Army entered Munich and overthrew the Bavarian Socialist Republic. Hitler was arrested with other soldiers in Munich and was accused of being a socialist. Hundreds of socialists were executed without trial but Hitler was able to convince them that he had been an opponent of the regime. To prove this he volunteered to help to identify soldiers who had supported the Socialist Republic. The authorities agreed to this proposal and Hitler was transferred to the commission investigating the revolution.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Adolf Hitler : Biography
> 
> He sounds like buggerreb's hero.
Click to expand...


No obama has more in common with the early of the 20's and early 30's Hitler so try again.


----------



## Ravi

Hitler's reputation as an orator grew and it soon became clear that he was the main reason why people were joining the party. This gave Hitler tremendous power within the organization as they knew they could not afford to lose him. One change suggested by Hitler concerned adding "Socialist" to the name of the party. Hitler had always been hostile to socialist ideas, especially those that involved racial or sexual equality. However, socialism was a popular political philosophy in Germany after the First World War. This was reflected in the growth in the German Social Democrat Party (SDP), the largest political party in Germany.

Hitler, therefore redefined socialism by placing the word 'National' before it. He claimed he was only in favour of equality for those who had "German blood". Jews and other "aliens" would lose their rights of citizenship, and immigration of non-Germans should be brought to an end.

Adolf Hitler : Biography

Well, he sure fooled buggerreb, but not all those French, American and British conservatives.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JakeStarkey said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> In Nazi Germany, wealthy individuals owned businesses. Hitler's "Charter of Labor" made employees virtual slaves to their master employees.
> 
> More rightwing stuff you need to know!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As for the Nazis, they generally did not have to kill in order to seize the property of Germans other than Jews. This was because, as we have seen, they established socialism by stealth, through price controls, which served to maintain the outward guise and appearance of private ownership. The private owners were thus deprived of their property without knowing it and thus felt no need to defend it by force.
> 
> Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian - George Reisman - Mises Daily
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Mises Daily doesn't count and you know it.  But you have admitted that it was not socialism.
Click to expand...



Maybe if you would read and stop commenting you might comprehend what's being said and discussed.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Ravi said:


> *Hitler's reputation as an orator grew and it soon became clear that he was the main reason why people were joining the party. This gave Hitler tremendous power within the organization as they knew they could not afford to lose him. One change suggested by Hitler concerned adding "Socialist" to the name of the party.* Hitler had always been hostile to socialist ideas, especially those that involved racial or sexual equality. However, socialism was a popular political philosophy in Germany after the First World War. This was reflected in the growth in the German Social Democrat Party (SDP), the largest political party in Germany.
> 
> Hitler, therefore redefined socialism by placing the word 'National' before it. He claimed he was only in favour of equality for those who had "German blood". Jews and other "aliens" would lose their rights of citizenship, and immigration of non-Germans should be brought to an end.
> 
> Adolf Hitler : Biography
> 
> Well, he sure fooled buggerreb, but not all those French, American and British conservatives.




Keep posting you are supporting what I am saying.

More in common with obama than you think.


----------



## Ravi

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Hitler's reputation as an orator grew and it soon became clear that he was the main reason why people were joining the party. This gave Hitler tremendous power within the organization as they knew they could not afford to lose him. One change suggested by Hitler concerned adding "Socialist" to the name of the party.* Hitler had always been hostile to socialist ideas, especially those that involved racial or sexual equality. However, socialism was a popular political philosophy in Germany after the First World War. This was reflected in the growth in the German Social Democrat Party (SDP), the largest political party in Germany.
> 
> Hitler, therefore redefined socialism by placing the word 'National' before it. He claimed he was only in favour of equality for those who had "German blood". Jews and other "aliens" would lose their rights of citizenship, and immigration of non-Germans should be brought to an end.
> 
> Adolf Hitler : Biography
> 
> Well, he sure fooled buggerreb, but not all those French, American and British conservatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Keep posting you are supporting what I am saying.
> 
> More in common with obama than you think.
Click to expand...

I pointed this out on your epic fail thread. Hitler used social programs to garner support but he never followed through. In other words, he lied, much like you do here on a regular basis.

But still, the right wing all supported him and/or wanted to appease him....because AFTER he came to power he quit pretending he was a socialist.


----------



## edthecynic

koshergrl said:


> edthecynic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> 
> He also drew the support of a lot of progressives, including George Bernard Shaw.
> 
> George Bernard Shaw Defends Hitler, Mass Murder - YouTube
> 
> Go ahead, try to tell me that Shaw, a noted socialist and member of the Fabian Society, was a conservative.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't you mindless brainwashed assholes ever check CON$ervoFascist lies for yourselves? Satirist Shaw was MOCKING Eugenicists in that video, as all you lying scum know full well!!
> 
> But if you really want someone spouting the Nazi rhetoric, here is your guy!
> 
> May 25, 2012
> RUSH: And I know that 88 million Americans are not working but they're eating, and it's a statistic that worries me.
> It's quite telling that 88 million are not working but they're eating.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah cuz it's fascist to expect people to work for money, instead of being fed and bred by the state.
Click to expand...

Cuz it's Fascist to say that people who don't work are useless eaters. Your MessiahRushie was attacking the disabled and women today, 2 parts of the 88 million, and I would guess that made you very proud.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Ravi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Hitler's reputation as an orator grew and it soon became clear that he was the main reason why people were joining the party. This gave Hitler tremendous power within the organization as they knew they could not afford to lose him. One change suggested by Hitler concerned adding "Socialist" to the name of the party.* Hitler had always been hostile to socialist ideas, especially those that involved racial or sexual equality. However, socialism was a popular political philosophy in Germany after the First World War. This was reflected in the growth in the German Social Democrat Party (SDP), the largest political party in Germany.
> 
> Hitler, therefore redefined socialism by placing the word 'National' before it. He claimed he was only in favour of equality for those who had "German blood". Jews and other "aliens" would lose their rights of citizenship, and immigration of non-Germans should be brought to an end.
> 
> Adolf Hitler : Biography
> 
> Well, he sure fooled buggerreb, but not all those French, American and British conservatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Keep posting you are supporting what I am saying.
> 
> More in common with obama than you think.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I pointed this out on your epic fail thread. Hitler used social programs to garner support but he never followed through. In other words, he lied, much like you do here on a regular basis.
> 
> But still, the right wing all supported him and/or wanted to appease him....because AFTER he came to power he quit pretending he was a socialist.
Click to expand...


Why is it when someone get's their ass kicked by the OP of a thread the person who get their ass kicked calls it an epic fail thread?

 Take the hat off you're pea brain needs blood.


----------



## koshergrl

edthecynic said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edthecynic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't you mindless brainwashed assholes ever check CON$ervoFascist lies for yourselves? Satirist Shaw was MOCKING Eugenicists in that video, as all you lying scum know full well!!
> 
> But if you really want someone spouting the Nazi rhetoric, here is your guy!
> 
> May 25, 2012
> RUSH: And I know that 88 million Americans are not working but they're eating, and it's a statistic that worries me.
> It's quite telling that 88 million are not working but they're eating.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah cuz it's fascist to expect people to work for money, instead of being fed and bred by the state.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cuz it's Fascist to say that people who don't work are useless eaters. Your MessiahRushie was attacking the disabled and women today, 2 parts of the 88 million, and I would guess that made you very proud.
Click to expand...

 
When did Rush say that?

Oh, that's right. He didn't.

However, I've heard abortion proponents say exactly that about the babies they delight in butchering.

What's your stance on that?


----------



## Political Junky

Neo-Nazism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's interesting that Neo-Nazis are considered Right Wing, and use the Swastika.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Political Junky said:


> Neo-Nazism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> It's interesting that Neo-Nazis are considered Right Wing, and use the Swastika.



Considered by the southern law proverty. 
and the BLACK PANTHERS AREN'T TERRORISTS.


----------



## Neotrotsky

Charles_Main said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> "We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak,
> with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility
> and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Speech of May 1, 1927. Quoted by Toland, 1976, p. 306).  Yet they destroyed the socialists, the communists, the democrats, cozied up to the capitalists, never nationalized industry, and so forth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What History you reading? They did indeed nationalize much Of Germany Industry.
Click to expand...



Concerned trolls/ left have spent decades trying to marginalize it to cover for the fact that, it is a creature of the left.
They make the rather weak and limited argument that socialism is just pure nationalization of industry. 
This argument is either intentionally misleading or based on a rather simplistic and ignorant view of economics
Something tells me in this case, it is the later....shallow people can get lost in discussions on socialism



They did as most modern socialists do today, they regulated it to the point where
private ownership meant very little and central gov't power was increased

For example 



March 1937 a special law authorised the RNS (Reichsnährstand) to determine what crops were to be grown in order to increase the output of scarce produce

February 1935 all employment came under the exclusive control of government.
Gov't offices which determined who would work where and for how much.

June, 1938, the Office of the Four Year Plan instituted guaranteed employment by conscripting labor. Every German worker was assigned a position from which he could not be released by the employer, nor could he switch jobs, without permission of the government employment office. 

Absenteeism was met with fines or imprisonment-all in the name of job security. 
A Nazi slogan at the time was "the Common Interest before Self"!​

What the left is trying to hide from....

Fascism, socialism are both Centrally Planned Economies.
They are part of the Rousseauian vision. It holds that the collective comes before the individual, our rights come from the group not from God or are innate 
that the tribe is the source of all morality, and the general will is the ultimate religious construct and so therefore the needs &#8212; and aims &#8212; of the group come before those of the individual. 

Fascism, Communism, Socialism, Progressivism and all the other collectivist groups are all based on the Rousseauian vision

They have more in common than not
which the left is trying to run from...

Friedrich Hayek defined fascism best
"It is simply collectivism freed from all traces of an individualist tradition which might hamper its realization."​


----------



## edthecynic

koshergrl said:


> edthecynic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah cuz it's fascist to expect people to work for money, instead of being fed and bred by the state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cuz it's Fascist to say that people who don't work are useless eaters. Your MessiahRushie was attacking the disabled and women today, 2 parts of the 88 million, and I would guess that made you very proud.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When did Rush say that?
> 
> Oh, that's right. He didn't.
> 
> However, I've heard abortion proponents say exactly that about the babies they delight in butchering.
> 
> What's your stance on that?
Click to expand...

I've already posted your MessiahRushie's rant on the lazy non-working useless people who are still eating, he rants about it all the time which is why you are so desperate to change the subject.

May 25, 2012
RUSH:  And I know that 88 million Americans are not working but they're eating, and it's a statistic that worries me.
It's quite telling that 88 million are not working but they're eating.

May 17, 2012
RUSH:  * How can 88 million people afford not to work in this country?* They can afford not to work because the ones who do work see enough of their income siphoned off to be redistributed to these people.*

July 03, 2012
RUSH:* You might be surprised to learn that you are never kicked off once you are enrolled. You are on it for life.* So we now have 8.7 million "workers" (as the story says) on disability.
*We have 8.7 million Americans who are living off of federal disability insurance payments, and can for the rest of their lives. *I don't know how much money it is. I don't know what an average monthly benefit is. But all it takes to qualify for a disability now is a half-decent lawyer to make the case for you

Sick verses Disablement | Disability Condition
*Of the 8 million collecting Social Security Disability Insurance benefits, more than 57 thousand go back to work every year.** Sadly, over 231,000 terminate their benefits by dying.
Average benefit payment is $1090 per month and median payment is right at $1000 per month.* Maximum possible benefit is just over $2,300 per month; Hardly the kind of money to live in luxury, especially if you have high medical costs.
I seriously doubt that the 8 million beneficiaries want to be poor and dependent on others the rest of their lives would you?


----------



## HUGGY

syrenn said:


> Sorry ravi...if anyone gives me the hitler feeling.... its obama.



Really?  You compare Obama and Hitler as equals?  WOW!  That's quite a statement.  Well I guess it is true that ya learn something new each day.  Thanks for the lesson.


----------



## JakeStarkey

bigrebnc1775 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You repeating the same thing over and over will never change the facts.
> First thing hitler did was join the National Socialist German Workers' Party
> 
> Then gains control of the National Socialist German Workers' Party and kills his political rivals. Does he kill all socialist? No he doesn't just his rivals.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is the work of a dictator, not a socialist.  He did not nationalize industries, he made workers subservient to the bosses.  He killed communists and socialists and leftists.
> 
> Show us what he DID as a socialist to gain power: nothing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're a fucking idiot Think about what I have been saying and what you just wrote.
Click to expand...


We all grin when we see you have posted because we know you have been punted into the garbage dump, from where you yell, "you're wrong."

You are the perfect stooge for which those who know better use you as the punching bag.

Keep coming up for more punches, that is your only worth here.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Neotrotsky said:


> Charles_Main said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> (Speech of May 1, 1927. Quoted by Toland, 1976, p. 306).  Yet they destroyed the socialists, the communists, the democrats, cozied up to the capitalists, never nationalized industry, and so forth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What History you reading? They did indeed nationalize much Of Germany Industry.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Concerned trolls/ left have spent decades trying to marginalize it to cover for the fact that, it is a creature of the left.
> They make the rather weak and limited argument that socialism is just pure nationalization of industry.
> This argument is either intentionally misleading or based on a rather simplistic and ignorant view of economics
> Something tells me in this case, it is the later....shallow people can get lost in discussions on socialism
> 
> 
> 
> They did as most modern socialists do today, they regulated it to the point where
> private ownership meant very little
> 
> For example
> 
> 
> March 1937 a special law authorised the RNS (Reichsnährstand) to determine what crops were to be grown in order to increase the output of scarce produce
> 
> February 1935 all employment came under the exclusive control of government.
> Gov't offices which determined who would work where and for how much.
> 
> June, 1938, the Office of the Four Year Plan instituted guaranteed employment by conscripting labor. Every German worker was assigned a position from which he could not be released by the employer, nor could he switch jobs, without permission of the government employment office.
> 
> Absenteeism was met with fines or imprisonment-all in the name of job security.
> A Nazi slogan at the time was "the Common Interest before Self"!​
> 
> What the left is trying to hide from....
> 
> Fascism, socialism are both Centrally Planned Economies.
> They are part of the Rousseauian vision. It holds that the collective comes before the individual, our rights come from the group not from God or are innate
> that the tribe is the source of all morality, and the general will is the ultimate religious construct and so therefore the needs  and aims  of the group come before those of the individual.
> 
> Fascism, Communism, Socialism, Progressivism and all the other collectivist groups are all based on the Rousseauian vision
> 
> They have more in common than not
> which the left is trying to run from...
> 
> Friedrich Hayek defined fascism best
> "It is simply collectivism freed from all traces of an individualist tradition which might hamper its realization."​
Click to expand...


OK, define socialism competently in political and historical terms, then go back and try again.  And please give us a competent, accept site.

Your word is worth nothing, concerned troll.


----------



## Neotrotsky

bigrebnc1775 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> As for the Nazis, they generally did not have to kill in order to seize the property of Germans other than Jews. This was because, as we have seen, they established socialism by stealth, through price controls, which served to maintain the outward guise and appearance of private ownership. The private owners were thus deprived of their property without knowing it and thus felt no need to defend it by force.
> 
> Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian - George Reisman - Mises Daily
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mises Daily doesn't count and you know it.  But you have admitted that it was not socialism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe if you would read and stop commenting you might comprehend what's being said and discussed.
Click to expand...



That would be asking too much from concerned trolls
Staying with the template is all they are capable of....
Some of them even try to claim that statism exist nowhere in the world



Again, before the war, many Progressives. left and right
were fascinated with Fascism and Progressive leaders desperate
to get out of the Great Depression looked at their big gov't ways for guidance 

For example 
FDR said:

_There seems to be no question that [Mussolini] is really interested in what we are doing and I am much interested and deeply impressed by what he has accomplished and by his evidenced honest purpose of restoring Italy._​Comment in early 1933 about Benito Mussolini to US Ambassador to Italy Breckinridge Long, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31

_I don't mind telling you in confidence that I am keeping in fairly close touch with that admirable Italian gentleman._​
Comment on Benito Mussolini in 1933, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31

Mussolini himself praised the New Deal as following his own corporate state, as quoted in a July 1933 article in the New York Times, "Your plan for coordination of industry follows precisely our lines of cooperation."

Which makes sense since the NRA, with its regulations and industry organizations, was nothing more than another creature of the left- corporatism.

Of course and for good reason, the Left tried to distance themselves from their early fascination with Fascism with the 
war and the aftermath. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed
Mussolini said 

"The Fascist conception of life, stresses the importance of the State and accepts the individual only 
in so far as his interests coincide with the State. It is opposed to classical liberalism [which] denied the 
State in the name of the individual; Fascism reasserts the rights of the State as expressing the real essence of the individual."

As said before,
They are part of the Rousseauian vision. It holds that the collective comes before the individual
----------------------------------------------------------------




Here boy


----------



## JakeStarkey

Neotrotsky said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mises Daily doesn't count and you know it.  But you have admitted that it was not socialism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe if you would read and stop commenting you might comprehend what's being said and discussed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> That would be asking too much from concerned trolls
> Staying with the template is all they are capable of....
> Some of them even try to claim that statism exist nowhere in the world
> 
> 
> 
> Again, before the war, many Progressives. left and right
> were fascinated with Fascism and Progressive leaders desperate
> to get out of the Great Depression looked at their big gov't ways for guidance
> 
> For example
> FDR said:
> 
> _There seems to be no question that [Mussolini] is really interested in what we are doing and I am much interested and deeply impressed by what he has accomplished and by his evidenced honest purpose of restoring Italy._​Comment in early 1933 about Benito Mussolini to US Ambassador to Italy Breckinridge Long, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31
> 
> _I don't mind telling you in confidence that I am keeping in fairly close touch with that admirable Italian gentleman._​
> Comment on Benito Mussolini in 1933, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31
> 
> Mussolini himself praised the New Deal as following his own corporate state, as quoted in a July 1933 article in the New York Times, "Your plan for coordination of industry follows precisely our lines of cooperation."
> 
> Which makes sense since the NRA, with its regulations and industry organizations, was nothing more than another creature of the left- corporatism.
> 
> Of course and for good reason, the Left tried to distance themselves from their early fascination with Fascism with the
> war and the aftermath.
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Indeed
> Mussolini said
> 
> "The Fascist conception of life, stresses the importance of the State and accepts the individual only
> in so far as his interests coincide with the State. It is opposed to classical liberalism [which] denied the
> State in the name of the individual; Fascism reasserts the rights of the State as expressing the real essence of the individual."
> 
> As said before,
> They are part of the Rousseauian vision. It holds that the collective comes before the individual
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Here boy
Click to expand...


AT LAST somebody has given a source.  Thank you.

*1933*?  The first six months of FDR's presidency?  Really?  Give us something of worth, NeoTroll.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Here is a start for reviewing NeoTroll's book.

_I was excited to begin this book, as I believed the author sought to compare the many similarities between these regimes and their greatly different outcomes. At points, he addressed the similarities successfully, particularly in chapters titled Leadership and Propaganda. My problem with the book is that not only does it lack virtually any reactions from ordinary citizens of these countries but, instead, it contains a lot of political science references with few definitions or explanations. The period quotations that are used are of an equally-dull and clinical perspective. It took me longer to read the 191 pages of true content (not including the Notes) in Three New Deals than it has taken me to read books three times as long. Every time I tried to get into a chapter, with few exceptions, I was driven to frustration by the tedium of trying to take a personal perspective from the torrential downpour of -isms (Communism, Socialism, Bolshevism, Fascism, Collectivism, Individualism, Progressivism, Liberalism, Capitalism, Regionalism, and Nomadism, to name just a few.) Throw in the fact that each of these terms must be reexamined by the reader, since they no longer mean what they did in 1935, and you're talking about anything but a leisurely read._

http://www.amazon.com/review/RK00IO1NXPRVU/ref=cm_cr_pr_viewpnt#RK00IO1NXPRVU&tag=ff0d01-20

We also should have, for clarity, from NeoTroll, comments by FDR after the Ethiopian invasion by Italy, Germany's rearmament, and the Spanish Civil War.

Oh, wait we, do: _By October, 1937, President Roosevelt understood that the world was in danger, but he found himself facing a dilemma: On the one hand, German and Italian aggression were threatening world peace, and it was no longer a question of which side the United States might eventually support. President Woodrow Wilson had faced that issue when World War I broke out in 1914; the German practice of unrestricted submarine warfare had decided the issue for Wilson as to which side the United States would support. But Hitler's belligerence, his rejection of the restrictions of the Treaty of Versailles, his rearming of Germany, and his militant rhetoric, along with the participation of Italy and Germany and the Spanish civil war and the Italian invasion of Ethiopia, made it clear that if there was to be an enemy, it would be a fascist states of Germany and Italy.

On the other hand, the spirit of isolationism was strong in the United States. The United States military establishment was pitifully small, and the neutrality acts which Congress had recently passed limited America's ability to support nations with whom President Roosevelt was sympathetic. He wanted to assist nations that were victims of aggression, but he also needed to keep the neutralist, antiwar contingent at arm's length. This quarantine speech was a step in the direction of taking a position that made it clear on which side the United States stood but at the same time was not warlike enough to arouse Roosevelt's political opponents_.

For more, open the link.  http://www.academicamerican.com/worldwar2/docs/FDRQuar.htm


----------



## Dr.House

JakeStarkey said:


> AT LAST somebody has given a source.  Thank you.



Why would you, someone who has used wikipedia, be so concerned about source?


----------



## Neotrotsky

The T said:


> And what did HITLER ultimately end up doing just as the Soviets did?
> 
> USE the useful idiots until they got ultimate power, and outlawed EVERYTHING that could be perceived as a threat to thier power and control.
> 
> Use liberty...then cut it off at the neck.
> 
> BAD analogy.
> 
> TRY AGAIN



I hear you
The Left has always tried to rewrite history
since the Left has so many failures

Which is part of the reason we have some of the issues today
Indeed, not learning from history we are doomed to repeat it....

See following quotations and match them to Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, and FDR 

A. "...above all the unity of a nation's spirit and will are worth far more than the freedom of the spirit and will of an individual... By this we understand only the individual's capacity to make sacrifices for the community, for his fellow men."

B. "The [] people must march forward as a trained and loyal army willing to sacrifice for the good of a common discipline."

C. "...moral law, binding together individual and the generations into a tradition and a mission, suppressing the instinct for a life enclosed within the brief round of pleasure in order to restore within duty a higher life free from the limits of time and space."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Perhaps it is an ignorance of history from the left/concerned trolls
or just a simple and naive belief, that we will get it correct- ............this time

Good luck with that,





Here boy


----------



## Neotrotsky

Dr.House said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> AT LAST somebody has given a source.  Thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why would you, someone who has used wikipedia, be so concerned about source?
Click to expand...






Don't feed the concerned trolls









here boy


----------



## JakeStarkey

Notice the far right trolls cannot put their argument into context.

That is typical of Mises drones and followers.

Is what it is: a far right failure again.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Neotrotsky said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> AT LAST somebody has given a source.  Thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why would you, someone who has used wikipedia, be so concerned about source?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Don't feed the concerned trolls
> 
> 
> 
> here boy
Click to expand...


Says the King and Queen Troll of wiki?  Too funny.

And they won't deal with a competent source that pulls the rug out for under them.

Worthless, worthless they are, but it's nice to know they will vote for Romney, who will then ignore them and their extremism.


----------



## Dr.House

JakeStarkey said:


> Notice the far right trolls cannot put their argument into context.
> 
> That is typical of Mises drones and followers.
> 
> Is what it is: a far right failure again.



I'm asking you why you, a known poster that sources wikipedia, would be concerned about the sources posted by others?


----------



## JakeStarkey

Queen Troll my dear Dr. House: you are deflecting.  My sources and information blew you trolls' arguments out of the water, as usual.  Are they wikipedia?  That your point doesn't matter.

See, House, this is why you get your butt spanked every time you mess with me.

I expect you to vote Romney and shut up, because you simply offer scat.  So now scat  Oh, and for once, please don't melt because you are fail yet again.


----------



## Dr.House

Why won't FakeJake answer a simple question?

Jokey:  Why do you, a wikipedia sourcer, care about what sources others use?

It's a simple question that you seem afraid to answer.

Man up, Jokey....  Answer the question and don't run away like a little girl....


----------



## JakeStarkey

Stop your whining and pining, son.  You are a far right extremist out of touch with the American mainstream who wants nothing to do with the modern 21st century.  Simply move on, and leave your betters to their world. Move along.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

Ravi said:


> You're finding individuals. I am showing you entire groups of the far right that supported Hitler.



I knew you never read links, so I posted a video that explains how the left supported him. Apparently watching videos is also beyond your capacity for learning.

A mind is a terrible thing to waste.


----------



## Dr.House

JakeStarkey said:


> Stop your whining and pining, son.  You are a far right extremist out of touch with the American mainstream who wants nothing to do with the modern 21st century.  Simply move on, and leave your betters to their world. Move along.



So you admit you're afraid to answer a simple question?

Well, we knew you were a pussy, so it's understandable...

You often source wikipedia, so why do you complain when others do it?...

You're too stupid to grasp how stupid you look doing that...


----------



## Quantum Windbag

JakeStarkey said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> "We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak,
> with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility
> and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Speech of May 1, 1927. Quoted by Toland, 1976, p. 306).  Yet they destroyed the socialists, the communists, the democrats, cozied up to the capitalists, never nationalized industry, and so forth.
Click to expand...


Hitler never nationalized industry?

Are you saying that government backed monopolies and oligarchies do not amount to nationalization?


----------



## Peach

Si modo said:


> Pol Pot and the left.
> 
> Jebus, Ravs.



I posted FACTS to show the right in America today is nothing like Hitler, ignored by those making absurd comparisons.


----------



## Neotrotsky

Dr.House said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop your whining and pining, son.  You are a far right extremist out of touch with the American mainstream who wants nothing to do with the modern 21st century.  Simply move on, and leave your betters to their world. Move along.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you admit you're afraid to answer a simple question?
> 
> Well, we knew you were a pussy, so it's understandable...
> 
> You often source wikipedia, so why do you complain when others do it?...
> 
> You're too stupid to grasp how stupid you look doing that...
Click to expand...


Concerned trolls' goals are not for any real debate
just to claim faux support for Romney while trying to 
discourage the base at the same time.

They are easy to spot with statements like
"I am voting for Romney but he will crush the conservative base"
or how they will always have to come to the aid of the left

Really? Who would put this guy in charge of the Romney campaign?


Easy way to spot- they never start a thread
They can't - their ideas are too extreme for the American public
Some of the concerned trolls on here have over 31,000 posts
and have never started a thread.


The other easy spot -
they always claim they "won" in some way...
really sophomoric 

Did you ever notice the posters that do this 
Never really do 

Funny how that works

Sad thing
Nobody believes them
-----------------



Here boy


----------



## CrusaderFrank

The Nazis were Socialists, leftists. They were not about individual freedom and liberty


----------



## CrusaderFrank

The biggest Progressive lies were: FDR saved the country from the Great Depression, McCarthy's HUAC blacklisted innocent people and Hitler was a right winger


----------



## Neotrotsky

CrusaderFrank said:


> The Nazis were Socialists, leftists. They were not about individual freedom and liberty






I am voting for Romney
and I am glad he will crush the likes of you in the party






-----------------------------------



Here boy


----------



## Peach

CrusaderFrank said:


> The Nazis were Socialists, leftists. They were not about individual freedom and liberty



No, the ADVERTISING* differs greatly; in practice fascism & communism are two sides of the same coin. No 'leftist' ADS in Germany, Italy, Spain, or Japan circa 1935-1945 however. Communists pretend to desire equality, fascists, superiority. 

*All that either 'idea' is at the core, a product being promoted.


----------



## JakeStarkey

How telling that one old GOP mainstreamer can easily refute four (count them) reactionary extremists to the far right.

*Quantam *wrote,  I posted a video that explains how the left supported him.  So I have asked the extremists here to put it context and offered links that did that, which the have ignored.  Quantum refuses Toland and others point that Hitler never nationalized industries as socialists do when they get the chance.  *House *asks about Wikipedia, which was never used here by me, and ignores the comptent repudiation of extremist reactionaery fear from the right of the sources that were used here by me.   *NeoTroll* continues ramble and ignores the evidence I posted that put his silliness into context.   *Frank *says flatly, The Nazis were Socialists, leftists. They were not about individual freedom and liberty.  The Nazi righties destroyed the Socialists, particularly the homosexual leadership of Rohm in the SA, but the extremist reactionaries here ignore the facts.

Not one responded to what I posted earlier in repudiation of their extremist righty nonsense.

Here is a start for reviewing NeoTroll's book.  _I was excited to begin this book, as I believed the author sought to compare the many similarities between these regimes and their greatly different outcomes. At points, he addressed the similarities successfully, particularly in chapters titled Leadership and Propaganda. My problem with the book is that not only does it lack virtually any reactions from ordinary citizens of these countries but, instead, it contains a lot of political science references with few definitions or explanations. The period quotations that are used are of an equally-dull and clinical perspective. It took me longer to read the 191 pages of true content (not including the Notes) in Three New Deals than it has taken me to read books three times as long. Every time I tried to get into a chapter, with few exceptions, I was driven to frustration by the tedium of trying to take a personal perspective from the torrential downpour of -isms (Communism, Socialism, Bolshevism, Fascism, Collectivism, Individualism, Progressivism, Liberalism, Capitalism, Regionalism, and Nomadism, to name just a few.) Throw in the fact that each of these terms must be reexamined by the reader, since they no longer mean what they did in 1935, and you're talking about anything but a leisurely read._

http://www.amazon.com/review/RK00IO1...#RK00IO1NXPRVU&tag=ff0d01-20

We also should have, for clarity, from NeoTroll, comments by FDR after the Ethiopian invasion by Italy, Germany's rearmament, and the Spanish Civil War.

Oh, wait we, do: _By October, 1937, President Roosevelt understood that the world was in danger, but he found himself facing a dilemma: On the one hand, German and Italian aggression were threatening world peace, and it was no longer a question of which side the United States might eventually support. President Woodrow Wilson had faced that issue when World War I broke out in 1914; the German practice of unrestricted submarine warfare had decided the issue for Wilson as to which side the United States would support. But Hitler's belligerence, his rejection of the restrictions of the Treaty of Versailles, his rearming of Germany, and his militant rhetoric, along with the participation of Italy and Germany and the Spanish civil war and the Italian invasion of Ethiopia, made it clear that if there was to be an enemy, it would be a fascist states of Germany and Italy._

_On the other hand, the spirit of isolationism was strong in the United States. The United States military establishment was pitifully small, and the neutrality acts which Congress had recently passed limited America's ability to support nations with whom President Roosevelt was sympathetic. He wanted to assist nations that were victims of aggression, but he also needed to keep the neutralist, antiwar contingent at arm's length. This quarantine speech was a step in the direction of taking a position that made it clear on which side the United States stood but at the same time was not warlike enough to arouse Roosevelt's political opponents._

For more, open the link. http://www.academicamerican.com/worl...cs/FDRQuar.htm
__________________
The principles of human rights are clearly written in the Declaration of Independence. Americans have no greater, and no lesser, human rights than any other peoples.


----------



## HUGGY

Neotrotsky said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Nazis were Socialists, leftists. They were not about individual freedom and liberty
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am voting for Romney
> and I am glad he will crush the likes of you in the party
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> Here boy
Click to expand...


IntellectualTrots.  I look forward to your faceplant in November.


----------



## Neotrotsky

CrusaderFrank said:


> The biggest Progressive lies were: FDR saved the country from the Great Depression, McCarthy's HUAC blacklisted innocent people and Hitler was a right winger



You just wait till Romney wins!

He is going to marginalize you guys so quick, you won't know what hit you
(don't make me put this in BIG font to prove how correct I am)







Here boy (click here)


----------



## JakeStarkey

Neotrotsky said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Nazis were Socialists, leftists. They were not about individual freedom and liberty
> 
> 
> 
> I am voting for Romney and I am glad he will crush the likes of you in the party   -----------------------------------    Here boy
Click to expand...


You want Frank crushed.  You will get you wish. Romney will crush you, too.

Romney is a good guy, and he can see you guys would pull what the Nazis did if you could get away it, so your days are numbered.


----------



## Dr.House

Dr.House said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop your whining and pining, son.  You are a far right extremist out of touch with the American mainstream who wants nothing to do with the modern 21st century.  Simply move on, and leave your betters to their world. Move along.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you admit you're afraid to answer a simple question?
> 
> Well, we knew you were a pussy, so it's understandable...
> 
> You often source wikipedia, so why do you complain when others do it?...
> 
> You're too stupid to grasp how stupid you look doing that...
Click to expand...


bump....


----------



## koshergrl

Jake calls everybody who doesn't tout the progressive party line a right wing extremist. At the same time, he pretends he's a moderate middle of the road fellow.

It's to desensitize people to his own extremism, and move the middle further to the left.


----------



## Neotrotsky

Truth is hard for the Left/concerned trolls
In fact it is their worst enemy








Here boy (click here)


----------



## Dr.House

koshergrl said:


> Jake calls everybody who doesn't tout the progressive party line a right wing extremist. At the same time, he pretends he's a moderate middle of the road fellow.
> 
> It's to desensitize people to his own extremism, and move the middle further to the left.



well when you are looking from his perspective....



Extreme Left --- FakeJake ----------------------------Centrist -------------------------Extreme Right


----------



## Neotrotsky

Dr.House said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jake calls everybody who doesn't tout the progressive party line a right wing extremist. At the same time, he pretends he's a moderate middle of the road fellow.
> 
> It's to desensitize people to his own extremism, and move the middle further to the left.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> well when you are looking from his perspective....
> 
> 
> 
> Extreme Left --- FakeJake ----------------------------Centrist -------------------------Extreme Right
Click to expand...


Really it is sad

Just like Papa Obama

No one wants the "bag of goods" he is trying to sell 

Well that should make him happy
Another thing they have in common 






Here boy


----------



## JakeStarkey

So the Far Right here fails yet again.

Can't answer the arguments.

Attacks the person.

And still fails.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

Dr.House said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jake calls everybody who doesn't tout the progressive party line a right wing extremist. At the same time, he pretends he's a moderate middle of the road fellow.
> 
> It's to desensitize people to his own extremism, and move the middle further to the left.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> well when you are looking from his perspective....
> 
> 
> 
> Extreme Left --- FakeJake ----------------------------Centrist -------------------------Extreme Right
Click to expand...


Shouldn't Jake be about 30 dashes to the left?


----------



## Dr.House

Quantum Windbag said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jake calls everybody who doesn't tout the progressive party line a right wing extremist. At the same time, he pretends he's a moderate middle of the road fellow.
> 
> It's to desensitize people to his own extremism, and move the middle further to the left.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> well when you are looking from his perspective....
> 
> 
> 
> Extreme Left --- FakeJake ----------------------------Centrist -------------------------Extreme Right
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Shouldn't Jake be about 30 dashes to the left?
Click to expand...


yeah, but I didn't want to mess up the thread width....


----------



## Dr.House

Dr.House said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop your whining and pining, son.  You are a far right extremist out of touch with the American mainstream who wants nothing to do with the modern 21st century.  Simply move on, and leave your betters to their world. Move along.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you admit you're afraid to answer a simple question?
> 
> Well, we knew you were a pussy, so it's understandable...
> 
> You often source wikipedia, so why do you complain when others do it?...
> 
> You're too stupid to grasp how stupid you look doing that...
Click to expand...


Bump....


----------



## Dr.House

JakeStarkey said:


> How telling that one old GOP mainstreamer can easily refute four (count them) reactionary extremists to the far right.
> 
> House asks about Wikipedia, which was never used here by me, and ignores the comptent [sic] repudiation of extremist reactionaery fear from the right of the sources that were used here by me.



That is a lie, FakeJake...

You know it, I know it, and the forum knows it....


----------



## JakeStarkey

Four responses of fail (three no less from the poseur House and one from the wacko Quantum).

Vote Romney, boys, then get out of the way before he runs over you.


----------



## Dr.House

pwning FakeJake should be an Olympic sport....lol


----------



## barry1960

editec said:


> Thinking that the our modern left v right debate has anything to do with Hitler is just plain silly.
> 
> Claiming that Hitlerism is either a good example socialism OR capitalism gone wrong misses the point entirely.
> 
> Of course thinking that our major US political parties are either socialists or facsicsts is equally the stuff of clueless partisans, too, isn't it?



Well said, but as a voice of reason you will be very lonely on this forum. There is no comparison between Hitler and either political party.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Barry, the far right just won't accept that.


----------



## Dr.House

Dr.House said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop your whining and pining, son.  You are a far right extremist out of touch with the American mainstream who wants nothing to do with the modern 21st century.  Simply move on, and leave your betters to their world. Move along.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you admit you're afraid to answer a simple question?
> 
> Well, we knew you were a pussy, so it's understandable...
> 
> You often source wikipedia, so why do you complain when others do it?...
> 
> You're too stupid to grasp how stupid you look doing that...
Click to expand...


Bump...


----------



## Neotrotsky

Dr, the far left just won't accept that.






Here boy


----------



## HUGGY

Dr.House said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop your whining and pining, son.  You are a far right extremist out of touch with the American mainstream who wants nothing to do with the modern 21st century.  Simply move on, and leave your betters to their world. Move along.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you admit you're afraid to answer a simple question?
> 
> Well, we knew you were a pussy, so it's understandable...
> 
> You often source wikipedia, so why do you complain when others do it?...
> 
> You're too stupid to grasp how stupid you look doing that...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Bump...
Click to expand...


HouseGimp...you really are the biggest idiot faggot on USMB.  Wiki is an excellent source of information.  You on the other hand...  not.  NOTHING on the internet is absolute truth.  Wiki is a good place to start when doing research.  At least Wiki shows all it's sources.  It is up to the user to do due dilligence and check out the sources.  Your last dozen posts just show how little intelligence you possess and how obssessive compulsive you are in your internet activity.  Word for word yours are the most meaningless here at USMB.  I would never say "all of the forum" as you do so frequently and erringly but it is sure that MOST of the board thinks you are a useless clown.


----------



## Dr.House

HUGGY said:


> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr.House said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you admit you're afraid to answer a simple question?
> 
> Well, we knew you were a pussy, so it's understandable...
> 
> You often source wikipedia, so why do you complain when others do it?...
> 
> You're too stupid to grasp how stupid you look doing that...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bump...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> HouseGimp...you really are the biggest idiot faggot on USMB.  Wiki is an excellent source of information.  You on the other hand...  not.  NOTHING on the internet is absolute truth.  Wiki is a good place to start when doing research.  At least Wiki shows all it's sources.  It is up to the user to do due dilligence and check out the sources.
Click to expand...

FakeJake is the one who says it is not a credible source...  I never said it wasn't...

Diaper Fag fails again...  It's like you don't even read what people post...  Is your short attention span problem causing this?



> Your last dozen posts just show how little intelligence you possess and how obssessive [sic] compulsive you are in your internet activity.


And your last dozen posts were YooToobz and false assumptions...  I guess your low IQ needs an outlet, but a few of us got a good laugh out of your stupidity in another thread, so thank you.

YooToobz - Good for you...



> Word for word yours are the most meaningless here at USMB.  I would never say "all of the forum" as you do so frequently and erringly but it is sure that MOST of the board thinks you are a useless clown.


Interesting, coming from such a feckless wonder as yourself...  Perhaps you can invent a word to convey your inane bleating whenever you stray from posts about homosexuality...  I look forward to what a low IQ brain like yours can "invent"...


----------



## Quantum Windbag

Dr.House said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> How telling that one old GOP mainstreamer can easily refute four (count them) reactionary extremists to the far right.
> 
> House asks about Wikipedia, which was never used here by me, and ignores the comptent [sic] repudiation of extremist reactionaery fear from the right of the sources that were used here by me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is a lie, FakeJake...
> 
> You know it, I know it, and the forum knows it....
Click to expand...


Jake forgot that it is actually possible to search for posts in this forum.



JakeStarkey said:


> Average age of the Swiss is about five years  older than Americans, which will count for some of the difference.  List of countries by median age - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Interestingly, of the almost twenty countries with older average ages  than the Swiss. the great majority have national health care with less  pressure on the GDP.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

JakeStarkey said:


> Barry, the far right just won't accept that.



Ravi is far right?


----------



## Remodeling Maidiac

All these pages and you're still a jackass. 

Sad, this is all you got? And to think you negged me on ny first day here.


----------



## daveman

koshergrl said:


> "
> "Living With Hitler" attempts to answer these questions by looking at the experiences of German liberals -- namely the leaders of Germany's liberal Democratic Party -- during the twelve years of Hitler's rule.
> It shows, first, that German liberals shared many beliefs with their Nazi rivals, and therefore favored some of Hitler's policies even as they opposed National Socialism in other respects. Like the Nazis, the liberals detested Communism and the Versailles Treaty, advocated a right to national self-determination for all ethnic Germans, and possessed nearly unbounded optimism toward science and technology. They supported the Third Reich's Keynesian response to the Great Depression, a moderately interventionist welfare state, and corporatist arrangement between capital and labor. In terms of women's issues, health care, and family policy, there were more than passing affinities between liberal and Nazi programs as well."
> 
> Liberals under Nazism: lessons for today? - Short Stack


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JakeStarkey said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe if you would read and stop commenting you might comprehend what's being said and discussed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That would be asking too much from concerned trolls
> Staying with the template is all they are capable of....
> Some of them even try to claim that statism exist nowhere in the world
> 
> 
> 
> Again, before the war, many Progressives. left and right
> were fascinated with Fascism and Progressive leaders desperate
> to get out of the Great Depression looked at their big gov't ways for guidance
> 
> For example
> FDR said:
> 
> _There seems to be no question that [Mussolini] is really interested in what we are doing and I am much interested and deeply impressed by what he has accomplished and by his evidenced honest purpose of restoring Italy._​Comment in early 1933 about Benito Mussolini to US Ambassador to Italy Breckinridge Long, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31
> 
> _I don't mind telling you in confidence that I am keeping in fairly close touch with that admirable Italian gentleman._​
> Comment on Benito Mussolini in 1933, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31
> 
> Mussolini himself praised the New Deal as following his own corporate state, as quoted in a July 1933 article in the New York Times, "Your plan for coordination of industry follows precisely our lines of cooperation."
> 
> Which makes sense since the NRA, with its regulations and industry organizations, was nothing more than another creature of the left- corporatism.
> 
> Of course and for good reason, the Left tried to distance themselves from their early fascination with Fascism with the
> war and the aftermath.
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Indeed
> Mussolini said
> 
> "The Fascist conception of life, stresses the importance of the State and accepts the individual only
> in so far as his interests coincide with the State. It is opposed to classical liberalism [which] denied the
> State in the name of the individual; Fascism reasserts the rights of the State as expressing the real essence of the individual."
> 
> As said before,
> They are part of the Rousseauian vision. It holds that the collective comes before the individual
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Here boy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> AT LAST somebody has given a source.  Thank you.
> 
> *1933*?  The first six months of FDR's presidency?  Really?  Give us something of worth, NeoTroll.
Click to expand...


I gave you several sources just because those source's prove you wrong you ignore them.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Dr.House said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Notice the far right trolls cannot put their argument into context.
> 
> That is typical of Mises drones and followers.
> 
> Is what it is: a far right failure again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm asking you why you, a known poster that sources wikipedia, would be concerned about the sources posted by others?
Click to expand...


Because he has no original thought and doesn't know what a good source is.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JakeStarkey said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Nazis were Socialists, leftists. They were not about individual freedom and liberty
> 
> 
> 
> I am voting for Romney and I am glad he will crush the likes of you in the party   -----------------------------------    Here boy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You want Frank crushed.  You will get you wish. Romney will crush you, too.
> 
> Romney is a good guy, and he can see you guys would pull what the Nazis did if you could get away it, so your days are numbered.
Click to expand...


You fucking idiot he was channeling you.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JakeStarkey said:


> So the Far Right here fails yet again.
> 
> Can't answer the arguments.
> 
> Attacks the person.
> 
> And still fails.



You and your trollish argument has been kicked to the curb by me and somehow think you can handle the rest?


----------



## L.K.Eder

bigrebnc1775 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Far Right here fails yet again.
> 
> Can't answer the arguments.
> 
> Attacks the person.
> 
> And still fails.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You and your trollish argument has been kicked to the curb by me and somehow think you can handle the rest?
Click to expand...


your stupidity protects you from an awareness of your own stupidity.

Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties of  Recognizing Ones Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-assessments,  was published in 1999

Dunning  and Kruger argued in their paper, When people are incompetent in the  strategies they adopt to achieve success and satisfaction, they suffer a  dual burden: *Not only do they reach erroneous conclusions and make  unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to  realize it. * Instead, like Mr. Wheeler, they are left with the erroneous  impression they are doing just fine.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

L.K.Eder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Far Right here fails yet again.
> 
> Can't answer the arguments.
> 
> Attacks the person.
> 
> And still fails.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You and your trollish argument has been kicked to the curb by me and somehow think you can handle the rest?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> your stupidity protects you from an awareness of your own stupidity.
> 
> Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties of  Recognizing Ones Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-assessments,  was published in 1999
> 
> Dunning  and Kruger argued in their paper, When people are incompetent in the  strategies they adopt to achieve success and satisfaction, they suffer a  dual burden: *Not only do they reach erroneous conclusions and make  unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to  realize it. * Instead, like Mr. Wheeler, they are left with the erroneous  impression they are doing just fine.[/URL]
Click to expand...



Try it our for yourself mushroom


----------



## L.K.Eder

bigrebnc1775 said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You and your trollish argument has been kicked to the curb by me and somehow think you can handle the rest?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> your stupidity protects you from an awareness of your own stupidity.
> 
> Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties of  Recognizing Ones Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-assessments,  was published in 1999Dunning  and Kruger argued in their paper, When people are incompetent in the  strategies they adopt to achieve success and satisfaction, they suffer a  dual burden: *Not only do they reach erroneous conclusions and make  unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to  realize it. * Instead, like Mr. Wheeler, they are left with the erroneous  impression they are doing just fine.[/URL]
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Try it our for yourself mushroom
Click to expand...



engrish


----------



## bigrebnc1775

L.K.Eder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> your stupidity protects you from an awareness of your own stupidity.
> 
> &#8220;Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties of  Recognizing One&#8217;s Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-assessments,&#8221;  was published in 1999Dunning  and Kruger argued in their paper, &#8220;When people are incompetent in the  strategies they adopt to achieve success and satisfaction, they suffer a  dual burden: *Not only do they reach erroneous conclusions and make  unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to  realize it. * Instead, like Mr. Wheeler, they are left with the erroneous  impression they are doing just fine.&#8221;[/URL]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Try it our for yourself mushroom
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> engrish
Click to expand...



Try it out for yourself mushroom
Your source that you used. You have all the signs mushroom


----------



## L.K.Eder

bigrebnc1775 said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Try it our for yourself mushroom
> 
> 
> 
> 
> engrish
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Try it out for yourself mushroom
> Your source that you used. You have all the signs mushroom
Click to expand...



no, YOU!


----------



## bigrebnc1775

L.K.Eder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> engrish
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Try it out for yourself mushroom
> Your source that you used. You have all the signs mushroom
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> no, YOU!
Click to expand...


Mushroom what's the matter? Just to let you know, I don't do requests for retards


----------



## L.K.Eder

bigrebnc1775 said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Try it out for yourself mushroom
> Your source that you used. You have all the signs mushroom
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no, YOU!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Mushroom what's the matter? Just to let you know, I don't do requests for retards
Click to expand...


thank you for the information.

now, get me a beer.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

L.K.Eder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> no, YOU!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mushroom what's the matter? Just to let you know, I don't do requests for retards
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> thank you for the information.
> 
> now, get me a beer.
Click to expand...


I told you mushroom I don't do requests for retards.


----------



## L.K.Eder

bigrebnc1775 said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mushroom what's the matter? Just to let you know, I don't do requests for retards
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thank you for the information.
> 
> now, get me a beer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I told you mushroom I don't do requests for retards.
Click to expand...


i understand.

now, where is my beer?


----------



## bigrebnc1775

L.K.Eder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> thank you for the information.
> 
> now, get me a beer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I told you mushroom I don't do requests for retards.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> i understand.
> 
> now, where is my beer?
Click to expand...


Mushroom how many times  oh hell never mind a retarded mushroom like you will never comprehend what is  said.


----------



## L.K.Eder

bigrebnc1775 said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I told you mushroom I don't do requests for retards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i understand.
> 
> now, where is my beer?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Mushroom how many times  oh hell never mind a retarded mushroom like you will never comprehend what is  said.
Click to expand...


i am really thirsty, mon.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

L.K.Eder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> i understand.
> 
> now, where is my beer?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mushroom how many times  oh hell never mind a retarded mushroom like you will never comprehend what is  said.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> i am really thirsty, mon.
Click to expand...


Get someone to show you how to open the bottle.


----------



## L.K.Eder

hitler did not get me a beer either.


----------



## Ravi

barry1960 said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thinking that the our modern left v right debate has anything to do with Hitler is just plain silly.
> 
> Claiming that Hitlerism is either a good example socialism OR capitalism gone wrong misses the point entirely.
> 
> Of course thinking that our major US political parties are either socialists or facsicsts is equally the stuff of clueless partisans, too, isn't it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well said, but as a voice of reason you will be very lonely on this forum. There is no comparison between Hitler and either political party.
Click to expand...

Of course not. This thread is merely about how the rightwing supported and/or wanted to appease Hitler.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

L.K.Eder said:


> hitler did not get me a beer either.



No but I bet you shared a few with him.


----------



## L.K.Eder

bigrebnc1775 said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> hitler did not get me a beer either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No but I bet you shared a few with him.
Click to expand...


yes, of course.

thirsty thursday is the jour fixe.


----------



## Artevelde

Ravi said:


> barry1960 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thinking that the our modern left v right debate has anything to do with Hitler is just plain silly.
> 
> Claiming that Hitlerism is either a good example socialism OR capitalism gone wrong misses the point entirely.
> 
> Of course thinking that our major US political parties are either socialists or facsicsts is equally the stuff of clueless partisans, too, isn't it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well said, but as a voice of reason you will be very lonely on this forum. There is no comparison between Hitler and either political party.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course not. This thread is merely about how the rightwing supported and/or wanted to appease Hitler.
Click to expand...


So you feel that Winston Churchill was left-wing, do you?


----------



## daveman

L.K.Eder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Far Right here fails yet again.
> 
> Can't answer the arguments.
> 
> Attacks the person.
> 
> And still fails.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You and your trollish argument has been kicked to the curb by me and somehow think you can handle the rest?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> your stupidity protects you from an awareness of your own stupidity.
> 
> Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties of  Recognizing Ones Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-assessments,  was published in 1999
> 
> Dunning  and Kruger argued in their paper, When people are incompetent in the  strategies they adopt to achieve success and satisfaction, they suffer a  dual burden: *Not only do they reach erroneous conclusions and make  unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to  realize it. * Instead, like Mr. Wheeler, they are left with the erroneous  impression they are doing just fine.
Click to expand...

This thread isn't about Obama.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

daveman said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You and your trollish argument has been kicked to the curb by me and somehow think you can handle the rest?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> your stupidity protects you from an awareness of your own stupidity.
> 
> Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties of  Recognizing Ones Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-assessments,  was published in 1999
> 
> Dunning  and Kruger argued in their paper, When people are incompetent in the  strategies they adopt to achieve success and satisfaction, they suffer a  dual burden: *Not only do they reach erroneous conclusions and make  unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to  realize it. * Instead, like Mr. Wheeler, they are left with the erroneous  impression they are doing just fine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This thread isn't about Obama.
Click to expand...

What do you expect from a mushroom? After all you will find most in dark damp places being fed off of troll shit.


----------



## Barb

Si modo said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Si modo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some folks can never grasp that there is fiscal conservatism and there is social conservatism. And, that a Classical Liberals are not one of the two.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And you are not a CL.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually, I am.
> 
> "Classical liberalism is a political ideology that advocates limited government, constitutionalism, rule of law, due process, individual liberties including freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and free markets."
> 
> Classical liberalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


The "free markets," as well as the government sponsored intervention into the affairs of other countries the US wanted to keep as client states in order to protect those "free markets" is where classic liberalism devolved into neoliberalism, and then to neoconservatism.


----------



## JakeStarkey

All, particularly the far righties who adore Hitler, will benefit from this movie.  

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Gsy4xs02Hs&fb_source=message]Hitler: The Rise of Evil - Mini-Series Trailer - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## edthecynic

L.K.Eder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Far Right here fails yet again.
> 
> Can't answer the arguments.
> 
> Attacks the person.
> 
> And still fails.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You and your trollish argument has been kicked to the curb by me and somehow think you can handle the rest?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *your stupidity protects you from an awareness of your own stupidity*.
> 
> Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties of  Recognizing Ones Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-assessments,  was published in 1999
> 
> Dunning  and Kruger argued in their paper, When people are incompetent in the  strategies they adopt to achieve success and satisfaction, they suffer a  dual burden: *Not only do they reach erroneous conclusions and make  unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to  realize it. * Instead, like Mr. Wheeler, they are left with the erroneous  impression they are doing just fine.
Click to expand...

Even his MessiahRushie agrees with you! 

March 01, 2012
RUSH:  To put it bluntly, dumb people are too dumb to know it." It's a blessing! You know, the worst thing would be to be dumb and to know it -- and there's evidence all over that the dumb do not know they're dumb.


----------



## daveman

bigrebnc1775 said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> your stupidity protects you from an awareness of your own stupidity.
> 
> Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties of  Recognizing Ones Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-assessments,  was published in 1999
> 
> Dunning  and Kruger argued in their paper, When people are incompetent in the  strategies they adopt to achieve success and satisfaction, they suffer a  dual burden: *Not only do they reach erroneous conclusions and make  unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to  realize it. * Instead, like Mr. Wheeler, they are left with the erroneous  impression they are doing just fine.
> 
> 
> 
> This thread isn't about Obama.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What do you expect from a mushroom? After all you will find most in dark damp places being fed off of troll shit.
Click to expand...


----------



## Barb

JakeStarkey said:


> All, particularly the far righties who adore Hitler, will benefit from this movie.
> 
> Hitler: The Rise of Evil - Mini-Series Trailer - YouTube



And lets not forget this:

Nazi Germany - Reichstag Fire 



> On 28th February 1933 Adolf Hitler went to see President Paul Hindenburg and informed him that the fire was the result of a Communist plot. Hindenburg was convinced and signed the Order of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State, known as the Reichstag Fire Decree.
> 
> Hitler used the Reichstag Fire Decree to arrest thousands of Communists and to ban all Communist publications. The Communist party was outlawed and not allowed to take part in the March 1933 elections (the Communist Party had gained 17% of the vote in the 1932 elections).
> 
> Without Communist opposition the Nazi Party gained 44% of the vote in the March 1933 elections. The German National People's Party, who supported the Nazi Party gained 8% of the vote. This gave Hitler a majority in the Reichstag.
> 
> With a majority in the Reichstag Hitler was able to pass the Enabling Act 23rd March 1933. The Enabling Act gave Hitler the power to pass laws independently of the Reichstag for a period of 4 years. This effectively made him Dictator of Germany.


----------



## daveman

JakeStarkey said:


> All, particularly the far righties who adore Hitler...



Like who, boy?


----------



## bigrebnc1775

edthecynic said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You and your trollish argument has been kicked to the curb by me and somehow think you can handle the rest?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *your stupidity protects you from an awareness of your own stupidity*.
> 
> Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties of  Recognizing Ones Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-assessments,  was published in 1999
> 
> Dunning  and Kruger argued in their paper, When people are incompetent in the  strategies they adopt to achieve success and satisfaction, they suffer a  dual burden: *Not only do they reach erroneous conclusions and make  unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to  realize it. * Instead, like Mr. Wheeler, they are left with the erroneous  impression they are doing just fine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Even his MessiahRushie agrees with you!
> 
> March 01, 2012
> RUSH:  To put it bluntly, dumb people are too dumb to know it." It's a blessing! You know, the worst thing would be to be dumb and to know it -- and there's evidence all over that the dumb do not know they're dumb.
Click to expand...


I'm not your psychotherapist I don't know why you say stupid shit.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

JakeStarkey said:


> All, particularly the far righties who adore Hitler, will benefit from this movie.
> 
> Hitler: The Rise of Evil - Mini-Series Trailer - YouTube



Like Obama, Hitler ruled his country and thought he knew what was best for everyone. That's a Left Winger


----------



## JakeStarkey

Nope, that's you, Frank.  Salute your Dear Leader and goose step away, please.


----------



## koshergrl

daveman said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> All, particularly the far righties who adore Hitler...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like who, boy?
Click to expand...


Like Jake.

He's always saying he's not left...and obviously he admires Hitler, he's continually promoting his policies.


----------



## JakeStarkey

I see that alliebabakoshergrl is heil saluting and goose stepping as well.  Where did she find the uniform?


----------



## Neotrotsky

koshergrl said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> All, particularly the far righties who adore Hitler...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like who, boy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Like Jake.
> 
> He's always saying he's not left...and obviously he admires Hitler, he's continually promoting his policies.
Click to expand...


Concerned trolls/ left have spent decades trying to marginalize it to cover for the fact that, it is a creature of the left.
They make the rather weak and limited argument that socialism is just pure nationalization of industry. 
This argument is either intentionally misleading or based on a rather simplistic and ignorant view of economics
Something tells me in this case, it is the later....shallow people can get lost in discussions on socialism

Fascism, crony capitalism, socialism ets are all collective and statist in nature  
They are part of the Rousseauian vision. It holds that the collective comes before the individual, our rights come from the group not from God or are innate that the tribe is the source of all morality, and the general will is the ultimate religious construct and so therefore the needs &#8212; and aims &#8212; of the group come before those of the individual. 

Fascism, Communism, Socialism, Progressivism and all the other collectivist groups are all based on the Rousseauian vision. They are creatures of the left.

They have more in common than not
which the left is trying to run from...

Friedrich Hayek defined fascism best

"It is simply collectivism freed from all traces of an individualist tradition which might hamper its realization."


The Left's ignorance and intentional historical revisionism on these issues are 
big factors in why the US keeps making the sames mistakes when it comes
to centralizing power. 


-----------------------------------------


Here boy


----------



## Neotrotsky

daveman said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> All, particularly the far righties who adore Hitler...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like who, boy?
Click to expand...


Another concerned troll invoking Godwin's law
just means they lose, according to the rule and not very original 
But did we expect any less


Happy 4th 

and please don't feed the concerned trolls






Otherwise we will have to listen to another boring round of his lies and faux support for Romney
while he tries to discourage the base and falsely accuse anyone to the right of Papa Obama
being a fascist.

Really, over 31,000 posts from some of these concerned trolls, one would think
they could come up with something more original.

The Papa Obama Truth Goon Squads have to get some
better material

---------------------------------




Here boy


----------



## JakeStarkey

This is a great 4th already.  The extremist far right have demonstrated this AM how much they don't care for America and how much they embrace Nazi behavior: intimidation, the Big Lie, and so forth.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

JakeStarkey said:


> This is a great 4th already.  The extremist far right have demonstrated this AM how much they don't care for America and how much they embrace Nazi behavior: intimidation, the Big Lie, and so forth.



Big Lies:

FDR got us out of the Great Depression
McCarthy's HUAC blacklisted innocent people
Hitler was a Right Winger


----------



## Neotrotsky

CrusaderFrank said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is a great 4th already.  The extremist far right have demonstrated this AM how much they don't care for America and how much they embrace Nazi behavior: intimidation, the Big Lie, and so forth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Big Lies:
> 
> FDR got us out of the Great Depression
> McCarthy's HUAC blacklisted innocent people
> Hitler was a Right Winger
Click to expand...



I can't wait for Romney to win
He is going to throw you guys out of the party
You and other Fascists 









--------------------------------------------


Here boy


----------



## MikeK

CrusaderFrank said:


> The Nazis were Socialists, leftists. They were not about individual freedom and liberty


For Hitler to refer to the emerging Nazi Party as _socialist_ was comparable to the Ku Klux Klan calling itself the NAACP.  That designation was a ploy intending to appeal to a significant segment of the German population of that era who were partial to certain pronounced socialist ideals.  Unfortunately the ploy was totally effective.  So effective it continues to this day to hoodwink Americans such as yourself.  

Socialism, in its essential philosophy, was to Nazism what night is to day.


----------



## daveman

daveman said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> All, particularly the far righties who adore Hitler...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like who, boy?
Click to expand...


Like who, boy?


----------



## daveman

JakeStarkey said:


> This is a great 4th already.  The extremist far right have demonstrated this AM how much they don't care for America and how much they embrace Nazi behavior: intimidation, the Big Lie, and so forth.


Obama is not America, boy.

You leftists continually make that mistake.


----------



## Neotrotsky

MikeK said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Nazis were Socialists, leftists. They were not about individual freedom and liberty
> 
> 
> 
> For Hitler to refer to the emerging Nazi Party as _socialist_ was comparable to the Ku Klux Klan calling itself the NAACP.  That designation was a ploy intending to appeal to a significant segment of the German population of that era who were partial to certain pronounced socialist ideals.  Unfortunately the ploy was totally effective.  So effective it continues to this day to hoodwink Americans such as yourself.
> 
> Socialism, in its essential philosophy, was to Nazism what night is to day.
Click to expand...


Yeah sure

they depended on small gov't 
and individuality


----------



## edthecynic

MikeK said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Nazis were Socialists, leftists. They were not about individual freedom and liberty
> 
> 
> 
> *For Hitler to refer to the emerging Nazi Party as socialist was comparable to the Ku Klux Klan calling itself the NAACP.  *That designation was *a ploy intending to appeal to a significant segment of the German population of that era* who were partial to certain pronounced socialist ideals.  Unfortunately the ploy was totally effective.  So effective it continues to this day to hoodwink Americans such as yourself.
> 
> Socialism, in its essential philosophy, was to Nazism what night is to day.
Click to expand...

Actually, a better example for today would be the CON$ervoFascists calling themselves Christians. It is just a ploy to appeal to a gullible segment of the American voting public.

"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross"- -Sinclair Lewis


----------



## bigrebnc1775

CrusaderFrank said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is a great 4th already.  The extremist far right have demonstrated this AM how much they don't care for America and how much they embrace Nazi behavior: intimidation, the Big Lie, and so forth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Big Lies:
> 
> FDR got us out of the Great Depression
> McCarthy's HUAC blacklisted innocent people
> Hitler was a Right Winger
Click to expand...


And USMB big lie:
Jake Starkey is a Republican.


----------



## Neotrotsky

edthecynic said:


> MikeK said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Nazis were Socialists, leftists. They were not about individual freedom and liberty
> 
> 
> 
> *For Hitler to refer to the emerging Nazi Party as socialist was comparable to the Ku Klux Klan calling itself the NAACP.  *That designation was *a ploy intending to appeal to a significant segment of the German population of that era* who were partial to certain pronounced socialist ideals.  Unfortunately the ploy was totally effective.  So effective it continues to this day to hoodwink Americans such as yourself.
> 
> Socialism, in its essential philosophy, was to Nazism what night is to day.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually, a better example for today would be the CON$ervoFascists calling themselves Christians. It is just a ploy to appeal to a gullible segment of the American voting public.
> 
> "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross"- -Sinclair Lewis
Click to expand...


Better would be FDR and the New Deal and Fascism 

For example...

FDR said:

_There seems to be no question that [Mussolini] is really interested in what we are doing and I am much interested and deeply impressed by what he has accomplished and by his evidenced honest purpose of restoring Italy._​
Comment in early 1933 about Benito Mussolini to US Ambassador to Italy Breckinridge Long, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31

_I don't mind telling you in confidence that I am keeping in fairly close touch with that admirable Italian gentleman._​
Comment on Benito Mussolini in 1933, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31


----------



## bigrebnc1775

MikeK said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Nazis were Socialists, leftists. They were not about individual freedom and liberty
> 
> 
> 
> For Hitler to refer to the emerging Nazi Party as _socialist_ was comparable to the Ku Klux Klan calling itself the NAACP.  That designation was a ploy intending to appeal to a significant segment of the German population of that era who were partial to certain pronounced socialist ideals.  Unfortunately the ploy was totally effective.  So effective it continues to this day to hoodwink Americans such as yourself.
> 
> Socialism, in its essential philosophy, was to Nazism what night is to day.
Click to expand...


The Nazi Party was socialist, Hitler became a member of the Nazi party, became very popular, took control of the party, killed his political rivals became a dictator. Anything else you need corrected on?


----------



## daveman

edthecynic said:


> MikeK said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Nazis were Socialists, leftists. They were not about individual freedom and liberty
> 
> 
> 
> *For Hitler to refer to the emerging Nazi Party as socialist was comparable to the Ku Klux Klan calling itself the NAACP.  *That designation was *a ploy intending to appeal to a significant segment of the German population of that era* who were partial to certain pronounced socialist ideals.  Unfortunately the ploy was totally effective.  So effective it continues to this day to hoodwink Americans such as yourself.
> 
> Socialism, in its essential philosophy, was to Nazism what night is to day.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually, a better example for today would be the CON$ervoFascists calling themselves Christians. It is just a ploy to appeal to a gullible segment of the American voting public.
> 
> "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross"- -Sinclair Lewis
Click to expand...

Wrong.  When fascism comes to America, it will be carrying a protest sign and screeching, "It's for the children!!"


----------



## daveman

Neotrotsky said:


> edthecynic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MikeK said:
> 
> 
> 
> *For Hitler to refer to the emerging Nazi Party as socialist was comparable to the Ku Klux Klan calling itself the NAACP.  *That designation was *a ploy intending to appeal to a significant segment of the German population of that era* who were partial to certain pronounced socialist ideals.  Unfortunately the ploy was totally effective.  So effective it continues to this day to hoodwink Americans such as yourself.
> 
> Socialism, in its essential philosophy, was to Nazism what night is to day.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, a better example for today would be the CON$ervoFascists calling themselves Christians. It is just a ploy to appeal to a gullible segment of the American voting public.
> 
> "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross"- -Sinclair Lewis
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Better would be FDR and the New Deal and Fascism
> 
> For example...
> 
> FDR said:
> 
> _There seems to be no question that [Mussolini] is really interested in what we are doing and I am much interested and deeply impressed by what he has accomplished and by his evidenced honest purpose of restoring Italy._​
> Comment in early 1933 about Benito Mussolini to US Ambassador to Italy Breckinridge Long, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31
> 
> _I don't mind telling you in confidence that I am keeping in fairly close touch with that admirable Italian gentleman._​
> Comment on Benito Mussolini in 1933, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31
Click to expand...

Leftists stick together.  And they loves them some dictators.


----------



## Neotrotsky

daveman said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edthecynic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, a better example for today would be the CON$ervoFascists calling themselves Christians. It is just a ploy to appeal to a gullible segment of the American voting public.
> 
> "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross"- -Sinclair Lewis
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Better would be FDR and the New Deal and Fascism
> 
> For example...
> 
> FDR said:
> 
> _There seems to be no question that [Mussolini] is really interested in what we are doing and I am much interested and deeply impressed by what he has accomplished and by his evidenced honest purpose of restoring Italy._​
> Comment in early 1933 about Benito Mussolini to US Ambassador to Italy Breckinridge Long, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31
> 
> _I don't mind telling you in confidence that I am keeping in fairly close touch with that admirable Italian gentleman._​
> Comment on Benito Mussolini in 1933, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Leftists stick together.  And they loves them some dictators.
Click to expand...


Mussolini himself praised the New Deal as following his own corporate state, as quoted in a July 1933 article in the New York Times, "Your plan for coordination of industry follows precisely our lines of cooperation."

Which makes sense since the NRA, with its regulations and industry organizations, was nothing more than another creature of the left- corporatism.

Of course and for good reason, the Left tried to distance themselves from their early fascination with Fascism with the 
war and the aftermath.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Neotrotsky said:


> edthecynic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MikeK said:
> 
> 
> 
> *For Hitler to refer to the emerging Nazi Party as socialist was comparable to the Ku Klux Klan calling itself the NAACP.  *That designation was *a ploy intending to appeal to a significant segment of the German population of that era* who were partial to certain pronounced socialist ideals.  Unfortunately the ploy was totally effective.  So effective it continues to this day to hoodwink Americans such as yourself.
> 
> Socialism, in its essential philosophy, was to Nazism what night is to day.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, a better example for today would be the CON$ervoFascists calling themselves Christians. It is just a ploy to appeal to a gullible segment of the American voting public.
> 
> "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross"- -Sinclair Lewis
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Better would be FDR and the New Deal and Fascism
> 
> For example...
> 
> FDR said:
> 
> _There seems to be no question that [Mussolini] is really interested in what we are doing and I am much interested and deeply impressed by what he has accomplished and by his evidenced honest purpose of restoring Italy._​
> Comment in early 1933 about Benito Mussolini to US Ambassador to Italy Breckinridge Long, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31
> 
> _I don't mind telling you in confidence that I am keeping in fairly close touch with that admirable Italian gentleman._​
> Comment on Benito Mussolini in 1933, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31
Click to expand...


Already rebutted earlier.  You fail to follow up with FDR's opinion on fascism, Mussolini, the Axis of Evil after 1935.  That would be like saying George Washington is a failure because he lost in 1754.  You fail put into context.

And you are spamming again.


----------



## daveman

Neotrotsky said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Better would be FDR and the New Deal and Fascism
> 
> For example...
> 
> FDR said:
> 
> _There seems to be no question that [Mussolini] is really interested in what we are doing and I am much interested and deeply impressed by what he has accomplished and by his evidenced honest purpose of restoring Italy._​
> Comment in early 1933 about Benito Mussolini to US Ambassador to Italy Breckinridge Long, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31
> 
> _I don't mind telling you in confidence that I am keeping in fairly close touch with that admirable Italian gentleman._​
> Comment on Benito Mussolini in 1933, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31
> 
> 
> 
> Leftists stick together.  And they loves them some dictators.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Mussolini himself praised the New Deal as following his own corporate state, as quoted in a July 1933 article in the New York Times, "Your plan for coordination of industry follows precisely our lines of cooperation."
> 
> Which makes sense since the NRA, with its regulations and industry organizations, was nothing more than another creature of the left- corporatism.
> 
> Of course and for good reason, the Left tried to distance themselves from their early fascination with Fascism with the
> war and the aftermath.
Click to expand...

You hush.  I've been told by people with absolutely NO partisan ax to grind that all oppressive and authoritarian political systems are on the right, and that the ultimate far left political system is a baby unicorn for everybody.


----------



## Neotrotsky

bigrebnc1775 said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is a great 4th already.  The extremist far right have demonstrated this AM how much they don't care for America and how much they embrace Nazi behavior: intimidation, the Big Lie, and so forth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Big Lies:
> 
> FDR got us out of the Great Depression
> McCarthy's HUAC blacklisted innocent people
> Hitler was a Right Winger
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And USMB big lie:
> Jake Starkey is a Republican.
Click to expand...


True enough

But the other big lie

The Left's ignorance and intentional historical revisionism on these issues are 
big factors in why the US keeps making the sames mistakes when it comes
to centralizing power. Which is why they try to deny the corporatism of the New Deal and
its' similarities to  Mussolini's economic dealings.

Concerned trolls/ left have spent decades trying to marginalize it to cover for the fact that, it is a creature of the left.

This argument is either intentionally misleading or based on a rather simplistic and ignorant view of economics

Something tells me in this case, it is the later....shallow people can get lost in discussions on socialism.

Amusing, is how the Left follows the old communist propaganda of accusing anyone who didn't agree with them a "fascist", even if they were a Communist. No doubt a leftover from the cold war days- It goes show how little the left has developed over the years

As said before....
They have more in common than not
which the left is trying to run from...

Friedrich Hayek defined fascism best

"It is simply collectivism freed from all traces of an individualist tradition which might hamper its realization."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Here boy


----------



## Neotrotsky

daveman said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Leftists stick together.  And they loves them some dictators.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mussolini himself praised the New Deal as following his own corporate state, as quoted in a July 1933 article in the New York Times, "Your plan for coordination of industry follows precisely our lines of cooperation."
> 
> Which makes sense since the NRA, with its regulations and industry organizations, was nothing more than another creature of the left- corporatism.
> 
> Of course and for good reason, the Left tried to distance themselves from their early fascination with Fascism with the
> war and the aftermath.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You hush.  I've been told by people with absolutely NO partisan ax to grind that all oppressive and authoritarian political systems are on the right, and that the ultimate far left political system is a baby unicorn for everybody.
Click to expand...



Can you really blame them

The Left's history is filled with unbelievable human suffering
Example people killed by Leftist govt's :

65 million in the People's Republic of China
20 million in the Soviet Union
2 million in Cambodia
2 million in North Korea
1 million in the Communist states of Eastern Europe
1 million in Vietnam 
--------------------------------------------------

Since the Left apologists  can't accept responsibility for it, they try to blame it on anything else or call it conservative, in some way.

Funny thing, the Left apologists always believe, when it comes to increasing gov't power and centralization, 
they will get it right--- this time


"baby unicorn" is right 








----------------------------------------------------------------------------



Here boy


----------



## daveman

Neotrotsky said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mussolini himself praised the New Deal as following his own corporate state, as quoted in a July 1933 article in the New York Times, "Your plan for coordination of industry follows precisely our lines of cooperation."
> 
> Which makes sense since the NRA, with its regulations and industry organizations, was nothing more than another creature of the left- corporatism.
> 
> Of course and for good reason, the Left tried to distance themselves from their early fascination with Fascism with the
> war and the aftermath.
> 
> 
> 
> You hush.  I've been told by people with absolutely NO partisan ax to grind that all oppressive and authoritarian political systems are on the right, and that the ultimate far left political system is a baby unicorn for everybody.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Can you really blame them
> 
> The Left's history is filled with unbelievable human suffering
> Example people killed by Leftist govt's :
> 
> 65 million in the People's Republic of China
> 20 million in the Soviet Union
> 2 million in Cambodia
> 2 million in North Korea
> 1 million in the Communist states of Eastern Europe
> 1 million in Vietnam
> --------------------------------------------------
> 
> Since the Left apologists  can't accept responsibility for it, they try to blame it on anything else or call it conservative, in some way.
> 
> Funny thing, the Left apologists always believe, when it comes to increasing gov't power and centralization,
> they will get it right--- this time
> 
> 
> "baby unicorn" is right
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> Here boy
Click to expand...


Yes, I've seen that argument made.  "The reason Communism failed is because the US always interfered and never gave it a chance!  But when WE'RE in charge, it'll work GREAT!!"

Scary, innit, that people are so stupid?


----------



## Barb




----------



## koshergrl

^^^^crock of shit^^^^


----------



## koshergrl

You get your charts from conservaturd, don't you?


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Barb said:


>


What the fuck is sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net


----------



## Neotrotsky

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Barb said:
> 
> 
> 
> ]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What the fuck is sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net
Click to expand...


Nothing original on her part, pretty easy to do  
I love the Jewish thing on hers- Remember all the "jew bashing" from the Left/ OWS
Again, nothing more than another poor attempt by the Left at historical revisionism 









As I have said before

Fascism, Communism, Socialism, Progressivism, Crony Capitalism
and all the other collectivist groups are all based on the Rousseauian vision. They are creatures of the left.

They have more in common than not
which the left is trying to run from...

Friedrich Hayek defined fascism best

"It is simply collectivism freed from all traces of an individualist tradition which might hamper its realization."

The Left's ignorance and intentional historical revisionism on these issues are 
big factors in why the US keeps making the sames mistakes when it comes
to centralizing power.​
Of course, the Left will falsely claim the failures of the Left are somehow conservative
and claim that we will "get it correct this time"

Good luck with that....


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Neotrotsky said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Barb said:
> 
> 
> 
> ]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What the fuck is sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nothing original on her part, pretty easy to do
Click to expand...


Yep


----------



## Artevelde

Barb said:


>



A nice example of total ignorance and stupidity.


----------



## koshergrl

Propaganda.


----------



## Ravi

daveman said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> You hush.  I've been told by people with absolutely NO partisan ax to grind that all oppressive and authoritarian political systems are on the right, and that the ultimate far left political system is a baby unicorn for everybody.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you really blame them
> 
> The Left's history is filled with unbelievable human suffering
> Example people killed by Leftist govt's :
> 
> 65 million in the People's Republic of China
> 20 million in the Soviet Union
> 2 million in Cambodia
> 2 million in North Korea
> 1 million in the Communist states of Eastern Europe
> 1 million in Vietnam
> --------------------------------------------------
> 
> Since the Left apologists  can't accept responsibility for it, they try to blame it on anything else or call it conservative, in some way.
> 
> Funny thing, the Left apologists always believe, when it comes to increasing gov't power and centralization,
> they will get it right--- this time
> 
> 
> "baby unicorn" is right
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> Here boy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, I've seen that argument made.  "The reason Communism failed is because the US always interfered and never gave it a chance!  But when WE'RE in charge, it'll work GREAT!!"
> 
> Scary, innit, that people are so stupid?
Click to expand...

No one, aside from in your fevered imagination, ever said that. No doubt you would have been a Stalin supporter, too, he was just as rightwing as Hitler.


----------



## Liability

Ravi is trollin', trollin', trollin'!

Yeeeee Haaaaaw.


----------



## HUGGY

Liability said:


> Ravi is trollin', trollin', trollin'!
> 
> Yeeeee Haaaaaw.



Don't you work?


----------



## koshergrl

Ravi said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can you really blame them
> 
> The Left's history is filled with unbelievable human suffering
> Example people killed by Leftist govt's :
> 
> 65 million in the People's Republic of China
> 20 million in the Soviet Union
> 2 million in Cambodia
> 2 million in North Korea
> 1 million in the Communist states of Eastern Europe
> 1 million in Vietnam
> --------------------------------------------------
> 
> Since the Left apologists  can't accept responsibility for it, they try to blame it on anything else or call it conservative, in some way.
> 
> Funny thing, the Left apologists always believe, when it comes to increasing gov't power and centralization,
> they will get it right--- this time
> 
> 
> "baby unicorn" is right
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> Here boy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I've seen that argument made.  "The reason Communism failed is because the US always interfered and never gave it a chance!  But when WE'RE in charge, it'll work GREAT!!"
> 
> Scary, innit, that people are so stupid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No one, aside from in your fevered imagination, ever said that. No doubt you would have been a Stalin supporter, too, he was just as rightwing as Hitler.
Click to expand...


Stalin and Hitler were both fascists...who counted on the left to propel them to power.

And leftists complied.


----------



## L.K.Eder

please do go on, y'all.


my plagiarized master thesis on creative history is almost ready to be sent to phoenix u.


----------



## whitehall

What's the point? If Hitler campaigned against Marxism then Marxism is validated? Small towns in Germany which looked the other way when Jews were arrested and murdered are now classified by modern liberals as "right-wing"? The "eugenics" theory of racial purity which was promoted by Nazis evolved into "planned parenthood" which is promoted by the American left today. I guess Michael Savage was right when he said "liberalism is a mental disorder".


----------



## Peach

Random set of alleged issues. Read The Rise & Fall of the Third Reich. That will end any comparisons to conservatives & Nazis.


----------



## daveman

Barb said:


>



Okay, so when are you going to be honest?


----------



## Intense

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Barb said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What the fuck is sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net
Click to expand...


Pretty Slanted chart.


----------



## daveman

Ravi said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can you really blame them
> 
> The Left's history is filled with unbelievable human suffering
> Example people killed by Leftist govt's :
> 
> 65 million in the People's Republic of China
> 20 million in the Soviet Union
> 2 million in Cambodia
> 2 million in North Korea
> 1 million in the Communist states of Eastern Europe
> 1 million in Vietnam
> --------------------------------------------------
> 
> Since the Left apologists  can't accept responsibility for it, they try to blame it on anything else or call it conservative, in some way.
> 
> Funny thing, the Left apologists always believe, when it comes to increasing gov't power and centralization,
> they will get it right--- this time
> 
> 
> "baby unicorn" is right
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> Here boy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I've seen that argument made.  "The reason Communism failed is because the US always interfered and never gave it a chance!  But when WE'RE in charge, it'll work GREAT!!"
> 
> Scary, innit, that people are so stupid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No one, aside from in your fevered imagination, ever said that.
Click to expand...

No one, that is, but an idiot leftist.  Possibly even you.  You qualify, after all.


Ravi said:


> No doubt you would have been a Stalin supporter, too, he was just as rightwing as Hitler.


No, I prefer liberty over oppression, unlike leftists.


----------



## L.K.Eder

i recommend reading "in the garden of beasts" by erik larson.

it is about the family of the US ambassador in berlin from 1933-1937.


----------



## Ravi

I'm surprised that my mocking of PoliticalChic went right over everyone's head. I suppose my OP was too subtle, though I thought it was a sledgehammer.

At least daveman confirmed, once again, what a POS hack he is.


----------



## HUGGY

Ravi said:


> I'm surprised that my mocking of PoliticalChic went right over everyone's head. I suppose my OP was too subtle, though I thought it was a sledgehammer.
> 
> At least daveman confirmed, once again, what a POS hack he is.



I disagree.  Daveman is not a piece of shit.  His posts only serve to make the world dumber.  He is the whole flaming bag of liquid shit.


----------



## daveman

Ravi said:


> I'm surprised that my mocking of PoliticalChic went right over everyone's head. I suppose my OP was too subtle, though I thought it was a sledgehammer.
> 
> At least daveman confirmed, once again, what a POS hack he is.


You do know, don't you, that reality steadfastly ignores you and remains what it is?

It is not subject to your whims, child.  No matter how much you pout and stamp your feet, reality ignores you.


----------



## daveman

HUGGY said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm surprised that my mocking of PoliticalChic went right over everyone's head. I suppose my OP was too subtle, though I thought it was a sledgehammer.
> 
> At least daveman confirmed, once again, what a POS hack he is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree.  Daveman is not a piece of shit.  His posts only serve to make the world dumber.  He is the whole flaming bag of liquid shit.
Click to expand...

Thus speaks Huggy, who makes the world safe for democracy by posting music videos.


----------



## L.K.Eder

lame


----------



## CrusaderFrank

L.K.Eder said:


> i recommend reading "in the garden of beasts" by erik larson.
> 
> it is about the family of the US ambassador in berlin from 1933-1937.



Great book!


----------



## CrusaderFrank

One of the Left's Big Lie's is that Hitler wasn't one of their very own.


----------



## HUGGY

CrusaderFrank said:


> One of the Left's Big Lie's is that Hitler wasn't one of their very own.



Ya..like Henry Ford was one of thier very own.  Frankie you need mental help.

I keep waiting to hear that you have gone postal and taken out the FDR library or something..


----------



## Neotrotsky

CrusaderFrank said:


> One of the Left's Big Lie's is that Hitler wasn't one of their very own.



Yes centralization of gov't power is a creature of the Left 

Interesting

Sinc FDR's New Deal and Fascism shared much of the same economic philosophy and the US
and Germany were using similar economic policies,
 it&#8217;s not too surprising that Hitler sent the following letter to U.S. Ambassador Dodd on March 14, 1934:

_
The Reich chancellor requests Mr. Dodd to present his greetings to President Roosevelt. 
He congratulates the president upon his heroic effort in the interest of the American people. 
The president&#8217;s successful struggle against economic distress is being followed by 
the entire German people with interest and admiration. The Reich chancellor is in accord
with the president that the virtues of sense of duty, readiness for sacrifice, 
and discipline must be the supreme rule of the whole nation. This moral demand, which
the president is addressing to every single citizen, is only the 
quintessence of German philosophy of the state, 
expressed in the motto &#8220;The public weal before the private gain.&#8221;_​

Hitler had genuine admiration for FDR and his approach to government.
He told a correspondent of the New York Times in the same year, 1934.
 &#8220;I have sympathy for Mr. Roosevelt,&#8221; 
 &#8220;because he marches straight toward his objectives over Congress, lobbies and bureaucracy.&#8221; 

 He went on to note he was a leader who is
 &#8220;understanding of the methods and motives of President Roosevelt.&#8221;


----------



## Ravi

HUGGY said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> One of the Left's Big Lie's is that Hitler wasn't one of their very own.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ya..like Henry Ford was one of thier very own.  Frankie you need mental help.
> 
> I keep waiting to hear that you have gone postal and taken out the FDR library or something..
Click to expand...

heh, I should have had him in my OP.


----------



## Ravi

Damn, I forgot to include the British Fascists, too, another rightwing group that supported fascism.


----------



## Neotrotsky

Don't forget 

many Progressives. left and right
were fascinated with Fascism and Progressive leaders desperate
to get out of the Great Depression looked at their big gov't ways for guidance 

Of course and for good reason, the people tried to distance themselves from their early fascination with Fascism with the war and the aftermath.

For example 
FDR said:
_There seems to be no question that [Mussolini] is really interested in what we are doing and I am much interested and deeply impressed by what he has accomplished and by his evidenced honest purpose of restoring Italy._​
Comment in early 1933 about Benito Mussolini to US Ambassador to Italy Breckinridge Long, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31

_I don't mind telling you in confidence that I am keeping in fairly close touch with that admirable Italian gentleman._​
Comment on Benito Mussolini in 1933, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31

Mussolini himself praised the New Deal as following his own corporate state, as quoted in a July 1933 article in the New York Times, 
_"Your plan for coordination of industry follows precisely our lines of cooperation."_​
Which makes sense since the NRA, with its regulations and industry organizations, was nothing more than another creature of the left- corporatism.

Two fascists leaders admiring FDR's economic policies
Funny how that works...


No need to thank me


----------



## L.K.Eder

ravi, next time you need to put in subparagraphs

1.

a.

b.

c.


----------



## Ravi

Neotrotsky said:


> Don't forget
> 
> many Progressives. left and right
> were fascinated with Fascism and Progressive leaders desperate
> to get out of the Great Depression looked at their big gov't ways for guidance
> 
> Of course and for good reason, the people tried to distance themselves from their early fascination with Fascism with the war and the aftermath.
> 
> For example
> FDR said:
> _There seems to be no question that [Mussolini] is really interested in what we are doing and I am much interested and deeply impressed by what he has accomplished and by his evidenced honest purpose of restoring Italy._​
> Comment in early 1933 about Benito Mussolini to US Ambassador to Italy Breckinridge Long, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31
> 
> _I don't mind telling you in confidence that I am keeping in fairly close touch with that admirable Italian gentleman._​
> Comment on Benito Mussolini in 1933, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31
> 
> Mussolini himself praised the New Deal as following his own corporate state, as quoted in a July 1933 article in the New York Times,
> _"Your plan for coordination of industry follows precisely our lines of cooperation."_​
> Which makes sense since the NRA, with its regulations and industry organizations, was nothing more than another creature of the left- corporatism.
> 
> Two fascists leaders admiring FDR's economic policies
> Funny how that works...
> 
> 
> No need to thank me



Right, because unsourced quotes negate the fact that FDR declared war on Germany and Italy.

It's pretty sad that you can't dispute the OP.


----------



## Neotrotsky

Read much
they are sourced- granted not links
but I can't help it if the Left is lazy
It is too bad you can't deny that fascists admired FDR and he them



War makes friends/enemies of people all the time
Nor does war negate the fact that similar economic policies existed
It is not like FDR became a "free market" guy 


Truth is hard for the left
In fact it is their worst enemy 



On August 23, 1939-Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union signed the German-Soviet Nonaggression Pact,
in which the two countries agreed to take no military action against each other for the next 10 years.

In fact the Soviet Union invaded Poland, along with Germany, from the East on September 17, 1939
due to their "non aggression" pact 

Yet Britain only declared war on Germany
Funny how that works


----------



## The Infidel

Ravi said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't forget
> 
> many Progressives. left and right
> were fascinated with Fascism and Progressive leaders desperate
> to get out of the Great Depression looked at their big gov't ways for guidance
> 
> Of course and for good reason, the people tried to distance themselves from their early fascination with Fascism with the war and the aftermath.
> 
> For example
> FDR said:
> _There seems to be no question that [Mussolini] is really interested in what we are doing and I am much interested and deeply impressed by what he has accomplished and by his evidenced honest purpose of restoring Italy._​
> Comment in early 1933 about Benito Mussolini to US Ambassador to Italy Breckinridge Long, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31
> 
> _I don't mind telling you in confidence that I am keeping in fairly close touch with that admirable Italian gentleman._​
> Comment on Benito Mussolini in 1933, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31
> 
> Mussolini himself praised the New Deal as following his own corporate state, as quoted in a July 1933 article in the New York Times,
> _"Your plan for coordination of industry follows precisely our lines of cooperation."_​
> Which makes sense since the NRA, with its regulations and industry organizations, was nothing more than another creature of the left- corporatism.
> 
> Two fascists leaders admiring FDR's economic policies
> Funny how that works...
> 
> 
> No need to thank me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Right, because unsourced quotes negate the fact that FDR declared war on Germany and Italy.
> 
> It's pretty sad that you can't dispute the OP.
Click to expand...


After they declared war on us first...


----------



## Neotrotsky

The Infidel said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't forget
> 
> many Progressives. left and right
> were fascinated with Fascism and Progressive leaders desperate
> to get out of the Great Depression looked at their big gov't ways for guidance
> 
> Of course and for good reason, the people tried to distance themselves from their early fascination with Fascism with the war and the aftermath.
> 
> For example
> FDR said:
> _There seems to be no question that [Mussolini] is really interested in what we are doing and I am much interested and deeply impressed by what he has accomplished and by his evidenced honest purpose of restoring Italy._​
> Comment in early 1933 about Benito Mussolini to US Ambassador to Italy Breckinridge Long, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31
> 
> _I don't mind telling you in confidence that I am keeping in fairly close touch with that admirable Italian gentleman._​
> Comment on Benito Mussolini in 1933, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31
> 
> Mussolini himself praised the New Deal as following his own corporate state, as quoted in a July 1933 article in the New York Times,
> _"Your plan for coordination of industry follows precisely our lines of cooperation."_​
> Which makes sense since the NRA, with its regulations and industry organizations, was nothing more than another creature of the left- corporatism.
> 
> Two fascists leaders admiring FDR's economic policies
> Funny how that works...
> 
> 
> No need to thank me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Right, because unsourced quotes negate the fact that FDR declared war on Germany and Italy.
> 
> It's pretty sad that you can't dispute the OP.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> After they declared war on us first...
Click to expand...


I hear you

Like the war proves anything
Germany fascists even went after and killed fellow fascists of the SA. Night of the Long Knives

It is not like that made them any less "fascist"



The left have spent decades trying to marginalize it right,  to cover for the fact that, it is a creature of the left.

They make the rather weak and limited argument that socialism is just pure nationalization of industry. 
This argument is either intentionally misleading or based on a rather simplistic and ignorant view of economics
Shallow people can get lost in discussions on socialism

Fascism, Communism, Socialism, Progressivism, Crony Capitalism 
all the other collectivist groups are all based on the Rousseauian vision. They are creatures of the left. 
They are all promoters of Statism 

They have more in common than not
which the left is trying to run from...

As I have quoted before"

Friedrich Hayek defined fascism best

"It is simply collectivism freed from all traces of an individualist tradition which might hamper its realization."


The Left's ignorance and intentional historical revisionism on these issues are 
big factors in why the US keeps making the sames mistakes when it comes
to centralizing power.


----------



## Ravi

One of your quotes was attributed to an anonymous source and the other to an obscure, if it even exists, paper that can't be found on the internet.

Still waiting for you to refute that the right supported Hitler.


----------



## Neotrotsky

Refute that progressives from both sides 
supported some of Fascism's economic policies 

I would never do that,
unlike you. 

In fact, Progressives today
even promote some of the similar type of economic policies

Like I said

The Left's ignorance and intentional historical revisionism on these issues are 
big factors in why the US keeps making the sames mistakes when it comes
to centralizing power.

Your posts only support that statement
Keep up the "good" work


----------



## daveman

Neotrotsky said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> One of the Left's Big Lie's is that Hitler wasn't one of their very own.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes centralization of gov't power is a creature of the Left
> 
> Interesting
> 
> Sinc FDR's New Deal and Fascism shared much of the same economic philosophy and the US
> and Germany were using similar economic policies,
> its not too surprising that Hitler sent the following letter to U.S. Ambassador Dodd on March 14, 1934:
> 
> _
> The Reich chancellor requests Mr. Dodd to present his greetings to President Roosevelt.
> He congratulates the president upon his heroic effort in the interest of the American people.
> The presidents successful struggle against economic distress is being followed by
> the entire German people with interest and admiration. The Reich chancellor is in accord
> with the president that the virtues of sense of duty, readiness for sacrifice,
> and discipline must be the supreme rule of the whole nation. This moral demand, which
> the president is addressing to every single citizen, is only the
> quintessence of German philosophy of the state,
> expressed in the motto The public weal before the private gain._​
> 
> Hitler had genuine admiration for FDR and his approach to government.
> He told a correspondent of the New York Times in the same year, 1934.
> I have sympathy for Mr. Roosevelt,
> because he marches straight toward his objectives over Congress, lobbies and bureaucracy.
> 
> He went on to note he was a leader who is
> understanding of the methods and motives of President Roosevelt.
Click to expand...


Nonsense.  Hitler was a registered Republican.  Everybody knows that.

Right, USMB lefties?


----------



## koshergrl

And an evangelical Christian, damn his eyes!


----------



## barry1960

Ravi said:


> One of your quotes was attributed to an anonymous source and the other to an obscure, if it even exists, paper that can't be found on the internet.
> 
> Still waiting for you to refute that the right supported Hitler.



Indeed the conservative parties of Germany in the early 1930s did throw some support Hitler's way. They did so because they too despised the democracy of the Weimar Republic and feared communism. However these parties wanted to control the Nazis rather than put them in power. They underestimated the Nazis who quickly seized power and created a one party state in the months after Hitler was appointed chancelor in 1933.

On this thred, the original purpose to compare the right to Hitler, people  Hitler to the right and the left. The truth is that Hitler and Nazism cannot be compared to either conservatives or liberals in today's American. Some have tried to hang their hat on Socialist in the name of the Nazi party and that just doesn't wash. Nazism is a party of the extreme right, but it is extreme and has nothing in common with the Tea Por the Republican Party. Nor does President Obama have anything in common with Hitler.

In other words you are pretty much all idiots -Ravi, Kosher Girl, Neotrotsky.....I suggest reading a history book on Nazi Germany.


----------



## regent

Interesting, the similarity between Mussolini and FDR, not only were they both leaders of countries but both breathed air and coughed at times. Almost identical twins.


----------



## daveman

regent said:


> Interesting, the similarity between Mussolini and FDR, not only were they both leaders of countries but both breathed air and coughed at times. Almost identical twins.


Yeah, you just never mind the letters of admiration between the two.


----------



## Ravi

barry1960 said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One of your quotes was attributed to an anonymous source and the other to an obscure, if it even exists, paper that can't be found on the internet.
> 
> Still waiting for you to refute that the right supported Hitler.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed the conservative parties of Germany in the early 1930s did throw some support Hitler's way. They did so because they too despised the democracy of the Weimar Republic and feared communism. However these parties wanted to control the Nazis rather than put them in power. They underestimated the Nazis who quickly seized power and created a one party state in the months after Hitler was appointed chancelor in 1933.
> 
> On this thred, the original purpose to compare the right to Hitler, people  Hitler to the right and the left. The truth is that Hitler and Nazism cannot be compared to either conservatives or liberals in today's American. Some have tried to hang their hat on Socialist in the name of the Nazi party and that just doesn't wash. Nazism is a party of the extreme right, but it is extreme and has nothing in common with the Tea Por the Republican Party. Nor does President Obama have anything in common with Hitler.
> 
> In other words you are pretty much all idiots -Ravi, Kosher Girl, Neotrotsky.....I suggest reading a history book on Nazi Germany.
Click to expand...


----------



## HUGGY

Neotrotsky said:


> The Infidel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Right, because unsourced quotes negate the fact that FDR declared war on Germany and Italy.
> 
> It's pretty sad that you can't dispute the OP.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After they declared war on us first...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I hear you
> 
> Like the war proves anything
> Germany fascists even went after and killed fellow fascists of the SA. Night of the Long Knives
> 
> It is not like that made them any less "fascist"
> 
> 
> 
> The left have spent decades trying to marginalize it right,  to cover for the fact that, it is a creature of the left.
> 
> They make the rather weak and limited argument that socialism is just pure nationalization of industry.
> This argument is either intentionally misleading or based on a rather simplistic and ignorant view of economics
> Shallow people can get lost in discussions on socialism
> 
> Fascism, Communism, Socialism, Progressivism, Crony Capitalism
> all the other collectivist groups are all based on the Rousseauian vision. *They are creatures of the left. *They are all promoters of Statism
> 
> They have more in common than not
> which the left is trying to run from...
> 
> As I have quoted before"
> 
> Friedrich Hayek defined fascism best
> 
> "It is simply collectivism freed from all traces of an individualist tradition which might hamper its realization."
> 
> 
> The Left's ignorance and intentional historical revisionism on these issues are
> big factors in why the US keeps making the sames mistakes when it comes
> to centralizing power.
Click to expand...


*"They are creatures of the left."*

How much do Karl Rove and the Koch brothers pay you to invade the internet with such absolute shit?

I would like to be charitable and suggest that you are just simply wrong but that isn't the case is it you fucking lying snake.

You obviously know some history and it is clear that your "mission" is to re-write it.  

Setting up a small group of people and corporations run by these people to bleed the rest of humanity of all it's resources and any ability to resist your big lies and big scam is hardly any wish from "the left".  

People like you use religion and a war on education in an attempt to keep the majority of people dumbed down ignorant and compliant consumers....

You use supposedly democratically elected government by taking a short cut around the founders prescribed structure with lobbiests and obscene amounts of money/bribes.

"Leftists" my ass.  You are pure evil.  You represent the "1000 years" Hitler was talking about. 

The trouble with your plan is that you can't dumb down enough people.  Not everyone is mesmerized by "reality tv".  Boy that's an oxymoron if there ever was one.  Not everyone laughs when you play your laugh track asshole.  

I have a dark side that actually wishes you god speed in your mindless destruction of democracy and the systematic dismantling of the middle class.   People like you have the same problem of Hitler's "master race".  You have convinced yourself that everyone you fuck with is weak.  That missconception won't work any better for you than it did for Adolf.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

The Infidel said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't forget
> 
> many Progressives. left and right
> were fascinated with Fascism and Progressive leaders desperate
> to get out of the Great Depression looked at their big gov't ways for guidance
> 
> Of course and for good reason, the people tried to distance themselves from their early fascination with Fascism with the war and the aftermath.
> 
> For example
> FDR said:
> _There seems to be no question that [Mussolini] is really interested in what we are doing and I am much interested and deeply impressed by what he has accomplished and by his evidenced honest purpose of restoring Italy._​
> Comment in early 1933 about Benito Mussolini to US Ambassador to Italy Breckinridge Long, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31
> 
> _I don't mind telling you in confidence that I am keeping in fairly close touch with that admirable Italian gentleman._​
> Comment on Benito Mussolini in 1933, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31
> 
> Mussolini himself praised the New Deal as following his own corporate state, as quoted in a July 1933 article in the New York Times,
> _"Your plan for coordination of industry follows precisely our lines of cooperation."_​
> Which makes sense since the NRA, with its regulations and industry organizations, was nothing more than another creature of the left- corporatism.
> 
> Two fascists leaders admiring FDR's economic policies
> Funny how that works...
> 
> 
> No need to thank me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Right, because unsourced quotes negate the fact that FDR declared war on Germany and Italy.
> 
> It's pretty sad that you can't dispute the OP.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> After they declared war on us first...
Click to expand...


It's funny how that worked The U.S. didn't declare war on Germany until after Germany declared war on America.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_declaration_of_war_upon_Germany_(1941)


----------



## regent

daveman said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting, the similarity between Mussolini and FDR, not only were they both leaders of countries but both breathed air and coughed at times. Almost identical twins.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, you just never mind the letters of admiration between the two.
Click to expand...


Yep, they were real love letters. Almost reminds one of diplomacy as practiced between nations not at war. Might want to check how the love letters changed as time went on.


----------



## koshergrl

HUGGY said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Infidel said:
> 
> 
> 
> After they declared war on us first...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hear you
> 
> Like the war proves anything
> Germany fascists even went after and killed fellow fascists of the SA. Night of the Long Knives
> 
> It is not like that made them any less "fascist"
> 
> 
> 
> The left have spent decades trying to marginalize it right,  to cover for the fact that, it is a creature of the left.
> 
> They make the rather weak and limited argument that socialism is just pure nationalization of industry.
> This argument is either intentionally misleading or based on a rather simplistic and ignorant view of economics
> Shallow people can get lost in discussions on socialism
> 
> Fascism, Communism, Socialism, Progressivism, Crony Capitalism
> all the other collectivist groups are all based on the Rousseauian vision. *They are creatures of the left. *They are all promoters of Statism
> 
> They have more in common than not
> which the left is trying to run from...
> 
> As I have quoted before"
> 
> Friedrich Hayek defined fascism best
> 
> "It is simply collectivism freed from all traces of an individualist tradition which might hamper its realization."
> 
> 
> The Left's ignorance and intentional historical revisionism on these issues are
> big factors in why the US keeps making the sames mistakes when it comes
> to centralizing power.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *"They are creatures of the left."*
> 
> How much do Karl Rove and the Koch brothers pay you to invade the internet with such absolute shit?
> 
> I would like to be charitable and suggest that you are just simply wrong but that isn't the case is it you fucking lying snake.
> 
> You obviously know some history and it is clear that your "mission" is to re-write it.
> 
> Setting up a small group of people and corporations run by these people to bleed the rest of humanity of all it's resources and any ability to resist your big lies and big scam is hardly any wish from "the left".
> 
> People like you use religion and a war on education in an attempt to keep the majority of people dumbed down ignorant and compliant consumers....
> 
> You use supposedly democratically elected government by taking a short cut around the founders prescribed structure with lobbiests and obscene amounts of money/bribes.
> 
> "Leftists" my ass.  You are pure evil.  You represent the "1000 years" Hitler was talking about.
> 
> The trouble with your plan is that you can't dumb down enough people.  Not everyone is mesmerized by "reality tv".  Boy that's an oxymoron if there ever was one.  Not everyone laughs when you play your laugh track asshole.
> 
> I have a dark side that actually wishes you god speed in your mindless destruction of democracy and the systematic dismantling of the middle class.   People like you have the same problem of Hitler's "master race".  You have convinced yourself that everyone you fuck with is weak.  That missconception won't work any better for you than it did for Adolf.
Click to expand...


You just described the fascist left perfectly.

Who did support Hitler, and continue to tout his policies.


----------



## daveman

HUGGY said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Infidel said:
> 
> 
> 
> After they declared war on us first...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hear you
> 
> Like the war proves anything
> Germany fascists even went after and killed fellow fascists of the SA. Night of the Long Knives
> 
> It is not like that made them any less "fascist"
> 
> 
> 
> The left have spent decades trying to marginalize it right,  to cover for the fact that, it is a creature of the left.
> 
> They make the rather weak and limited argument that socialism is just pure nationalization of industry.
> This argument is either intentionally misleading or based on a rather simplistic and ignorant view of economics
> Shallow people can get lost in discussions on socialism
> 
> Fascism, Communism, Socialism, Progressivism, Crony Capitalism
> all the other collectivist groups are all based on the Rousseauian vision. *They are creatures of the left. *They are all promoters of Statism
> 
> They have more in common than not
> which the left is trying to run from...
> 
> As I have quoted before"
> 
> Friedrich Hayek defined fascism best
> 
> "It is simply collectivism freed from all traces of an individualist tradition which might hamper its realization."
> 
> 
> The Left's ignorance and intentional historical revisionism on these issues are
> big factors in why the US keeps making the sames mistakes when it comes
> to centralizing power.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *"They are creatures of the left."*
> 
> How much do Karl Rove and the Koch brothers pay you to invade the internet with such absolute shit?
> 
> I would like to be charitable and suggest that you are just simply wrong but that isn't the case is it you fucking lying snake.
> 
> You obviously know some history and it is clear that your "mission" is to re-write it.
> 
> Setting up a small group of people and corporations run by these people to bleed the rest of humanity of all it's resources and any ability to resist your big lies and big scam is hardly any wish from "the left".
> 
> People like you use religion and a war on education in an attempt to keep the majority of people dumbed down ignorant and compliant consumers....
> 
> You use supposedly democratically elected government by taking a short cut around the founders prescribed structure with lobbiests and obscene amounts of money/bribes.
> 
> "Leftists" my ass.  You are pure evil.  You represent the "1000 years" Hitler was talking about.
> 
> The trouble with your plan is that you can't dumb down enough people.  Not everyone is mesmerized by "reality tv".  Boy that's an oxymoron if there ever was one.  Not everyone laughs when you play your laugh track asshole.
> 
> I have a dark side that actually wishes you god speed in your mindless destruction of democracy and the systematic dismantling of the middle class.   People like you have the same problem of Hitler's "master race".  You have convinced yourself that everyone you fuck with is weak.  That missconception won't work any better for you than it did for Adolf.
Click to expand...

Emotional little girl is emotional.


----------



## daveman

regent said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting, the similarity between Mussolini and FDR, not only were they both leaders of countries but both breathed air and coughed at times. Almost identical twins.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, you just never mind the letters of admiration between the two.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep, they were real love letters. Almost reminds one of diplomacy as practiced between nations not at war. Might want to check how the love letters changed as time went on.
Click to expand...

And the opinion of someone who thinks Communism is swell is worth...what, exactly?


----------



## Neotrotsky

daveman said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> I hear you
> 
> Like the war proves anything
> Germany fascists even went after and killed fellow fascists of the SA. Night of the Long Knives
> 
> It is not like that made them any less "fascist"
> 
> 
> 
> The left have spent decades trying to marginalize it right,  to cover for the fact that, it is a creature of the left.
> 
> They make the rather weak and limited argument that socialism is just pure nationalization of industry.
> This argument is either intentionally misleading or based on a rather simplistic and ignorant view of economics
> Shallow people can get lost in discussions on socialism
> 
> Fascism, Communism, Socialism, Progressivism, Crony Capitalism
> all the other collectivist groups are all based on the Rousseauian vision. *They are creatures of the left. *They are all promoters of Statism
> 
> They have more in common than not
> which the left is trying to run from...
> 
> As I have quoted before"
> 
> Friedrich Hayek defined fascism best
> 
> "It is simply collectivism freed from all traces of an individualist tradition which might hamper its realization."
> 
> 
> The Left's ignorance and intentional historical revisionism on these issues are
> big factors in why the US keeps making the sames mistakes when it comes
> to centralizing power.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *"They are creatures of the left."*
> 
> How much do Karl Rove and the Koch brothers pay you to invade the internet with such absolute shit?
> 
> I would like to be charitable and suggest that you are just simply wrong but that isn't the case is it you fucking lying snake.
> 
> You obviously know some history and it is clear that your "mission" is to re-write it.
> 
> Setting up a small group of people and corporations run by these people to bleed the rest of humanity of all it's resources and any ability to resist your big lies and big scam is hardly any wish from "the left".
> 
> People like you use religion and a war on education in an attempt to keep the majority of people dumbed down ignorant and compliant consumers....
> 
> You use supposedly democratically elected government by taking a short cut around the founders prescribed structure with lobbiests and obscene amounts of money/bribes.
> 
> "Leftists" my ass.  You are pure evil.  You represent the "1000 years" Hitler was talking about.
> 
> 
> The trouble with your plan is that you can't dumb down enough people.  Not everyone is mesmerized by "reality tv".  Boy that's an oxymoron if there ever was one.  Not everyone laughs when you play your laugh track asshole.
> 
> I have a dark side that actually wishes you god speed in your mindless destruction of democracy and the systematic dismantling of the middle class.   People like you have the same problem of Hitler's "master race".  You have convinced yourself that everyone you fuck with is weak.  That missconception won't work any better for you than it did for Adolf.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Emotional little girl is emotional.
Click to expand...


To be sure

The poster "Barry" tried to be more reasonable
but they too are blinded with a leftist construct that needs
to identify  it all on the right and not focus on the real problem- statism.

Notice how in this construct, Leftism never does anything bad
Funny how that works


Again....
The issue is one of statism- which can come from both sides.

Socialism, communism, fascism, crony capitalism are all forms of some level of CPE's 
and share little with a true free market system. Fascism depends on and thrives on a large and intrusive gov't or "big gov't", not small. 

However, Fascism is unique 
It tends to be syncretic- being neither left-wing nor right, exclusively.
Hitler even attacked, in Mein Kampf,  left-wing and right-wing politics 

_"Today our left-wing politicians in particular are constantly insisting that their craven-hearted and obsequious foreign 
policy necessarily results from the disarmament of Germany, whereas the truth is that this is the policy of traitors [...]
But the politicians of the Right deserve exactly the same reproach. It was through their miserable cowardice that those 
ruffians of Jews who came into power in 1918 were able to rob the nation of its arms."_​
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The issue is the power and scope of the gov't and the problems that
a large gov't can have on individual liberty. While many different groups
may use different reasons/causes for statism- it tends to never work out well and
they tend to end up at the same failed point in history. 

Peter Drucker said it best:

_"the complete collapse of the belief in the attainability of freedom and equality through Marxism has forced Russia 
to travel the same road toward a totalitarian society of     un-freedom and inequality which Germany has been following. 
Not that communism and fascism are essentially the same. Fascism is the stage reached after communism has proved an illusion, 
and it has proved as much an illusion in Russia as in pre-Hitler Germany."
_​

Sadly, for the US
many still chase this "illusion"-
Fed on part ignorance and delusions of utopia 

So true-

The road to hell is paved with good intentions

No doubt,  this won't be the last we have heard from these 
apologists of failed statism 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





Here boy


----------



## regent

daveman said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, you just never mind the letters of admiration between the two.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, they were real love letters. Almost reminds one of diplomacy as practiced between nations not at war. Might want to check how the love letters changed as time went on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And the opinion of someone who thinks Communism is swell is worth...what, exactly?
Click to expand...


I thought we were discussing Mussolini and FDR now suddenly the topic changes to your premise that I think communism is swell. But that's OK, so now we can take up communism. 
Since I know of no nation that has practiced Marxian communism it's hard to judge how swell it is, but we do know that those that started to implement communism dropped it like a bad habit, it didn't seem to work. Can you name a nation that has practiced Marxian communism?


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Before the defenders of Hitler was a right winger go into full meltdown I would like to point out that intense made a valid comment. The U.S. did not declare war on Germany until after Germany  declared war on the U.S..


----------



## bigrebnc1775

regent said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, they were real love letters. Almost reminds one of diplomacy as practiced between nations not at war. Might want to check how the love letters changed as time went on.
> 
> 
> 
> And the opinion of someone who thinks Communism is swell is worth...what, exactly?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I thought we were discussing Mussolini and FDR now suddenly the topic changes to your premise that I think communism is swell. But that's OK, so now we can take up communism.
> Since I know of no nation that has practiced Marxian communism it's hard to judge how swell it is, but we do know that those that started to implement communism dropped it like a bad habit, it didn't seem to work. Can you name a nation that has practiced Marxian communism?
Click to expand...

What was the Soviet Union?


----------



## Neotrotsky

Let the "apologists" start


----------



## manifold

Ravi said:


> Doubt that Hitler had the support of the conservative right wing?
> 
> 1. "Hitler found his greatest support in *traditionally conservative small towns. He campaigned with attacks on Marxism, making it clear that by Marxism he meant the Social Democrats. Hitler appealed to morality, attacking free love and what he inferred was the immorality of Berlin and some other major cities. He promised to stamp out big city corruption. He called for a spiritual revolution, for a "positive Christianity" and a spirit of national pride. Hitler repeatedly called for national renewal. *He and his National Socialists benefited from the recent upheaval in the Soviet Union and the rise in fear and disgust for Bolshevism. His party's posters read:
> 
> *    If you want your country to go Bolshevik, vote Communist. If you want to remain free Germans, vote for the National Socialists.*"
> 
> Hitler and Germany: 1928 to 1935
> 
> 2. Neville Chamberlain, appeaser in chief, after the Sudetenland was handed over to Hitler, "But the Conservative leader has always expressed his desire to find a *peaceful solution to the Fuehrer's wish to create a new - and enlarged - German homeland in Europe.*"
> 
> BBC ON THIS DAY | 30 | 1938: 'Peace for our time' - Chamberlain
> 
> 3. The French right admired Hitler, "When Socialists and Communists formed a Popular front Government in 1936 there were many French conservatives who boldly announced that *Hitler was preferrable to the leadership of the French socialist Leon Blum*."
> 
> Road to War
> 
> 4. "right-to-work" anti-labor conservatives were also pro-Hitler. "There were a mulitude of other racists jumping on the Fascist bandwagon. Joseph P. Kamp printed over two million copies of his anti-labor pamphlet, "Join the C.I.O. and Help Build a Soviet America" which he advertised with the Ku Klux Klan. *Millionaire John Kirby in Houston began publishing the anti-black, anti-labor Christian American in support of "right to work" legislation"*
> 
> Support for Hitler (or Fascism) in the United States | Radical Reference
> 
> 5. Foreshadowing Republican views on the Clinton being concerned about bin laden as a distraction from Lewinsky, "The former president, Herbert Hoover, had become the Republican Party's chief spokesman in foreign affairs, and when Germany seized Moravia and Bohemia, *Hoover declared that no clear and present danger existed* and that Britain, France and others in Europe would be able to defend themselves should there be war. Hoover spoke of Roosevelt's "dangerous adventures" and argued that Roosevelt was trying to divert people's attention from his failure to end the depression"
> 
> The United States, War Preparation, China, and Jewish Immigration: 1938-39



Hitler was a rightwinger.

And in related 'news', the sun rises in the east.


----------



## koshergrl

No, Hitler was a fascist.

He was a rightwinger only in that he claimed to be...but in reality, the policies that he established, the methods that he used, the support that he garnered from the rest of the world...was all left wing.


----------



## manifold

koshergrl said:


> No, Hitler was a fascist.



Fascism is an extreme rightwing ideology.

Look it up Einstein.


----------



## HUGGY

manifold said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, Hitler was a fascist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fascism is an extreme rightwing ideology.
> 
> Look it up Einstein.
Click to expand...


They are too busy trying to re-write history than do anything so mundane as look up a definition they already want to change.


----------



## koshergrl

It is universally debated. Leftwingers pretend it's right wing, but in reality, there are fascists who rise to power via support from the right, and fascists who rise to power via support from the left.

The 25 point program, which does lip service to capitalism, was clearly leftist in design and application. Likewise, Hitler did lip service to the Church, and then went to work dismantling the churches.

That's what lefty fascists do. They lie to gain power, then they show their true colors.


----------



## koshergrl

Fascism - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

I see no reference to "right wing" here.

Because that's just the leftist revisionist definition. As you've changed the definition of so many other terms you don't like to be associated with, but still are...likewise you're changing the definition of "fascism" to remove yourselves from the mix..when you know that's right where you stand.


----------



## Neotrotsky

koshergrl said:


> Fascism - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
> 
> I see no reference to "right wing" here.
> 
> Because that's just the leftist revisionist definition. As you've changed the definition of so many other terms you don't like to be associated with, but still are...likewise you're changing the definition of "fascism" to remove yourselves from the mix..when you know that's right where you stand.



Indeed

they want to use a definition construct that is pushed by the left
Too funny,  in the cold war days, Soviets use to accuse fellow communist they
did not agree with, as "fascists"  

It goes to show the Left has not changed much over time

Notice as how they desperate what to deny the main issue
The issue is of the nature of gov't

No doubt they feel the Left will get correct- this time


----------



## bigrebnc1775

manifold said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, Hitler was a fascist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fascism is an extreme rightwing ideology.
> 
> Look it up Einstein.
Click to expand...


I'll disagree with both of you. Hitler was a dictator who used socialism to gain control and when he gained control killed his political enemies.


----------



## Liability

Fascism is *claimed* to be far right.

But really, it's just another tool of Statists, like socialism.

So Ravi's typically mindless trolling is still going strong in this thread, eh?


----------



## Neotrotsky

It comforts the apologists for the failures of gov't
to blame it on the right

They think they will get it right this time


----------



## Liability

LIBERAL HERO:


----------



## Neotrotsky

Oh god

now you are going to get the left/concerned trolls going


----------



## HUGGY

Liability said:


> LIBERAL HERO:



That was stupid.  Even for you.  Howzabout you name any so-called "liberal" that would hang your image in thier home?

I can think of many right wing fucks that probably already have one gracing thier crib..  some likely over the mantle.


----------



## koshergrl

No, he's a progressive hero. They pretend he's not, but they adhere religiously to his 25 points all the same.


----------



## Liability

HUGGY said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> LIBERAL HERO:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That was stupid.  Even for you.  Howzabout you name any so-called "liberal" that would hang your image in thier home?
> 
> I can think of many right wing fucks that probably already have one gracing thier crib..  some likely over the mantle.
Click to expand...


No.  Your attempt at a come-back was stupid.  In your case -- of course -- that's redundant.

Hitler is no more of an icon to the right than he is to the left.  

And it's Hitler's image, you moron.

I have seen many a lib derp with pictures of Stalin and Mao and Che.  Given that, they have no basis to object to the other famous liberal murdering scumbag, Hitler.


----------



## Neotrotsky

Che was a racist 

The Left loves to use his picture


----------



## HUGGY

Liability said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> LIBERAL HERO:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That was stupid.  Even for you.  Howzabout you name any so-called "liberal" that would hang your image in thier home?
> 
> I can think of many right wing fucks that probably already have one gracing thier crib..  some likely over the mantle.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  Your attempt at a come-back was stupid.  In your case -- of course -- that's redundant.
> 
> Hitler is no more of an icon to the right than he is to the left.
> 
> And it's Hitler's image, you moron.
> 
> *I have seen many a lib derp with pictures of Stalin and Mao and Che.  Given that, they have no basis to object to the other famous liberal murdering scumbag, Hitler*.
Click to expand...


My bad...I thought your were sharing from your hero collection..

As for the last sentence.  I don't believe you.  I have been in a few homes in my 63 years and never seen "Stalin and Mao and Che"  or "Hitler" images on the wall.  I think YOU belive it  though as you do with much of what you pull out of your ass.


----------



## Truthmatters

there is going to be quite a stir when you get your asses kicked on all these cases huh?


----------



## Neotrotsky




----------



## Liability

Truthmatters said:


> there is going to be quite a stir when you get your asses kicked on all these cases huh?



Still can't work up enough basic integrity to answer two simple questions, though, eh TderpM?

*Do you support the "right" of the dead to vote?

Do you imagine that aliens should have a right to vote in American elections?*


----------



## Liability

HUGGY said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> That was stupid.  Even for you.  Howzabout you name any so-called "liberal" that would hang your image in thier home?
> 
> I can think of many right wing fucks that probably already have one gracing thier crib..  some likely over the mantle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No.  Your attempt at a come-back was stupid.  In your case -- of course -- that's redundant.
> 
> Hitler is no more of an icon to the right than he is to the left.
> 
> And it's Hitler's image, you moron.
> 
> *I have seen many a lib derp with pictures of Stalin and Mao and Che.  Given that, they have no basis to object to the other famous liberal murdering scumbag, Hitler*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> My bad...I thought your were sharing from your hero collection..
> 
> As for the last sentence.  I don't believe you.  I have been in a few homes in my 63 years and never seen "Stalin and Mao and Che"  or "Hitler" images on the wall.  I think YOU belive it  though as you do with much of what you pull out of your ass.
Click to expand...


No.  You didn't think any such thing.  I'm not a fucking lib.

As for your last mutterance, who cares what a tool like you "believes" or says he believes or doesn't believe?

The *fact* is:  lots of libs have pictures of Che and Mao (and they have been known to lovingly and reverentially carry his stupid book around with them too) and lots of libs thought Stalin was the best fucking thing since sliced bread.

You are either pitiably ignorant or simply dishonet.  It doesn't matter which.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

Ravi said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't forget
> 
> many Progressives. left and right
> were fascinated with Fascism and Progressive leaders desperate
> to get out of the Great Depression looked at their big gov't ways for guidance
> 
> Of course and for good reason, the people tried to distance themselves from their early fascination with Fascism with the war and the aftermath.
> 
> For example
> FDR said:_There seems to be no question that [Mussolini] is really interested in what we are doing and I am much interested and deeply impressed by what he has accomplished and by his evidenced honest purpose of restoring Italy._​Comment in early 1933 about Benito Mussolini to US Ambassador to Italy Breckinridge Long, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31
> _I don't mind telling you in confidence that I am keeping in fairly close touch with that admirable Italian gentleman._​Comment on Benito Mussolini in 1933, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31
> 
> Mussolini himself praised the New Deal as following his own corporate state, as quoted in a July 1933 article in the New York Times, _"Your plan for coordination of industry follows precisely our lines of cooperation."_​Which makes sense since the NRA, with its regulations and industry organizations, was nothing more than another creature of the left- corporatism.
> 
> Two fascists leaders admiring FDR's economic policies
> Funny how that works...
> 
> 
> No need to thank me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Right, because unsourced quotes negate the fact that FDR declared war on Germany and Italy.
> 
> It's pretty sad that you can't dispute the OP.
Click to expand...


This is a sad indication of the state of education in this country. The Constitution specifically gives Congress the sole authority to declare war. They declared war on Japan on 8 Dec 1941, and then declared war on Germany and Italy on 11 Dec 1941, the day after both countries declared war on us. If the only thing that will make something that is in every history book about WWII I have ever read true is you seeing it on the internet I have actual links for you.

BBC ON THIS DAY | 11 | 1941: Germany and Italy declare war on US

Declaration of war by the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Quantum Windbag

manifold said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, Hitler was a fascist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fascism is an extreme rightwing ideology.
> 
> Look it up Einstein.
Click to expand...


Actually, they are syncretic. They oppose almost everything conservatives and liberals stand for, and advocate things the extreme elements on both sides believe in. I generally label them progressive to piss idiots off, but I also understand the difference between a progressive and a liberal.


----------



## Quantum Windbag

HUGGY said:


> manifold said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, Hitler was a fascist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fascism is an extreme rightwing ideology.
> 
> Look it up Einstein.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They are too busy trying to re-write history than do anything so mundane as look up a definition they already want to change.
Click to expand...


The OP is obviously the person in this thread rewriting history, why else would she insist that FDR declared war on Germany before they declared war on us?


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Fascism is Liberalism with a mustache


----------



## Quantum Windbag

HUGGY said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> LIBERAL HERO:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That was stupid.  Even for you.  Howzabout you name any so-called "liberal" that would hang your image in thier home?
> 
> I can think of many right wing fucks that probably already have one gracing thier crib..  some likely over the mantle.
Click to expand...


Probably the same ones who would hang this one in the campaign office of somebody running for president of the United States.






Go ahead, tell me this murdering scum was a right winger.


----------



## Political Junky

HUGGY said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> That was stupid.  Even for you.  Howzabout you name any so-called "liberal" that would hang your image in thier home?
> 
> I can think of many right wing fucks that probably already have one gracing thier crib..  some likely over the mantle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No.  Your attempt at a come-back was stupid.  In your case -- of course -- that's redundant.
> 
> Hitler is no more of an icon to the right than he is to the left.
> 
> And it's Hitler's image, you moron.
> 
> *I have seen many a lib derp with pictures of Stalin and Mao and Che.  Given that, they have no basis to object to the other famous liberal murdering scumbag, Hitler*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> My bad...I thought your were sharing from your hero collection..
> 
> As for the last sentence.  I don't believe you.  I have been in a few homes in my 63 years and never seen "Stalin and Mao and Che"  or "Hitler" images on the wall.  I think YOU belive it  though as you do with much of what you pull out of your ass.
Click to expand...

Neo-Nazism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Note the swastikas on display by these right wing nutjobs.


----------



## Neotrotsky

So they want a small non intrusive gov't  as well?

Good to know



Speaking of hate groups...

Former KKK Leader David Duke Supports Black Democrat Jew-Hater For Congress


_&#8220;In a race for Congress between an anti-Zionist black activist and a black activist who is a bought and paid for Zionist Uncle Tom, I&#8217;ll take the anti-Zionist any day,&#8221; Mr. Duke says in the video. &#8220;In this election of limited choices, I believe that Charles Barron is the best choice. Why? Because I think there&#8217;s no greater danger facing the United States of America and facing the world than the unbridled power of Zionist globalism. &#8230; Charles Barron stands against that power. If I lived in New York City, I would certainly vote for Charles Barron_​.

-----------------------------------------------


Hey he supports OWS as well
Funny how that works
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCkSaQSjnaI"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCkSaQSjnaI[/ame]


As noted before

Peter Drucker said it best:

_"the complete collapse of the belief in the attainability of freedom and equality through Marxism has forced Russia 
to travel the same road toward a totalitarian society of     un-freedom and inequality which Germany has been following. 
Not that communism and fascism are essentially the same. Fascism is the stage reached after communism has proved an illusion, 
and it has proved as much an illusion in Russia as in pre-Hitler Germany."
_​


----------



## bigrebnc1775




----------



## Liability

Subliminal works, too.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Liability said:


> Subliminal works, too.



No wonder I hate coke.


----------



## Political Junky

bigrebnc1775 said:


>


Hitler didn't regulate rifles or shotguns, only handguns.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Political Junky said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hitler didn't regulate rifles or shotguns, only handguns.
Click to expand...


Nazi Weapons Act of 1938 (Translated to English)

Classified guns for "sporting purposes".
All citizens who wished to purchase firearms had to register with the Nazi officials and have a background check.
Presumed German citizens were hostile and thereby exempted Nazis from the gun control law.
*Gave Nazis unrestricted power to decide what kinds of firearms could, or could not be owned by private persons.*
The types of ammunition that were legal were subject to control by bureaucrats.
Juveniles under 18 years could not buy firearms and ammunition.

Nazi Gun Control


----------



## Political Junky

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Political Junky said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hitler didn't regulate rifles or shotguns, only handguns.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nazi Weapons Act of 1938 (Translated to English)
> 
> Classified guns for "sporting purposes".
> All citizens who wished to purchase firearms had to register with the Nazi officials and have a background check.
> Presumed German citizens were hostile and thereby exempted Nazis from the gun control law.
> *Gave Nazis unrestricted power to decide what kinds of firearms could, or could not be owned by private persons.*
> The types of ammunition that were legal were subject to control by bureaucrats.
> Juveniles under 18 years could not buy firearms and ammunition.
> 
> Nazi Gun Control
Click to expand...

From a website entitled "Hitler was a Leftist", really?


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Political Junky said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Political Junky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hitler didn't regulate rifles or shotguns, only handguns.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nazi Weapons Act of 1938 (Translated to English)
> 
> Classified guns for "sporting purposes".
> All citizens who wished to purchase firearms had to register with the Nazi officials and have a background check.
> Presumed German citizens were hostile and thereby exempted Nazis from the gun control law.
> *Gave Nazis unrestricted power to decide what kinds of firearms could, or could not be owned by private persons.*
> The types of ammunition that were legal were subject to control by bureaucrats.
> Juveniles under 18 years could not buy firearms and ammunition.
> 
> Nazi Gun Control
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> From a website entitled "Hitler was a Leftist", really?
Click to expand...


Well then, Right wingers aren't for gun control.


----------



## HUGGY

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Political Junky said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nazi Weapons Act of 1938 (Translated to English)
> 
> Classified guns for "sporting purposes".
> All citizens who wished to purchase firearms had to register with the Nazi officials and have a background check.
> Presumed German citizens were hostile and thereby exempted Nazis from the gun control law.
> *Gave Nazis unrestricted power to decide what kinds of firearms could, or could not be owned by private persons.*
> The types of ammunition that were legal were subject to control by bureaucrats.
> Juveniles under 18 years could not buy firearms and ammunition.
> 
> Nazi Gun Control
> 
> 
> 
> From a website entitled "Hitler was a Leftist", really?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well then, Right wingers aren't for gun control.
Click to expand...


I don't believe there are very many citizens of the U S A that are flat out against the individuals right to possess firearms.   What gets me is how the infotainment "news" runs up to victims of a shooting and asks how they feel about guns.  Cars kill way more people in the U S than guns...you don't see these fuckwits asking the victims of car crashes if they want to ban automobiles.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

HUGGY said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Political Junky said:
> 
> 
> 
> From a website entitled "Hitler was a Leftist", really?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well then, Right wingers aren't for gun control.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't believe there are very many citizens of the U S A that are flat out against the individuals right to possess firearms.   What gets me is how the infotainment "news" runs up to victims of a shooting and asks how they feel about guns.  Cars kill way more people in the U S than guns...you don't see these fuckwits asking the victims of car crashes if they want to ban automobiles.
Click to expand...




> I don't believe there are very many citizens of the U S A that are flat out against the individuals right to possess firearms.


They are very vocal those that are, and whine like a bitch drowning out the majority when they don't get their way. So your comment was loaded.


----------



## Liability

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> Subliminal works, too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No wonder I hate coke.
Click to expand...


But now when you say "Coke blows," you'll know what you're saying!


----------



## regent

The problem with the car-gun analogy is that guns are made for one purpose and cars another. Kids get killed in playgrounds ergo we should....


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Liability said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> Subliminal works, too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No wonder I hate coke.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But now when you say "Coke blows," you'll know what you're saying!
Click to expand...


More like coke sucks.


----------



## daveman

HUGGY said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> LIBERAL HERO:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That was stupid.  Even for you.  Howzabout you name any so-called "liberal" that would hang your image in thier home?
> 
> I can think of many right wing fucks that probably already have one gracing thier crib..  some likely over the mantle.
Click to expand...

No, you can't.


----------



## HUGGY

daveman said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> LIBERAL HERO:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That was stupid.  Even for you.  Howzabout you name any so-called "liberal" that would hang your image in thier home?
> 
> I can think of many right wing fucks that probably already have one gracing thier crib..  some likely over the mantle.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, you can't.
Click to expand...


Dave frantically spreads his stupidity on the interwebs.


----------



## daveman

HUGGY said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> That was stupid.  Even for you.  Howzabout you name any so-called "liberal" that would hang your image in thier home?
> 
> I can think of many right wing fucks that probably already have one gracing thier crib..  some likely over the mantle.
> 
> 
> 
> No, you can't.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dave frantically spreads his stupidity on the interwebs.
Click to expand...

Then name names, boy.

Let's see how big a retard you really are.


----------



## HUGGY

daveman said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, you can't.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dave frantically spreads his stupidity on the interwebs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Then name names, boy.
> 
> Let's see how big a retard you really are.
Click to expand...


Stupid people call zero shots in my world Dave.


----------



## daveman

HUGGY said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dave frantically spreads his stupidity on the interwebs.
> 
> 
> 
> Then name names, boy.
> 
> Let's see how big a retard you really are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Stupid people call zero shots in my world Dave.
Click to expand...

You fail, then.  Big, fat, hairy fail.


----------



## Ravi

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Before the defenders of Hitler was a right winger go into full meltdown I would like to point out that intense made a valid comment. The U.S. did not declare war on Germany until after Germany  declared war on the U.S..


Yep, because the conservatives in Congress wanted to appease Hitler.


----------



## BDBoop




----------



## koshergrl

Cuz it's always best not to learn from history, or identify deplorable policies before people are victimized.

Got it. Wait until AFTER the human rights offenses occur.

We're well on the way. The first thing Hitler did was encourage abortion amongst the Poles.


----------



## Liability

HUGGY said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> That was stupid.  Even for you.  Howzabout you name any so-called "liberal" that would hang your image in thier home?
> 
> I can think of many right wing fucks that probably already have one gracing thier crib..  some likely over the mantle.
> 
> 
> 
> No, you can't.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dave frantically spreads his stupidity on the interwebs.
Click to expand...


So you claim.

But he was right.


----------



## HUGGY

Liability said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, you can't.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dave frantically spreads his stupidity on the interwebs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you claim.
> 
> But he was right.
Click to expand...


You two need to get a room.  You be sure to bring your photo collection.


----------



## Liability

HUGGY said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dave frantically spreads his stupidity on the interwebs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you claim.
> 
> But he was right.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You two need to get a room.  You be sure to bring your photo collection.
Click to expand...


When you've got nothing, it shows.

It's showing -- again.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Ravi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Before the defenders of Hitler was a right winger go into full meltdown I would like to point out that intense made a valid comment. The U.S. did not declare war on Germany until after Germany  declared war on the U.S..
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, because the conservatives in Congress wanted to appease Hitler.
Click to expand...


FDR wasn't a conservative try again.


----------



## Liability

I am not a big fan of FDR, but let's be serious here.

I don't think FDR wanted to appease Hitler.  

If anything, he was itching to get into the fight.   And, good for him, too.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Liability said:


> I am not a big fan of FDR, but let's be serious here.
> 
> I don't think FDR wanted to appease Hitler.
> 
> If anything, he was itching to get into the fight.   And, good for him, too.



Would FDR appointment of Joe Kennedy and Joe Kennedy appeasement of Hitler tell you anything?


----------



## Liability

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am not a big fan of FDR, but let's be serious here.
> 
> I don't think FDR wanted to appease Hitler.
> 
> If anything, he was itching to get into the fight.   And, good for him, too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Would FDR appointment of Joe Kennedy and Joe Kennedy appeasement of Hitler tell you anything?
Click to expand...


Not what you might imagine.

He may have straddled the fence a bit, for a time, but ultimately he came down on the side of trying to ENGAGE Nazi Germany.


----------



## daveman

Liability said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you claim.
> 
> But he was right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You two need to get a room.  You be sure to bring your photo collection.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When you've got nothing, it shows.
> 
> It's showing -- again.
Click to expand...

Huggy doesn't have to prove his claims.  We're supposed to just take his word for it.

Right, Huggy?


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Liability said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am not a big fan of FDR, but let's be serious here.
> 
> I don't think FDR wanted to appease Hitler.
> 
> If anything, he was itching to get into the fight.   And, good for him, too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Would FDR appointment of Joe Kennedy and Joe Kennedy appeasement of Hitler tell you anything?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not what you might imagine.
> 
> He may have straddled the fence a bit, for a time, but ultimately he came down on the side of trying to ENGAGE Nazi Germany.
Click to expand...


Would that be before or after Germany declared war on the U.S.?


----------



## del

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Would FDR appointment of Joe Kennedy and Joe Kennedy appeasement of Hitler tell you anything?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not what you might imagine.
> 
> He may have straddled the fence a bit, for a time, but ultimately he came down on the side of trying to ENGAGE Nazi Germany.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Would that be before or after Germany declared war on the U.S.?
Click to expand...


that would be before, mouth breather.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

del said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not what you might imagine.
> 
> He may have straddled the fence a bit, for a time, but ultimately he came down on the side of trying to ENGAGE Nazi Germany.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Would that be before or after Germany declared war on the U.S.?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> that would be before, mouth breather.
Click to expand...


Right knuckle dragger


----------



## regent

After Pearl Harbor most Americans wanted to attack Japan but FDR believed the greater threat was Germany so Japan was put on hold. The threat with Germany was that the USSR would make some type of peace with Germany as she had in WWI leaving Britain to face Germany alone. To invade Europe we needed Britain and her land base.  
As our resources went to the ETO the US military in the Pacific used leapfrog, and island hopping and navy to engage Japan. With those tactics America could use its limited Pacific resources by picking places we could land with somewhat superior forces. We avoided strongholds like Rabaul and Truk. Even so, Japan defended her bases with a tenacity that made the US wonder what would Japan proper would be like.


----------



## Artevelde

Ravi said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Before the defenders of Hitler was a right winger go into full meltdown I would like to point out that intense made a valid comment. The U.S. did not declare war on Germany until after Germany  declared war on the U.S..
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, because the conservatives in Congress wanted to appease Hitler.
Click to expand...


Complete nonsense. The strongest opponents of US inviolvement with Europe were Progressive members of Congress.


----------



## Artevelde

Liability said:


> I am not a big fan of FDR, but let's be serious here.
> 
> I don't think FDR wanted to appease Hitler.
> 
> If anything, he was itching to get into the fight.   And, good for him, too.



True, although FDR was actually more cautious about getting into the war itself than many people believed or believe.


----------



## Ravi

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Before the defenders of Hitler was a right winger go into full meltdown I would like to point out that intense made a valid comment. The U.S. did not declare war on Germany until after Germany  declared war on the U.S..
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, because the conservatives in Congress wanted to appease Hitler.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> FDR wasn't a conservative try again.
Click to expand...


He also wasn't a member of Congress.


----------



## NoNukes

Si modo said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Si modo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some folks can never grasp that there is fiscal conservatism and there is social conservatism. And, that a Classical Liberals are not one of the two.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And you are not a CL.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually, I am.
> 
> "Classical liberalism is a political ideology that advocates limited government, constitutionalism, rule of law, due process, individual liberties including freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and free markets."
> 
> Classical liberalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Wikipedia is one of the worst reference sources available.


----------



## Liability

Artevelde said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am not a big fan of FDR, but let's be serious here.
> 
> I don't think FDR wanted to appease Hitler.
> 
> If anything, he was itching to get into the fight.   And, good for him, too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> True, although FDR was actually more cautious about getting into the war itself than many people believed or believe.
Click to expand...


Yeah.  But he was also doing lend lease, and that wasn't exactly the kind of thing that would have Adolf warming up to us.

And then there's that whole conspiracy notion that he knew of the Japanese sneak attack on Pearl Harbor before it was even commenced, and he did nothing to prevent it so that it would serve as a trip wire for the U.S. to finally GET IN the war.


----------



## Liability

NoNukes said:


> Si modo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> And you are not a CL.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, I am.
> 
> "Classical liberalism is a political ideology that advocates limited government, constitutionalism, rule of law, due process, individual liberties including freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and free markets."
> 
> Classical liberalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Wikipedia is one of the worst reference sources available.
Click to expand...


Yes.  It is. 

 On the other hand, no matter how badly they suck, the definition itself remains either correct or incorrect.

In the case of classical liberalism, they appear to be pretty much right on the money.


----------



## 007

syrenn said:


> Sorry ravi...if anyone gives me the hitler feeling.... its obama.


----------



## BDBoop

Of course he does, Pale Ass. But you're one of the biggest racist assholes on the board.


----------



## HUGGY

daveman said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> You two need to get a room.  You be sure to bring your photo collection.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When you've got nothing, it shows.
> 
> It's showing -- again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Huggy doesn't have to prove his claims.  We're supposed to just take his word for it.
> 
> Right, Huggy?
Click to expand...


Ya...sure.  Sounds good to me.


----------



## NoNukes

Liability said:


> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Si modo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, I am.
> 
> "Classical liberalism is a political ideology that advocates limited government, constitutionalism, rule of law, due process, individual liberties including freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and free markets."
> 
> Classical liberalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> Wikipedia is one of the worst reference sources available.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes.  It is.
> 
> On the other hand, no matter how badly they suck, the definition itself remains either correct or incorrect.
> 
> In the case of classical liberalism, they appear to be pretty much right on the money.
Click to expand...


This is the liberal of today. Classical liberalism is a thing of the past. If you want to live in the past, fine.

  &#8194; 

lib·er·al·ism&#8194; &#8194;[lib-er-uh-liz-uhm, lib-ruh-]  Show IPA
noun
1.
the quality or state of being liberal,  as in behavior or attitude.
2.
a political or social philosophy advocating the freedom of the individual, parliamentary systems of government, nonviolent modification of political, social, or economic institutions to assure unrestricted development in all spheres of human endeavor, and governmental guarantees of individual rights and civil liberties.
3.
( sometimes initial capital letter ) the principles and practices of a liberal  party in politics.
4.
a movement in modern Protestantism that emphasizes freedom from tradition and authority, the adjustment of religious beliefs to scientific conceptio


----------



## Liability

NoNukes said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wikipedia is one of the worst reference sources available.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes.  It is.
> 
> On the other hand, no matter how badly they suck, the definition itself remains either correct or incorrect.
> 
> In the case of classical liberalism, they appear to be pretty much right on the money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is the liberal of today. Classical liberalism is a thing of the past. If you want to live in the past, fine.
> 
> &#8194;
> 
> lib·er·al·ism&#8194; &#8194;[lib-er-uh-liz-uhm, lib-ruh-]  Show IPA
> noun
> 1.
> the quality or state of being liberal,  as in behavior or attitude.
> 2.
> a political or social philosophy advocating the freedom of the individual, parliamentary systems of government, nonviolent modification of political, social, or economic institutions to assure unrestricted development in all spheres of human endeavor, and governmental guarantees of individual rights and civil liberties.
> 3.
> ( sometimes initial capital letter ) the principles and practices of a liberal  party in politics.
> 4.
> a movement in modern Protestantism that emphasizes freedom from tradition and authority, the adjustment of religious beliefs to scientific conceptio
Click to expand...


The TERM being defined was not "liberalism."

The term being defined was "CLASSICAL liberalism."

Liberalism is opposed to Conservatism ::  CLASSICAL Liberalism IS conservatism.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Who Am I?

I suffer from Narcissistic Personality Disorder

My father was a Communist, a government employee and had multiple children with several woman

My father was not interested in my Mom and me so he abandoned us and we moved around a lot when I was young

I was not raised in the country that elected me

In my mid 30&#8217;s I wrote an autobiography highlighting my early years, political ideas, and thoughts on race

I then wrote a second book further describing my political ideas and ambitions

I&#8217;ve always maintained an exaggerated sense of self-importance

I require constant admiration 

I believe in Universal Health Care

I believe capitalism is evil

I am an anti-Semite

I believe in curtailing the rights of the people to own guns

I used economic turmoil to springboard myself to political power

I destroy my political enemies

I love using Grecian Temples as a backdrop to give speeches

Louis Farakan thought very highly of me

One of my very first actions was to seize control on my nation&#8217;s car companies


----------



## regent

liberalism and conservatism have core values. Those values do not change much, but what does change is the means to achieve those core values. For example, Jefferson believed in small limited government, but small limited government is not a core liberal value it can be a means to achieve a value. When Jefferson became the government his view of small limited government began to change, his fear of government faded somewhat. The same process occurred with Reagan, he preached small limited government until elected. 
The problem with defining liberalism and conservatism is that too often the means to achieve their core values is assumed to be part of the definition.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

regent said:


> liberalism and conservatism have core values. Those values do not change much, but what does change is the means to achieve those core values. For example, Jefferson believed in small limited government, but small limited government is not a core liberal value it can be a means to achieve a value. When Jefferson became the government his view of small limited government began to change, his fear of government faded somewhat. The same process occurred with Reagan, he preached small limited government until elected.
> The problem with defining liberalism and conservatism is that too often the means to achieve their core values is assumed to be part of the definition.



Reagan tried to eliminate the Department of Education and asked for a line item veto (remember, Democrats neutered the Presidency in with their Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974)


----------



## Indofred

CrusaderFrank said:


> Who Am I?
> 
> I suffer from Narcissistic Personality Disorder
> 
> *Prove it.*
> 
> My father was a Communist, a government employee and had multiple children with several woman
> 
> *My dad an industrial scientist - I'm not*
> 
> My father was not interested in my Mom and me so he abandoned us and we moved around a lot when I was young
> 
> *40 to 60% of US marriages end in divorce each year.*
> 
> I was not raised in the country that elected me
> 
> *Good - That means he knows more about the world than Sarah Palin. (So do most slugs but not many republican politicians)*
> 
> In my mid 30s I wrote an autobiography highlighting my early years, political ideas, and thoughts on race
> 
> I then wrote a second book further describing my political ideas and ambitions
> 
> *Most politicians write such things. George W Bush did.*
> 
> Ive always maintained an exaggerated sense of self-importance
> 
> *He's a politician - What the devil do you expect?*
> 
> I require constant admiration
> 
> *Seems you do*
> 
> I believe in Universal Health Care
> 
> *I'm politically right of centre but I do as well.*
> 
> I believe capitalism is evil
> 
> *He's said it doesn't work. So have a lot of other people. I happen to believe he's talking bollocks but it's hardly a killer statement.
> I believe Einstein said it was the source of evil as did some bloke called Jesus.*
> 
> I am an anti-Semite
> 
> *Better supply at least one quote where Obama states a hatred of Jews.*
> 
> I believe in curtailing the rights of the people to own guns
> 
> *Good on the lad. The gun lobby are bloody idiots.*
> 
> I used economic turmoil to springboard myself to political power
> 
> *You mean the total cock up of the last Bush administration. Hardly a great political point to attempt.*
> 
> I destroy my political enemies
> 
> *Bush killed his own troops to line his pockets with dirty money. Top that.*
> 
> I love using Grecian Temples as a backdrop to give speeches
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Louis Farakan thought very highly of me
> 
> *Saddam admired Ron Raygun.
> Big deal.*
> 
> One of my very first actions was to seize control on my nations car companies



*Or save a bunch of US jobs from moving to Japan or some other country.*

Your post, sir, is twaddle.


----------



## NoNukes

Liability said:


> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes.  It is.
> 
> On the other hand, no matter how badly they suck, the definition itself remains either correct or incorrect.
> 
> In the case of classical liberalism, they appear to be pretty much right on the money.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is the liberal of today. Classical liberalism is a thing of the past. If you want to live in the past, fine.
> 
> &#8194;
> 
> lib·er·al·ism&#8194; &#8194;[lib-er-uh-liz-uhm, lib-ruh-]  Show IPA
> noun
> 1.
> the quality or state of being liberal,  as in behavior or attitude.
> 2.
> a political or social philosophy advocating the freedom of the individual, parliamentary systems of government, nonviolent modification of political, social, or economic institutions to assure unrestricted development in all spheres of human endeavor, and governmental guarantees of individual rights and civil liberties.
> 3.
> ( sometimes initial capital letter ) the principles and practices of a liberal  party in politics.
> 4.
> a movement in modern Protestantism that emphasizes freedom from tradition and authority, the adjustment of religious beliefs to scientific conceptio
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The TERM being defined was not "liberalism."
> 
> The term being defined was "CLASSICAL liberalism."
> 
> Liberalism is opposed to Conservatism ::  CLASSICAL Liberalism IS conservatism.
Click to expand...


So when you guys are criticizing liberals, you are criticizing yourselves. Interesting.


----------



## Liability

NoNukes said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is the liberal of today. Classical liberalism is a thing of the past. If you want to live in the past, fine.
> 
> &#8194;
> 
> lib·er·al·ism&#8194; &#8194;[lib-er-uh-liz-uhm, lib-ruh-]  Show IPA
> noun
> 1.
> the quality or state of being liberal,  as in behavior or attitude.
> 2.
> a political or social philosophy advocating the freedom of the individual, parliamentary systems of government, nonviolent modification of political, social, or economic institutions to assure unrestricted development in all spheres of human endeavor, and governmental guarantees of individual rights and civil liberties.
> 3.
> ( sometimes initial capital letter ) the principles and practices of a liberal  party in politics.
> 4.
> a movement in modern Protestantism that emphasizes freedom from tradition and authority, the adjustment of religious beliefs to scientific conceptio
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The TERM being defined was not "liberalism."
> 
> The term being defined was "CLASSICAL liberalism."
> 
> Liberalism is opposed to Conservatism ::  CLASSICAL Liberalism IS conservatism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So when you guys are criticizing liberals, you are criticizing yourselves. Interesting.
Click to expand...


Nope.  You just highlighted your inability to grasp even simple sentences.

A CLASSICAL liberal is not a liberal.   A modern day liberal tries to deny that he/she is a liberal.  But modern day liberals (no matter what fake name they use for their political philosophy) still don't quite understand the virtues of limited government.  It's a pretty good give away for what they really are.

Now, let's address your problem.  If there's any chance of going back on line for a second helping of brains, you need it. Badly.  Petition the Almighty.


----------



## Political Junky

I don't know any Liberals who deny that they are Liberal.


----------



## Liability

Political Junky said:


> I don't know any Liberals who deny that they are Liberal.



You need to start paying attention, then.


----------



## daveman

HUGGY said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liability said:
> 
> 
> 
> When you've got nothing, it shows.
> 
> It's showing -- again.
> 
> 
> 
> Huggy doesn't have to prove his claims.  We're supposed to just take his word for it.
> 
> Right, Huggy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ya...sure.  Sounds good to me.
Click to expand...


How are you dealing with the bitter disappointment?


----------



## regent

There are different types of liberalism and conservatism, each with a little different slant on some life. 
A problem with defining literalism or conservatism by defining people is that many people, except Limbaugh etc. may have a liberal view of some things and a conservative views of others.


----------



## BDBoop

Liability said:


> Political Junky said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know any Liberals who deny that they are Liberal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You need to start paying attention, then.
Click to expand...


Name names, then.


----------



## HUGGY

daveman said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Huggy doesn't have to prove his claims.  We're supposed to just take his word for it.
> 
> Right, Huggy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ya...sure.  Sounds good to me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How are you dealing with the bitter disappointment?
Click to expand...


Me?.. you have to be on drugs.  I like the way it is all turning out.  

Dave you are such an idiot...seriously...


----------



## daveman

HUGGY said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ya...sure.  Sounds good to me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How are you dealing with the bitter disappointment?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Me?.. you have to be on drugs.  I like the way it is all turning out.
> 
> Dave you are such an idiot...seriously...
Click to expand...

Really?  Who's believing your unsubstantiated horseshit?

I count zero.  You?


----------



## Artevelde

daveman said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> How are you dealing with the bitter disappointment?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Me?.. you have to be on drugs.  I like the way it is all turning out.
> 
> Dave you are such an idiot...seriously...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Really?  Who's believing your unsubstantiated horseshit?
> 
> I count zero.  You?
Click to expand...


Maybe he believes it himself, that would make one (maybe more if he has split personality).


----------



## HUGGY

daveman said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> How are you dealing with the bitter disappointment?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Me?.. you have to be on drugs.  I like the way it is all turning out.
> 
> Dave you are such an idiot...seriously...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Really?  Who's believing your unsubstantiated horseshit?
> 
> I count zero.  You?
Click to expand...


Why are you so worried if anyone "believes" me?  I'm not.  I don't post at USMB to convert morons like you to any point of view.  You are beyond any help I might offer.  There are plenty of people that come here to see what opinions others have on issues.  I have some opinions that some of these people appreciate seeing.  You dissagreeing with me hardly changes that.


----------



## Ravi

HUGGY said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> Me?.. you have to be on drugs.  I like the way it is all turning out.
> 
> Dave you are such an idiot...seriously...
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  Who's believing your unsubstantiated horseshit?
> 
> I count zero.  You?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why are you so worried if anyone "believes" me?  I'm not.  I don't post at USMB to convert morons like you to any point of view.  You are beyond any help I might offer.  There are plenty of people that come here to see what opinions others have on issues.  I have some opinions that some of these people appreciate seeing.  You dissagreeing with me hardly changes that.
Click to expand...

Huggy. Please. Don't spoil a good thread. naziman will now start inanely posting his usual bullshit for the next five pages.


----------



## HUGGY

Ravi said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  Who's believing your unsubstantiated horseshit?
> 
> I count zero.  You?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you so worried if anyone "believes" me?  I'm not.  I don't post at USMB to convert morons like you to any point of view.  You are beyond any help I might offer.  There are plenty of people that come here to see what opinions others have on issues.  I have some opinions that some of these people appreciate seeing.  You dissagreeing with me hardly changes that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Huggy. Please. Don't spoil a good thread. naziman will now start inanely posting his usual bullshit for the next five pages.
Click to expand...


Point well taken.  Naziman...there is no need to respond to me...my posts are meaningless and nobody reads them anyways ..  I accept that your attacks are 100% correct in the name of keeping this thread on topic.  

What we talkin bout here?...Oh ya..Hitler and the right.  I think any reasonable person would conclude that Hitler was bad.  Any person that cares about thier fellow man could conclude that Christian Fundamentalists NewGOPers do not care for anyone but the wealthiest among us, the top 1%.  That in itself is fascist by nature.


----------



## L.K.Eder

incccccccccccccccccccoooooooooooooooooooooommmmmiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiing


----------



## daveman

HUGGY said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> Me?.. you have to be on drugs.  I like the way it is all turning out.
> 
> Dave you are such an idiot...seriously...
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  Who's believing your unsubstantiated horseshit?
> 
> I count zero.  You?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why are you so worried if anyone "believes" me?  I'm not.  I don't post at USMB to convert morons like you to any point of view.  You are beyond any help I might offer.  There are plenty of people that come here to see what opinions others have on issues.  I have some opinions that some of these people appreciate seeing.  You dissagreeing with me hardly changes that.
Click to expand...

If you would substantiate any of your claims, more people would appreciate your views.

But you're not interested in that.  Oh, well.


----------



## daveman

Ravi said:


> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  Who's believing your unsubstantiated horseshit?
> 
> I count zero.  You?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you so worried if anyone "believes" me?  I'm not.  I don't post at USMB to convert morons like you to any point of view.  You are beyond any help I might offer.  There are plenty of people that come here to see what opinions others have on issues.  I have some opinions that some of these people appreciate seeing.  You dissagreeing with me hardly changes that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Huggy. Please. Don't spoil a good thread. naziman will now start inanely posting his usual bullshit for the next five pages.
Click to expand...

"Naziman"?

I'd ask you to provide proof of my supposed Nazism, but you don't provide proof, either.

So, feel free to eat shit.


----------



## daveman

HUGGY said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you so worried if anyone "believes" me?  I'm not.  I don't post at USMB to convert morons like you to any point of view.  You are beyond any help I might offer.  There are plenty of people that come here to see what opinions others have on issues.  I have some opinions that some of these people appreciate seeing.  You dissagreeing with me hardly changes that.
> 
> 
> 
> Huggy. Please. Don't spoil a good thread. naziman will now start inanely posting his usual bullshit for the next five pages.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Point well taken.  Naziman...there is no need to respond to me...my posts are meaningless and nobody reads them anyways ..  I accept that your attacks are 100% correct in the name of keeping this thread on topic.
> 
> What we talkin bout here?...Oh ya..Hitler and the right.  I think any reasonable person would conclude that Hitler was bad.  *Any person that cares about thier fellow man could conclude that Christian Fundamentalists NewGOPers do not care for anyone but the wealthiest among us, the top 1%.*  That in itself is fascist by nature.
Click to expand...

It would be, if it were true.

Have you ever considered thinking for yourself?  Are you even capable?


----------



## L.K.Eder

three belated whiners.

i apologize.

will recalibrate while not caring.


----------



## WilliamCody

So what if "the Right" supported Hitler?

That's like saying the Democrats were pro-Jim Crow.  It's true, but it misses the point that political movements/institutions shift over time.  While there are some very basic and crude similarities, "the Right" of Nazi Germany was its own beast, unlike any right-wing movements of any other countries, primarily because it defined itself on German and Teutonic nationalism.


----------



## Euroconservativ

Ravi said:


> Doubt that Hitler had the support of the conservative right wing?
> 
> 1. "Hitler found his greatest support in *traditionally conservative small towns. He campaigned with attacks on Marxism, making it clear that by Marxism he meant the Social Democrats. Hitler appealed to morality, attacking free love and what he inferred was the immorality of Berlin and some other major cities. He promised to stamp out big city corruption. He called for a spiritual revolution, for a "positive Christianity" and a spirit of national pride. Hitler repeatedly called for national renewal. *He and his National Socialists benefited from the recent upheaval in the Soviet Union and the rise in fear and disgust for Bolshevism. His party's posters read:



The nazi party got its worst electoral result in traditional and catholic southern Bayern and Baden. The more catholic the less votes

Catholics in Germany:






Nazi support:






Second, you must contextualise things. We are talking about a period when liberal capitalism and parlamentarism were largely discredited. And mainstream parties sympathized with totalitarian ideologies, sometimes as a way to stop their opponents. The german right thought that they were able to control the nazis.


Third, they actually didn't care that much about religion. It was only instrumental in their obsession with race. The nazi party program talks about positive christianity "without binding itself to any confession". And demanded freedom for all religious faiths "insofar as they do not endanger its existence or offend the moral and ethical sense of the german race".


--------


If you like association fallacies, let's copy/paste other points of the nazi program:

_"The State must assume the responsibility of organizing thoroughly the entire cultural system of the people. The curricula of all educational establishments shall be adapted to practical life. The conception of the State Idea (science of citizenship) must be taught in the schools from the very beginning. We demand that specially talented children of poor parents, whatever their station or occupation, be educated at the expense of the State"_

_We demand that ruthless war be waged against those who work to the injury of the common welfare. Traitors, usurers, profiteers, etc._

_We demand profit-sharing in large industries.

We demand a generous increase in old-age pensions. 

Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in blood and treasure, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as treason to the people. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits_

Etc, etc


Hitler always blamed what he called "war profiteers"

[youtube]DfyKgiRnxkQ[/youtube]


----------



## Ravi

Good book recommendation, LK. I owe you a rep.


----------



## koshergrl

Ravi doesn't care about fact. She's been schooled on this topic for years, and she is going to continue to lie in order to hide the truth of the matter...Nazism sprung forth from and embraced progressive ideology.

And Progressive ideology continues to embrace the most vile of the Nazi practices. Population control via killing vulnerable classes of people. 

Catholics died at the hands of Nazis because they adamantly opposed it.


----------



## koshergrl

and they opposed it before anyone else did. When American progressives were heaping glory on Hitler's head, Catholics were decrying him.


----------



## manifold

koshergrl said:


> and they opposed it before anyone else did. When American progressives were heaping glory on Hitler's head, Catholics were decrying him.



How can you even think about such petty, inconsequential matters at a time like this?

Don't you know that the mods are fucking with the hallowed rep system?


----------



## koshergrl

I'm currently out of rep, and since everything is immediate to me....


----------



## manifold

koshergrl said:


> I'm currently out of rep, and since* everything is immediate to me*....



yeah, you're like a goldfish that way aren't you.


----------



## Ravi

Actually, the most vocal against Hitler were the commies. But we know you'll never admit to the truth, Babble.


----------



## koshergrl

I never said the commies weren't anti-Hitler.


----------



## manifold

Ravi said:


> Actually, the most vocal against Hitler were the commies. But we know you'll never admit to the truth, Babble.



I think the joos might disagree.


----------



## Ravi

manifold said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, the most vocal against Hitler were the commies. But we know you'll never admit to the truth, Babble.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the joos might disagree.
Click to expand...


In America. In Germany they were too afraid to say much.


----------



## koshergrl

The Catholics spoke out against him, though.


----------



## koshergrl

From Answers.com 
Actually pretty good answer:

"Although born and raised in the Catholic faith, Hitler grew to hate sincere Catholics and Christians in general, and during his career, persecuted them. He considered the Catholic teachings of humility, gentleness, and compassion toward others to be signs of "weakness," ill-befitting the members of the "Master Race," and did not wish Hitler Youth to learn to be "weak" and "wishy-washy" like Catholics and other Christians.
On March 10, 1937, Pope Pius XI published an encyclical critical of Nazism called _Mit brennender Sorge_ (With Burning Anxiety). In response, uniformed members of the "Master Race" rounded up and imprisoned a number of Catholic monks.
Hitler hated Roman Catholics who stood with the Pope against him, but appreciated those Catholics who felt they could compromise their faith by becoming Nazis and supporting the utmost in brutality and wickedness, yet continuing to attend Mass, receiving the Sacraments, and claiming to be Catholic.

Read more: Why did Hitler hate Roman Catholics

For those interested in actually understanding, rather than just telling lies against Catholics. Who actually died for opposing Hitler in Germany.


----------



## Neotrotsky

koshergrl said:


> From Answers.com
> Actually pretty good answer:
> 
> "Although born and raised in the Catholic faith, Hitler grew to hate sincere Catholics and Christians in general, and during his career, persecuted them. He considered the Catholic teachings of humility, gentleness, and compassion toward others to be signs of "weakness," ill-befitting the members of the "Master Race," and did not wish Hitler Youth to learn to be "weak" and "wishy-washy" like Catholics and other Christians.
> On March 10, 1937, Pope Pius XI published an encyclical critical of Nazism called _Mit brennender Sorge_ (With Burning Anxiety). In response, uniformed members of the "Master Race" rounded up and imprisoned a number of Catholic monks.
> Hitler hated Roman Catholics who stood with the Pope against him, but appreciated those Catholics who felt they could compromise their faith by becoming Nazis and supporting the utmost in brutality and wickedness, yet continuing to attend Mass, receiving the Sacraments, and claiming to be Catholic.
> 
> Read more: Why did Hitler hate Roman Catholics
> 
> For those interested in actually understanding, rather than just telling lies against Catholics. Who actually died for opposing Hitler in Germany.




I hear you


Is it any different than antebellum blacks who actually owned slaves that 
were not their relatives ?

One would not argue that all blacks then supported slavery


----------



## Political Junky

Nazi photos


----------



## Neotrotsky

Political Junky said:


> Nazi photos




Like most statists, they wanted to impose their
belief system and, in effect, make a new religion


For example, Rosenberg, in his influential book for Nazis,
 &#8220;The Myth of the Twentieth Century&#8221;, he wrote: 
_
There is no proof for the often made claim that Jesus was a Jew. Indeed, there is much to show the contrary. 
Jesus possibly was Aryan, or partially so, showing the Nordic type strongly._​
Give me a break- Jesus was not a Jew!

The Nazi's were like all statists.
Nothing can be above the state, man or religion.

Religion was viewed as nothing more to them then a form of competition
and something to be manipulated to help keep the gov't in power.


----------



## koshergrl

Plus most religions maintain a code of conduct/honor that is not in keeping with statist practices.


----------



## Neotrotsky

koshergrl said:


> Plus most religions maintain a code of conduct/honor that is not in keeping with statist practices.



Good point

The Nazi's advance of the the "German Christen" movement created in 1934 a schism called the  &#8220;Confessional Church&#8221; 
which had their Barmen Declaration- objecting to  Nazi doctrine and to the interference of the State in the church. 

Some brave people were imprisoned and/or murdered by the Nazis for that..
Martin Niemoeller
Dietrich Bonhoeffer 

Again, they could not reconcile the Nazi state's desire for total control/ sovereignty over a person.
In Christian religions (or Jewish), that ultimately belongs only to God.


----------



## Political Junky

Nazi Artifacts: Mementoes, Badges, Pins and Painting


----------



## Neotrotsky

US Navy cross







Following that line of logic,,,

Hitler was a community organizer


----------



## barry1960

Neotrotsky said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Plus most religions maintain a code of conduct/honor that is not in keeping with statist practices.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good point
> 
> The Nazi's advance of the the "German Christen" movement created in 1934 a schism called the  Confessional Church
> which had their Barmen Declaration- objecting to  Nazi doctrine and to the interference of the State in the church.
> 
> Some brave people were imprisoned and/or murdered by the Nazis for that..
> Martin Niemoeller
> Dietrich Bonhoeffer
> 
> Again, they could not reconcile the Nazi state's desire for total control/ sovereignty over a person.
> In Christian religions (or Jewish), that ultimately belongs only to God.
Click to expand...


Good post. I am a bit surprised. To clarify, Bonhoeffer was imprisoned for his anti-Nazi stance, but was executed for his implication with the July 20th conspirators.


----------



## Artevelde

Ravi said:


> Actually, the most vocal against Hitler were the commies. But we know you'll never admit to the truth, Babble.



They were even more vocal against all the other anti-Hitler forces.


----------



## daveman

daveman said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HUGGY said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you so worried if anyone "believes" me?  I'm not.  I don't post at USMB to convert morons like you to any point of view.  You are beyond any help I might offer.  There are plenty of people that come here to see what opinions others have on issues.  I have some opinions that some of these people appreciate seeing.  You dissagreeing with me hardly changes that.
> 
> 
> 
> Huggy. Please. Don't spoil a good thread. naziman will now start inanely posting his usual bullshit for the next five pages.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "Naziman"?
> 
> I'd ask you to provide proof of my supposed Nazism, but you don't provide proof, either.
> 
> So, feel free to eat shit.
Click to expand...

Ravi?  I see no proof of my supposed Nazism.  Did you choose to eat shit, then?


----------



## Black_Label

Political Junky said:


> Nazi Artifacts: Mementoes, Badges, Pins and Painting



Good find. The nazis and the vatican were BFF


----------



## koshergrl

No, they WEREN'T. 

"[FONT=arial,helvetica]Today, many youths imagine that  the sole purpose of Hitler&#8217;s Third Reich was to kill and persecute the  Jews, supposedly the only victims of the socialist regime. The reality  is not so simple. This Jewish-dominated theme is a distortion of a  biased media propaganda, strongly supported by Hollywood, which has been  meticulously taken up by the present day education system. It was not  just Jews, however, who suffered under the Third Reich. The Catholic  nobility was also strongly persecuted by the Nazis. 

From the onset of National Socialism, Baron von Guttenberg and his  circle of friends realized the dangers it presented to their country and  the Catholic religion, and they made efforts to fight it."

The Catholic nobility was decimated by Hitler. Monks were slaughtered, churches looted. But that's okay by today's Nazis, the progressives, who think the Nazis were doing the right thing, to hear them laud their policies,and pretend that the Catholics were pro-Nazi.

http://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/A_035br_Stirrup.htm


[/FONT]


----------



## L.K.Eder

koshergrl said:


> No, they WEREN'T.
> 
> "[FONT=arial,helvetica]Today, many youths imagine that  the sole purpose of Hitlers Third Reich was to kill and persecute the  Jews, supposedly the only victims of the socialist regime. The reality  is not so simple. This Jewish-dominated theme is a distortion of a  biased media propaganda, strongly supported by Hollywood, which has been  meticulously taken up by the present day education system. It was not  just Jews, however, who suffered under the Third Reich. The Catholic  nobility was also strongly persecuted by the Nazis.
> 
> From the onset of National Socialism, Baron von Guttenberg and his  circle of friends realized the dangers it presented to their country and  the Catholic religion, and they made efforts to fight it."
> 
> The Catholic nobility was decimated by Hitler. Monks were slaughtered, churches looted. But that's okay by today's Nazis, the progressives, who think the Nazis were doing the right thing, to hear them laud their policies,and pretend that the Catholics were pro-Nazi.
> 
> The Catholic Resistance to Nazism in Germany by Marian T. Horvat and Judith F Mead
> 
> 
> [/FONT]


wow, what a shitty source. haha, how did you find this?


----------



## koshergrl

Like you would know.


----------



## Ravi

Black_Label said:


> Political Junky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nazi Artifacts: Mementoes, Badges, Pins and Painting
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good find. The nazis and the vatican were BFF
Click to expand...


That's a very sad picture.


----------



## L.K.Eder

koshergrl said:


> Like you would know.



i am really interested in how you managed to find this "source".

i mean, it is not difficult to find a serious source to defend catholics' behaviour during the third reich.

but the one you presented? holy moly.


----------



## del

L.K.Eder said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, they WEREN'T.
> 
> "[FONT=arial,helvetica]Today, many youths imagine that  the sole purpose of Hitlers Third Reich was to kill and persecute the  Jews, supposedly the only victims of the socialist regime. The reality  is not so simple. This Jewish-dominated theme is a distortion of a  biased media propaganda, strongly supported by Hollywood, which has been  meticulously taken up by the present day education system. It was not  just Jews, however, who suffered under the Third Reich. The Catholic  nobility was also strongly persecuted by the Nazis.
> 
> From the onset of National Socialism, Baron von Guttenberg and his  circle of friends realized the dangers it presented to their country and  the Catholic religion, and they made efforts to fight it."
> 
> The Catholic nobility was decimated by Hitler. Monks were slaughtered, churches looted. But that's okay by today's Nazis, the progressives, who think the Nazis were doing the right thing, to hear them laud their policies,and pretend that the Catholics were pro-Nazi.
> 
> The Catholic Resistance to Nazism in Germany by Marian T. Horvat and Judith F Mead
> 
> 
> [/FONT]
> 
> 
> 
> wow, what a shitty source. haha, how did you find this?
Click to expand...


it came with her copy of the protocols of the elders of zion

she just had to pay separate shipping and handling


----------



## koshergrl

L.K.Eder said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like you would know.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i am really interested in how you managed to find this "source".
> 
> i mean, it is not difficult to find a serious source to defend catholics' behaviour during the third reich.
> 
> but the one you presented? holy moly.
Click to expand...

 
I did a search and it was on the first page...


----------



## daveman

del said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, they WEREN'T.
> 
> "[FONT=arial,helvetica]Today, many youths imagine that  the sole purpose of Hitlers Third Reich was to kill and persecute the  Jews, supposedly the only victims of the socialist regime. The reality  is not so simple. This Jewish-dominated theme is a distortion of a  biased media propaganda, strongly supported by Hollywood, which has been  meticulously taken up by the present day education system. It was not  just Jews, however, who suffered under the Third Reich. The Catholic  nobility was also strongly persecuted by the Nazis.
> 
> From the onset of National Socialism, Baron von Guttenberg and his  circle of friends realized the dangers it presented to their country and  the Catholic religion, and they made efforts to fight it."
> 
> The Catholic nobility was decimated by Hitler. Monks were slaughtered, churches looted. But that's okay by today's Nazis, the progressives, who think the Nazis were doing the right thing, to hear them laud their policies,and pretend that the Catholics were pro-Nazi.
> 
> The Catholic Resistance to Nazism in Germany by Marian T. Horvat and Judith F Mead
> 
> 
> [/FONT]
> 
> 
> 
> wow, what a shitty source. haha, how did you find this?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> it came with her copy of the protocols of the elders of zion
> 
> she just had to pay separate shipping and handling
Click to expand...

Anyone who thinks the Protocols is real is a Jew-hating retard.

Given that fact, do you think the Protocols is real, del?


----------



## L.K.Eder

daveman said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> wow, what a shitty source. haha, how did you find this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it came with her copy of the protocols of the elders of zion
> 
> she just had to pay separate shipping and handling
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Anyone who thinks the Protocols is real is a Jew-hating retard.
> 
> Given that fact, do you think the Protocols is real, del?
Click to expand...


careful del, it is a clever trap set by ddadadadadadadadvaeman.


----------



## L.K.Eder

koshergrl said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like you would know.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i am really interested in how you managed to find this "source".
> 
> i mean, it is not difficult to find a serious source to defend catholics' behaviour during the third reich.
> 
> but the one you presented? holy moly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I did a search and it was on the first page...
Click to expand...


and did you forget to engage the filth filter in your search engine?

or did you just select the most inane hit?


----------



## Peach

koshergrl said:


> No, they WEREN'T.
> 
> "[FONT=arial,helvetica]Today, many youths imagine that  the sole purpose of Hitlers Third Reich was to kill and persecute the  Jews, supposedly the only victims of the socialist regime. The reality  is not so simple. This Jewish-dominated theme is a distortion of a  biased media propaganda, strongly supported by Hollywood, which has been  meticulously taken up by the present day education system. It was not  just Jews, however, who suffered under the Third Reich. The Catholic  nobility was also strongly persecuted by the Nazis.
> 
> From the onset of National Socialism, Baron von Guttenberg and his  circle of friends realized the dangers it presented to their country and  the Catholic religion, and they made efforts to fight it."
> 
> The Catholic nobility was decimated by Hitler. Monks were slaughtered, churches looted. But that's okay by today's Nazis, the progressives, who think the Nazis were doing the right thing, to hear them laud their policies,and pretend that the Catholics were pro-Nazi.
> 
> The Catholic Resistance to Nazism in Germany by Marian T. Horvat and Judith F Mead
> 
> 
> [/FONT]



Thank you, kg; the persecution of Catholics, and other devout Christians is often overlooked in the discussion of the Third Reich.


----------



## koshergrl

Especially since the progressive history revisionists are working as hard as they can to pretend it didn't happen. It justifies their attacks on Christians.


----------



## koshergrl

Which in turn is exactly what the Nazis did to justify THEIR attacks on different groups.


----------



## L.K.Eder

koshergrl said:


> Especially since the progressive history revisionists are working as hard as they can to pretend it didn't happen. It justifies their attacks on Christians.



don't celebrate yet just because you found one gullible person.

your source is still a travesty.


----------



## Sunni Man

It really makes no difference whether the Protocols are fact or fiction.

They accurately lay out the Zionist agenda for world domination.

And the enslavement of the gentile people.


----------



## Peach

koshergrl said:


> Especially since the progressive history revisionists are working as hard as they can to pretend it didn't happen. It justifies their attacks on Christians.


 
NOT I, many Catholics sheltered Jews, aided them at the risk of their own lives. A bit on the Pope and his attempts to resist the deluge:

Appearing before 250,000 pilgrims at Lourdes in April 1935, Cardinal Pacelli said:
[The Nazis] are in reality only miserable plagiarists who dress up old errors with new tinsel. It does not make any difference whether they flock to the banners of the social revolution, whether they are guided by a false conception of the world and of life, or whether they are possessed by the superstition of a race and blood cult.[citation needed]
In 1936, Archbishop Cesare Orsenigo, Papal Nuncio to Germany, asked Cardinal Pacelli, then Vatican Secretary of State, for instructions regarding an invitation from Hitler to attend a Nazi Party meeting in Nuremberg, along with the entire diplomatic corps. Pacelli replied, The Holy Father thinks it is preferable that your Excellency abstain, taking a few days vacation.[citation needed]
In 1937, Orsenigo was invited along with the diplomatic corps to a reception for Hitlers birthday. Orsenigo again asked the Vatican if he should attend. Pacellis reply was, The Holy Father thinks not. Also because of the position of this Embassy, the Holy Father believes it is preferable in the present situation if your Excellency abstains from taking part in manifestations of homage toward the Lord Chancellor,[citation needed]
During Hitlers visit to Rome in 1938, Pius XI and Pacelli avoided meeting with him by leaving Rome a month early for the papal summer residence of Castel Gandolfo.
The Vatican was closed, and the priests and religious brothers and sisters left in Rome were told not to participate in the festivities and celebrations surrounding Hitlers Visit. On the Feast of the Holy Cross, Pius XI said from Castel Gandolfo, It saddens me to think that today in Rome the cross that is worshipped is not the Cross of our Saviour.
[edit]Denouncing the "war of ideologies"

Peter Kent writes:
Once the Rome-Berlin Axis had been proclaimed, the Holy See sought to drive a wedge between Germany and Italy. In early January 1937, a series of articles in Osservatore Romano returned to the theme of denouncing the war of ideologies attendant on the Spanish Civil War, and as Mussolini sought to turn Italian opinion towards Germany, the Pope sought to turn it in the opposite direction. A public protest against the German treatment of the Church was called for so that there should be no doubt where the Pope stood and what attitude Catholics should take.[31]


----------



## Peach

And more on the false claims of Catholic/Christian support for Nazism:

Plan for the Roman Catholic Church
Historian Heinz Hürten (professor emeritus at the Catholic University of Eichstaett) noted that the Nazi party had plans for the Roman Catholic Church, according to which the Church was supposed to "eat from the hands of the government." The sequence of these plans, he states, follow this sequence: an abolition of the priestly celibacy and a nationalisation of all church property, the dissolution of monastic religious institutes, and an end to the influence of the Catholic Church upon education. Hutzen states that Hitler proposed to reduce vocations to the priesthood by forbidding seminaries from receiving applicants before their 25th birthdays, and thus had hoped that these men would marry beforehand, during the time (18 &#8211; 25 years) in which they were obliged to work in military or labour service. Also, along with this process, the Church's sacraments would be revised and changed to so-called "Lebensfeiern", the non-Christian celebrations of different periods of life.[76]
There existed some considerable differences among officials within the Nazi Party on the question of Christianity. Goebbels is purported to have feared the creation of a third front of Catholics against their regime in Germany itself. In his diary, Goebbels wrote about the "traitors of the Black International who again stabbed our glorious government in the back by their criticism", by which Hutzen states meant the indirectly or actively resisting Catholic clergymen (who wore black cassocks).[77]
[edit]Christians imprisoned or died under the Third Reich
Although there are high profile cases of individual Lutherans and Catholics who died in prison or in concentration camps, the largest number of Christians who died would have been Jewish Christians or mischlinge who were sent to death camps for their race rather than their religion. Kahane (1999) state that the total number of Christians of Jewish descent in the Third Reich is estimated at around 200,000.[78] Among the Gentile Christians 11,300 Jehovah's Witnesses were placed in camps, and about 1,490 died, of whom 270 were executed as conscientious objectors.[79] Dachau had a special "priest block." Of the 2,720 priests (among them 2,579 Catholic) held in Dachau, 1,034 did not survive the camp. The majority of these priests were Polish (1,780), of whom 868 died in Dachau.
[edit]Other beliefs


----------



## Peach

Sunni Man said:


> It really makes no difference whether the Protocols are fact or fiction.
> 
> They accurately lay out the Zionist agenda for world domination.
> 
> And the enslavement of the gentile people.



Sunni, take a long walk off a short pier.


----------



## Sunni Man

Peach said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> It really makes no difference whether the Protocols are fact or fiction.
> 
> They accurately lay out the Zionist agenda for world domination.
> 
> And the enslavement of the gentile people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunni, take a long walk off a short pier.
Click to expand...

Obviously you have never read them.

And have no idea what the Protocols actually say.

Yet you have a strong opinion against them.


----------



## Black_Label

L.K.Eder said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Especially since the progressive history revisionists are working as hard as they can to pretend it didn't happen. It justifies their attacks on Christians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> don't celebrate yet just because you found one gullible person.
> 
> your source is still a travesty.
Click to expand...


Big time, what a steaming pile of shit and propaganda. Goebbels would be proud.


----------



## koshergrl

I don't understand the problem with the source. I'm not familiar with it.


----------



## L.K.Eder

koshergrl said:


> I don't understand the problem with the source. I'm not familiar with it.



i wasn't either. then i read what they had to offer on their review of the noble baronesses' adventures.

actually your excerpt gave big hints, too.


----------



## koshergrl

I need more. I did a couple of searches and came up with  nothing.


----------



## L.K.Eder

koshergrl said:


> I need more. I did a couple of searches and came up with  nothing.



you don't need to do anything but read the stuff you linked.

it is factually incorrect in many places. sloppy. 

and the big hint is the joos-media conspiracy bullshit.

one big whopper is that the stauffenberg plot is allegedly not talked about much.


> [FONT=arial,helvetica]Sadly, there is little said today in history books about this tragedy and heroism of this German resistance movement.[/FONT]



the problem is more that this one group is getting all the attention when the resistance is mentioned. often forgetting that many of those of the 20th july plot were avid nazis until the war went south.

and that is just the beginning.


----------



## Peach

Sunni Man said:


> Peach said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> It really makes no difference whether the Protocols are fact or fiction.
> 
> They accurately lay out the Zionist agenda for world domination.
> 
> And the enslavement of the gentile people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunni, take a long walk off a short pier.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Obviously you have never read them.
> 
> And have no idea what the Protocols actually say.
> 
> Yet you have a strong opinion against them.
Click to expand...



I have and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion are such obvious fraudulent, sick rantings no one SINCE Hitler has given them any credence.


----------



## Neotrotsky

L.K.Eder said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> I need more. I did a couple of searches and came up with  nothing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you don't need to do anything but read the stuff you linked.
> 
> it is factually incorrect in many places. sloppy.
> 
> and the big hint is the joos-media conspiracy bullshit.
> 
> one big whopper is that the stauffenberg plot is allegedly not talked about much.
> 
> 
> 
> [FONT=arial,helvetica]Sadly, there is little said today in history books about this tragedy and heroism of this German resistance movement.[/FONT]
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the problem is more that this one group is getting all the attention when the resistance is mentioned. often forgetting that many of those of the 20th july plot were avid nazis until the war went south.
> 
> and that is just the beginning.
Click to expand...



Indeed....
Fascism even had many admirers here at home before
the war broke out 


For example 
FDR said:
_There seems to be no question that [Mussolini] is really interested in what we are doing and I am much interested and deeply impressed by what he has accomplished and by his evidenced honest purpose of restoring Italy._​Comment in early 1933 about Benito Mussolini to US Ambassador to Italy Breckinridge Long, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31
_
I don't mind telling you in confidence that I am keeping in fairly close touch with that admirable Italian gentleman._​Comment on Benito Mussolini in 1933, as quoted in Three New Deals : Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933-1939 (2006) by Wolfgang Schivelbusch, p. 31


Mussolini himself praised the New Deal as following his own corporate state, 
as quoted in a July 1933 article in the New York Times,

_"Your plan for coordination of industry follows precisely our lines of cooperation."_​
Which makes sense since the NRA, with its regulations and industry organizations, was nothing more than another creature of the left- corporatism.


----------



## koshergrl

L.K.Eder said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> I need more. I did a couple of searches and came up with nothing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you don't need to do anything but read the stuff you linked.
> 
> it is factually incorrect in many places. sloppy.
> 
> and the big hint is the joos-media conspiracy bullshit.
> 
> one big whopper is that the stauffenberg plot is allegedly not talked about much.
> 
> 
> 
> [FONT=arial,helvetica]Sadly, there is little said today in history books about this tragedy and heroism of this German resistance movement.[/FONT]
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the problem is more that this one group is getting all the attention when the resistance is mentioned. often forgetting that many of those of the 20th july plot were avid nazis until the war went south.
> 
> and that is just the beginning.
Click to expand...

 
I thought it was a personal account by a couple of women of the persecution of the Catholic nobility. 

I'm not sure I expect it to be a minute-by-minute accounting of everything that happened during WWII.

It's a personal account of the persecution of Catholics. Works for me, it's supporting evidence that blows Ravi's idiocy out of the water.

You'd think she never saw the Sound of Music.


----------



## Peach

L.K.Eder said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> I need more. I did a couple of searches and came up with  nothing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you don't need to do anything but read the stuff you linked.
> 
> it is factually incorrect in many places. sloppy.
> 
> and the big hint is the joos-media conspiracy bullshit.
> 
> one big whopper is that the stauffenberg plot is allegedly not talked about much.
> 
> 
> 
> [FONT=arial,helvetica]Sadly, there is little said today in history books about this tragedy and heroism of this German resistance movement.[/FONT]
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the problem is more that this one group is getting all the attention when the resistance is mentioned. often forgetting that many of those of the 20th july plot were avid nazis until the war went south.
> 
> and that is just the beginning.
Click to expand...


The college group, The Society of the White Rose is heartbreaking story. Many, many heroes though have stories little known. I posted of the French Resistance hero Moulin once. Aubrac died just this last April.


----------



## L.K.Eder

koshergrl said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> I need more. I did a couple of searches and came up with nothing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you don't need to do anything but read the stuff you linked.
> 
> it is factually incorrect in many places. sloppy.
> 
> and the big hint is the joos-media conspiracy bullshit.
> 
> one big whopper is that the stauffenberg plot is allegedly not talked about much.
> 
> 
> 
> [FONT=arial,helvetica]Sadly, there is little said today in history books about this tragedy and heroism of this German resistance movement.[/FONT]
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the problem is more that this one group is getting all the attention when the resistance is mentioned. often forgetting that many of those of the 20th july plot were avid nazis until the war went south.
> 
> and that is just the beginning.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I thought it was a personal account by a couple of women of the persecution of the Catholic nobility.
> 
> I'm not sure I expect it to be a minute-by-minute accounting of everything that happened during WWII.
> 
> It's a personal account of the persecution of Catholics. Works for me, it's supporting evidence that blows Ravi's idiocy out of the water.
> 
> You'd think she never saw the Sound of Music.
Click to expand...


some catholics were persecuted.

the church however was playing it safe.

they tried to with the reichskonkordat in 1933.

the catholics who were persecuted were the ones who spoke up.

hey, almost like other germans, regardless of confession.

the catholic church had one shining moment, led by bishop galen.

they spoke out against T4.

leading to the stopping of the overt euthanasia system.

if you want to defend catholics, home in on this.

Clemens August Graf von Galen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## koshergrl

It doesn't matter. My point is the catholic church did take a stand against Nazism and Catholics died making that stand. A lot of people.


----------



## koshergrl

But thank you for the link.


----------



## Peach

koshergrl said:


> It doesn't matter. My point is the catholic church did take a stand against Nazism and Catholics died making that stand. A lot of people.



Name one OTHER religion that took such a brave stand. Jehovah's Witnesses were exterminated because of their religion,  the pope played his cards carefully with the Third Reich, as best he could. One beautiful photo:

File:FTP-p012904.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Peach

koshergrl said:


> But thank you for the link.



More on the Catholic Resistance:

Dachau had a special "priest block." Of the 2720 priests (among them 2579 Catholic) held in Dachau, 1034 did not survive the camp. The majority were Polish (1780), of whom 868 died in Dachau.
Patriarch Gavrilo V of the Serbian Orthodox Church, imprisoned in Dachau from September to December 1944
a number of the Polish 108 Martyrs of World War Two:
Father Jean Bernard (19071994), Roman Catholic priest from Luxembourg who was imprisoned from May, 1941 to August, 1942. He wrote the book Pfarrerblock 25487 about his experiences in Dachau
Blessed Titus Brandsma, Dutch Carmelite priest and professor of philosophy, died 26 July 1942
Norbert &#268;apek (18701942) founder of the Unitarian Church in the Czech Republic
Blessed Stefan Wincenty Frelichowski, Polish Roman Catholic priest, died 23 February 1945
August Froehlich, German Roman Catholic priest, he protected the rights of the German Catholics and the maltreatment of Polish forced labourers
Hilary Pawe&#322; Januszewski
Ignacy Je&#380; Catholic Bishop
Joseph Kentenich, founder of the Schoenstatt Movement, spent three and a half years in Dachau
Bishop Jan Maria Micha&#322; Kowalski, the first Minister Generalis (Minister General) of the order of the Mariavites. He perished on 18 May 1942, in a gas chamber in Schloss Hartheim.
Adam Kozlowiecki, Polish Cardinal
Max Lackmann, Lutheran pastor and founder of League for Evangelical-Catholic Reunion.
Blessed Karl Leisner, in Dachau since 14 December 1941, freed 4 May 1945, but died on 12 August from tuberculosis contracted in the camp
Josef Lenzel, German Roman Catholic priest, he helped of the Polish forced labourers
Bernhard Lichtenberg - German Roman Catholic priest, was sent to Dachau but died on his way there in 1943
Martin Niemöller, imprisoned in 1941, freed 4 May 1945
Nikolai Velimirovi&#263;, bishop of the Serbian Orthodox Church and an influential theological writer, venerated as saint in the Eastern Orthodox Church.
Lawrence Wnuk
Nanne Zwiep, Pastor of the Dutch Reformed Church in Enschede, spoke out from the pulpit against Nazis and their treatment of Dutch Citizens and anti-Semitism, arrested 20 April 1942, died in Dachau of exhaustion and malnutrition 24 November 1942
More than two dozen members of the Religious Society of Friends (known as Quakers) were interned at Dachau. They may or may not have been considered clergy by the Nazis, as all Quakers perform services which in other Protestant denominations are considered the province of clergy. Over a dozen of them were murdered there.
[edit]Politicians

Rachel Teo: Resistance against the Holocaust by Catholic Laypeople

Introduction: Zegota (back to top)

The Catholic population in Europe during the time of the war was a substantial one, with countries such as France, Italy, Germany and Poland possessing Catholics as their majority population. Coupled by the fact that Catholicism was rooted in moral and humanitarian principles of righteous behaviour, of sacrifice and love, one could and would expect resistance as substantial as the population figures. On the contrary, however, the Catholic response to the Holocaust remained a passive one, and attempts to actively oppose the Nazi regime were sparse and often organised only on local levels. A Catholic response to the Holocaust is thus difficult to measure due to its sporadic nature. Compounding this problem was the fact that the responses varied according to their proximity with the Nazi government, both physically and ideologically. Regardless, these circumstances did not prevent the rise of a movement that involved the involvement and efforts of many Catholics in an underground anti-Nazi movement known as the *Zegota.*

The Zegota were both brilliant, and heroic.


----------



## daveman

L.K.Eder said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> del said:
> 
> 
> 
> it came with her copy of the protocols of the elders of zion
> 
> she just had to pay separate shipping and handling
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone who thinks the Protocols is real is a Jew-hating retard.
> 
> Given that fact, do you think the Protocols is real, del?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> careful del, it is a clever trap set by ddadadadadadadadvaeman.
Click to expand...


How 'bout you, Bird Boi?  Do you believe the Protocols is a real document written by Jews?


----------



## daveman

Sunni Man said:


> It really makes no difference whether the Protocols are fact or fiction.
> 
> They accurately lay out the Zionist agenda for world domination.
> 
> And the enslavement of the gentile people.



Speaking of Jew-hating retards...


----------



## L.K.Eder

daveman said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone who thinks the Protocols is real is a Jew-hating retard.
> 
> Given that fact, do you think the Protocols is real, del?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> careful del, it is a clever trap set by ddadadadadadadadvaeman.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How 'bout you, Bird Boi?  Do you believe the Protocols is a real document written by Jews?
Click to expand...


be lame somewhere else.


----------



## Neotrotsky

daveman said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> wow, what a shitty source. haha, how did you find this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it came with her copy of the protocols of the elders of zion
> 
> she just had to pay separate shipping and handling
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Anyone who thinks the Protocols is real is a Jew-hating retard.
> 
> Given that fact, do you think the Protocols is real, del?
Click to expand...


true

they are about as real as Papa Obama's
autobiographies


----------



## Sunni Man

daveman said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> It really makes no difference whether the Protocols are fact or fiction.
> 
> They accurately lay out the Zionist agenda for world domination.
> 
> And the enslavement of the gentile people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking of Jew-hating retards...
Click to expand...

Acknowledging the truth of the Protocols doesn't make a person anti-semitic. 

Just a realist.


----------



## daveman

L.K.Eder said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> careful del, it is a clever trap set by ddadadadadadadadvaeman.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How 'bout you, Bird Boi?  Do you believe the Protocols is a real document written by Jews?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> be lame somewhere else.
Click to expand...


Afraid to answer?  Why?


----------



## daveman

Sunni Man said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> It really makes no difference whether the Protocols are fact or fiction.
> 
> They accurately lay out the Zionist agenda for world domination.
> 
> And the enslavement of the gentile people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking of Jew-hating retards...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Acknowledging the truth of the Protocols doesn't make a person anti-semitic.
> 
> Just a realist.
Click to expand...

Calling the pigshit in the Protocols "truth" makes you a Jew-hating retard.

THAT'S real.


----------



## Sunni Man

daveman said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking of Jew-hating retards...
> 
> 
> 
> Acknowledging the truth of the Protocols doesn't make a person anti-semitic.
> 
> Just a realist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Calling the pigshit in the Protocols "truth" makes you a Jew-hating retard.
> 
> THAT'S real.
Click to expand...

Obviously, you have never read the Protocols.

Or else you wouldn't be so quick to pass judgement.    

It has nothing to do with hating Jews.


----------



## Ravi

davenaziman appears to be terminally retarded.


----------



## daveman

Sunni Man said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> Acknowledging the truth of the Protocols doesn't make a person anti-semitic.
> 
> Just a realist.
> 
> 
> 
> Calling the pigshit in the Protocols "truth" makes you a Jew-hating retard.
> 
> THAT'S real.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Obviously, you have never read the Protocols.
> 
> Or else you wouldn't be so quick to pass judgement.
> 
> It has nothing to do with hating Jews.
Click to expand...

I've never read the Twilight novels, either, but I know they're fiction.

Moron.


----------



## daveman

Ravi said:


> davenaziman appears to be terminally retarded.



No, I am not a leftist.

Still waiting for proof of my alleged Nazism.

You ever gonna cough it up, or just keep flinging poo?


----------



## Artevelde

Sunni Man said:


> It really makes no difference whether the Protocols are fact or fiction.
> 
> They accurately lay out the Zionist agenda for world domination.
> 
> And the enslavement of the gentile people.



Nonsense.


----------



## Sunni Man

Artevelde said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> It really makes no difference whether the Protocols are fact or fiction.
> 
> They accurately lay out the Zionist agenda for world domination.
> 
> And the enslavement of the gentile people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nonsense.
Click to expand...

Have you ever read it?


----------



## Artevelde

Sunni Man said:


> Artevelde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> It really makes no difference whether the Protocols are fact or fiction.
> 
> They accurately lay out the Zionist agenda for world domination.
> 
> And the enslavement of the gentile people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Have you ever read it?
Click to expand...


Have you read the history of its origins?


----------



## Sunni Man

Artevelde said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Artevelde said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nonsense.
> 
> 
> 
> Have you ever read it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Have you read the history of its origins?
Click to expand...

Like I have said before.

I don't know if it is fact or fiction.

And it doesn't matter to me the source or the history.

If you read the Protocols they are spot on and hard to refute.


----------



## Artevelde

Sunni Man said:


> Artevelde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> Have you ever read it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have you read the history of its origins?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like I have said before.
> 
> I don't know if it is fact or fiction.
> 
> And it doesn't matter to me the source or the history.
> 
> If you read the Protocols they are spot on and hard to refute.
Click to expand...


The only fact is that it is a complete forgery and fabrication, put together by an overzealous Okhrana man.


----------



## Sunni Man

Artevelde said:


> The only fact is that it is a complete *forgery *and fabrication, put together by an overzealous Okhrana man.


How could it be a "forgery" if it's a fabrication as you allege??


----------



## MHunterB

NEWS OF RELIGIOUS CONFLICT & INTOLERANCE - 2004-September

This is a link to the site I've mentioned before, the Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance....  they seek to be as factual as possible and not promote any one religion or POV.


----------



## Sunni Man

Funny thing about the Protocols.

99.99% of the people here have never read the book.

Yet, mere mention of the Protocols elicits an immediate knee jerk reaction.

And howls of anti-semitism and nazi will fill the air.

I am most likely the only person on the forum who has ever read the book.

Not out of hate; but intellectual curiosity.


----------



## MHunterB

And you know that it's an 'unattributed adaptation' (ie, plagiarized) of a mid-19thC  French *political satire*, right?

And that it has been promoted and printed as being 'true' (ie, *not* the satire the original was) with the express purpose of vilifying Jews as the source of all the world's woes?


----------



## JakeStarkey

If people like Sunni really believe what he wrote, regardless of the forgery, then such people should be disenfranchised and working for those who can think clearly.  We can't have people like Sunni making history, only working for those who can make history.



Peach said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> It really makes no difference whether the Protocols are fact or fiction.
> 
> They accurately lay out the Zionist agenda for world domination.
> 
> And the enslavement of the gentile people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunni, take a long walk off a short pier.
Click to expand...


----------



## Sunni Man

JakeStarkey said:


> If people like Sunni really believe what he wrote, regardless of the forgery, then such people should be disenfranchised and working for those who can think clearly.  *We *can't have people like Sunni making history, only working for those who can make history.


Who is "We" you nitwit??


----------



## Intense

Sunni Man said:


> Funny thing about the Protocols.
> 
> 99.99% of the people here have never read the book.
> 
> Yet, mere mention of the Protocols elicits an immediate knee jerk reaction.
> 
> And howls of anti-semitism and nazi will fill the air.
> 
> I am most likely the only person on the forum who has ever read the book.
> 
> Not out of hate; but intellectual curiosity.



So from another perspective, the Jews are Coke, and the Muslims are Pepsi, and you are in competition for cheap labor , Acolytes? No thank you. Pass the salt.... are you going to eat all of those fries???


----------



## jillian

Sunni Man said:


> Funny thing about the Protocols.
> 
> 99.99% of the people here have never read the book.
> 
> Yet, mere mention of the Protocols elicits an immediate knee jerk reaction.
> 
> And howls of anti-semitism and nazi will fill the air.
> 
> I am most likely the only person on the forum who has ever read the book.
> 
> Not out of hate; but intellectual curiosity.



only to a braindead anti-semitic piece of excrement.

butwhatchagonnado?


----------



## Sunni Man

jillian said:


> only to a braindead anti-semitic piece of excrement.
> 
> butwhatchagonnado?


So I take it that you never read it either?


----------



## Intense

Sunni Man said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> only to a braindead anti-semitic piece of excrement.
> 
> butwhatchagonnado?
> 
> 
> 
> So I take it that you never read it either?
Click to expand...


If you go back far enough, who was not into World Domination?


----------



## Intense

Here is a Favorite. Does it Remind you of anyone???  

http://www.constitution.org/ime/hammurabi.htm


----------



## Neotrotsky

Intense said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> only to a braindead anti-semitic piece of excrement.
> 
> butwhatchagonnado?
> 
> 
> 
> So I take it that you never read it either?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you go back far enough, who was not into World Domination?
Click to expand...


Good point

One group I can think of is the Shakers
They practiced celibacy- sort of difficult to dominate
if you have no one left


----------



## Peach

Sunni Man said:


> Artevelde said:
> 
> 
> 
> The only fact is that it is a complete *forgery *and fabrication, put together by an overzealous Okhrana man.
> 
> 
> 
> How could it be a "forgery" if it's a fabrication as you allege??
Click to expand...


The hideous trash purports to be a religious text of Judaism, as it is not, one can term it a forgery. It remains a fabrication also. Forgeries are FABRICATED documents su. Anyone who even references that reprehensible filth as anything but same, cannot understand human thought and emotions.


----------



## Intense

Neotrotsky said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> So I take it that you never read it either?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you go back far enough, who was not into World Domination?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Good point
> 
> One group I can think of is the Shakers
> They practiced celibacy- sort of difficult to dominate
> if you have no one left
Click to expand...


They were a form of Christianity, focused on Salvation, in their own way of course.


----------



## JakeStarkey

The normal, decent sorts of human beings, which you and those who think like you have clearly deserted.





Sunni Man said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> If people like Sunni really believe what he wrote, regardless of the forgery, then such people should be disenfranchised and working for those who can think clearly.  *We *can't have people like Sunni making history, only working for those who can make history.
> 
> 
> 
> Who is "We" you nitwit??
Click to expand...


----------



## Peach

JakeStarkey said:


> The normal, decent sorts of human beings, which you and those who think like you have clearly deserted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> If people like Sunni really believe what he wrote, regardless of the forgery, then such people should be disenfranchised and working for those who can think clearly.  *We *can't have people like Sunni making history, only working for those who can make history.
> 
> 
> 
> Who is "We" you nitwit??
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


If su was a part thereof is questionable.


----------



## Intense

JakeStarkey said:


> The normal, decent sorts of human beings, which you and those who think like you have clearly deserted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> If people like Sunni really believe what he wrote, regardless of the forgery, then such people should be disenfranchised and working for those who can think clearly.  *We *can't have people like Sunni making history, only working for those who can make history.
> 
> 
> 
> Who is "We" you nitwit??
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Those Unalienable Rights a Gift from Our Maker, for us to recognize, define, and redefine, and redefine, in accordance with His will, through Conscience. You don't get to decide for the rest of us. Let me know when that sinks in. ..................Harmony and Communion with the Laws of Creation, and It's Architect. Each with our own measure.


----------



## Sunni Man

Peach said:


> The hideous trash purports to be a religious text of Judaism, as it is not, one can term it a forgery. It remains a fabrication also. Forgeries are FABRICATED documents su. Anyone who even references that reprehensible filth as anything but same, cannot understand human thought and emotions.


Clearly you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

No one ever claimed that the Protocols were a religious text of Judaism.

They are just a political road map for the zionists to follow in order to implement their sadistic agenda for the world.


----------



## Neotrotsky

Considering that this crap came out before WW II

How does the Holocaust work into that plan for world domination?

Seems to me that their "plan" must have failed somewhere along the way
So what are worried about


----------



## daveman

Sunni Man said:


> Peach said:
> 
> 
> 
> The hideous trash purports to be a religious text of Judaism, as it is not, one can term it a forgery. It remains a fabrication also. Forgeries are FABRICATED documents su. Anyone who even references that reprehensible filth as anything but same, cannot understand human thought and emotions.
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly you don't have a clue what you are talking about.
> 
> No one ever claimed that the Protocols were a religious text of Judaism.
> 
> They are just a political road map for the zionists to follow in order to implement their sadistic agenda for the world.
Click to expand...


It was written by Jew-haters to justify their hatred.  Other Jew-haters, being not very bright, believe it's accurate.


----------



## Artevelde

Peach said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Artevelde said:
> 
> 
> 
> The only fact is that it is a complete *forgery *and fabrication, put together by an overzealous Okhrana man.
> 
> 
> 
> How could it be a "forgery" if it's a fabrication as you allege??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The hideous trash purports to be a religious text of Judaism, as it is not, one can term it a forgery. It remains a fabrication also. Forgeries are FABRICATED documents su. Anyone who even references that reprehensible filth as anything but same, cannot understand human thought and emotions.
Click to expand...


You're going way over his head. Hard-core racists can't be convinced.


----------



## Bfgrn

_"Today Christians stand at the head of our country. I pledge that I will never tie myself to parties who want to destroy Christianity... We want to fill our culture again with the Christian spirit.... We want to burn out all the recent immoral developments in literature, in the theatre, and in the press - in short, *we want to burn out the poison of immorality which has entered into our whole life and culture as a result of liberal excess *during the past few years."

*Adolf Hitler*
The Speeches of Adolph Hitler, 1922-1939, Vol. 1 (London, Oxford University Press, 1942), pg. 871-872._


----------



## JakeStarkey

Adolph sounds like some of the far right extremists on the board here, such as Artevelde, for instance.


----------



## Bfgrn

While not all conservatives are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.
Robert Altmeyer - The Authoritarians


In the February 29, 1929 edition of the _Völkischer Beobachter_ (official newspaper of the Nazi Party), Adolf Hitler published an article on the new Lateran Treaty between Mussolini's fascist government and the Vatican. According to Hitler, this treaty should demonstrate to the world that not only are fascism and Christianity not polar opposites, but that they are in fact close kin which should be working together:






"The fact that the Curia is now making its peace with Fascism shows that the Vatican trusts the new political realities far more than did the former liberal democracy with which it could not come to terms.

...The fact that the Catholic Church has come to an agreement with Fascist Italy ...proves beyond doubt that the Fascist world of ideas is closer to Christianity than those of Jewish liberalism or even atheistic Marxism, to which the so-called Catholic Center Party sees itself so closely bound, to the detriment of Christianity today and our German people." 

Note Hitler's use of the phrase "Jewish liberalism." An important aspect of modern political anti-Semitism was the ability to associate Jews with everything conservative Christians disliked about modernity: emancipation (of women, Jews, gays, and other minorities), the loss of Christian privileges, legalized contraception and abortion, easier divorces, sexual liberty, socialist economic policies, expanding capitalism, etc. Conservative Christianity has never come entirely to terms with the Enlightenment and modern political liberalism.


----------



## ItsjustmeIthink

I don't know whats more funny, Libs comparing conservatives to nazis or conservatives calling other people partisan.


----------



## Artevelde

Bfgrn said:


> While not all conservatives are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.
> Robert Altmeyer - The Authoritarians
> 
> 
> In the February 29, 1929 edition of the _Völkischer Beobachter_ (official newspaper of the Nazi Party), Adolf Hitler published an article on the new Lateran Treaty between Mussolini's fascist government and the Vatican. According to Hitler, this treaty should demonstrate to the world that not only are fascism and Christianity not polar opposites, but that they are in fact close kin which should be working together:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "The fact that the Curia is now making its peace with Fascism shows that the Vatican trusts the new political realities far more than did the former liberal democracy with which it could not come to terms.
> 
> ...The fact that the Catholic Church has come to an agreement with Fascist Italy ...proves beyond doubt that the Fascist world of ideas is closer to Christianity than those of Jewish liberalism or even atheistic Marxism, to which the so-called Catholic Center Party sees itself so closely bound, to the detriment of Christianity today and our German people."
> 
> Note Hitler's use of the phrase "Jewish liberalism." An important aspect of modern political anti-Semitism was the ability to associate Jews with everything conservative Christians disliked about modernity: emancipation (of women, Jews, gays, and other minorities), the loss of Christian privileges, legalized contraception and abortion, easier divorces, sexual liberty, socialist economic policies, expanding capitalism, etc. Conservative Christianity has never come entirely to terms with the Enlightenment and modern political liberalism.



I guess you also feel Hitler was a misunderstood pacifist, since it's easy to find many quotes in which he pleads for peace.


----------



## Bfgrn

Artevelde said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> While not all conservatives are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.
> Robert Altmeyer - The Authoritarians
> 
> 
> In the February 29, 1929 edition of the _Völkischer Beobachter_ (official newspaper of the Nazi Party), Adolf Hitler published an article on the new Lateran Treaty between Mussolini's fascist government and the Vatican. According to Hitler, this treaty should demonstrate to the world that not only are fascism and Christianity not polar opposites, but that they are in fact close kin which should be working together:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "The fact that the Curia is now making its peace with Fascism shows that the Vatican trusts the new political realities far more than did the former liberal democracy with which it could not come to terms.
> 
> ...The fact that the Catholic Church has come to an agreement with Fascist Italy ...proves beyond doubt that the Fascist world of ideas is closer to Christianity than those of Jewish liberalism or even atheistic Marxism, to which the so-called Catholic Center Party sees itself so closely bound, to the detriment of Christianity today and our German people."
> 
> Note Hitler's use of the phrase "Jewish liberalism." An important aspect of modern political anti-Semitism was the ability to associate Jews with everything conservative Christians disliked about modernity: emancipation (of women, Jews, gays, and other minorities), the loss of Christian privileges, legalized contraception and abortion, easier divorces, sexual liberty, socialist economic policies, expanding capitalism, etc. Conservative Christianity has never come entirely to terms with the Enlightenment and modern political liberalism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess you also feel Hitler was a misunderstood pacifist, since it's easy to find many quotes in which he pleads for peace.
Click to expand...


No, I don't 'feel' Hitler was a misunderstood pacifist. Not when you understand the history of Europe leading up to fascism.

Traditional conservatives have persistently criticized modern liberalism for its alleged softness. After the First World War right-wing German and Italian critics abused the governments of Weimar Germany and pre-Mussolini Italy for their commitment to social welfare, which their critics linked to an unwillingness to use force in international relations. To use Robert Kagans expression, the Weimar Republic could only do the dishes, not prepare the feast.

German and Italian critics of liberalismwriters such as Ernst Jünger and Giovanni Gentilelonged for the military spirit that allegedly typified the front-fighter generation that had lived through the horrors of trench warfare during World War I. The experience of war, they said, could redeem the anti-national Weimar Republic and the spineless decadence of Italian liberalism by reintroducing them to the necessity of using forcewhich would mean a much more ready resort to military power and a reorientation of government to promote its use. Both men and nations could thereby reestablish their virility.

Extreme right-wing theoreticiansfor example, German jurist and political philosopher Carl Schmittbelieved that the European states in general had to choose between defending the interests of their national communitiesat the end of the day by forceand sustaining a debilitating commitment to popular welfare, which more and more absorbed the energies of a weak-kneed liberalism that precariously clung to power in many European states. Schmitt believed that the state existed exclusively to oppose the enemies of the national community and ensure domestic order. Politics, he famously said, is founded on the friend-enemy polarity. Liberals had embarked on a fruitless crusade to escape inevitable political conflict within their societies by expanding the welfare function of the modern state to appease the demands of the masses, and thereby weakening its executive function.

The proximate causes of this revulsion against liberalism in Italy, Germany, and elsewhere are not far to seek. And the underlying anti-liberal logic was more cultural than political-economic. After defeat in World War I neither Germany nor Italy was able to advance its interests effectively in Europe. The Italians were widely regarded as pathetic soldiers. The Italians, Bismarck said, have such large appetites and such poor teeth. Giovanni Gentile, subsequently a Fascist minister for Mussolini, lamented the dolce far niente (sweet do nothing) that he found characterized the Italians as a nation. As for the Germans, they had of course lost the war, but they were encouraged to believe that their armies and fighting men had not been defeated on the battlefield but had been betrayed by an unpatriotic cabal of Jews, Francophiles, liberals, and socialists.

So for these men and like-minded others, there was a necessary connection between reviving militarism and imperialism and curtailing the states commitment to popular welfare. Only a new political elitebattle-hardened, ruthless, and devoted to authoritarian governmentcould achieve the reforms needed to restore these states to the ranks of the European powerful. The new governments would not be parliamentary: talk shops never get anything done. In Italy the Fascist elite developed an imperial ideology focusing on Rome; in Germany, too, there was an imperial elementthe Thousand Year Empirealthough we correctly understand the racism of the National Socialists to have been their most memorable contribution to the horrors of the 20th century. 
The Hard Road to Fascism


----------



## daveman

JakeStarkey said:


> Adolph sounds like some of the far right extremists on the board here, such as Artevelde, for instance.



Troll.


----------



## daveman

Bfgrn said:


> While not all conservatives are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.
> Robert Altmeyer - The Authoritarians



Altmeyer's full of shit.  For proof, see Castro.  Stalin.  Lenin.  Marx.  Mao.  Pol Pot.  

_All_ authoritarian.  _All_ on the left.  This is undeniable.

Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to vote Democrat.


----------



## Bfgrn

daveman said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> While not all conservatives are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political *conservatives*.
> Robert Altmeyer - The Authoritarians
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Altmeyer's full of shit.  For proof, see Castro.  Stalin.  Lenin.  Marx.  Mao.  Pol Pot.
> 
> _All_ authoritarian.  _All_ on the left.  This is undeniable.
> 
> Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to vote Democrat.
Click to expand...


Your parochial indoctrination is the root cause of your ignorance. 

Would a conservative in Russia want to conserve the US Constitution? Capitalism? The tenets and orthodoxy of American culture?


----------



## JakeStarkey

The American common sense thinking people, certainly not you.

You aren't qualified to make decisions for others, obviously.



Sunni Man said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> If people like Sunni really believe what he wrote, regardless of the forgery, then such people should be disenfranchised and working for those who can think clearly.  *We *can't have people like Sunni making history, only working for those who can make history.
> 
> 
> 
> Who is "We" you nitwit??
Click to expand...


----------



## JakeStarkey

Artevelde is a troll, and so are you if you are defending him.



daveman said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Adolph sounds like some of the far right extremists on the board here, such as Artevelde, for instance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Troll.
Click to expand...


----------



## koshergrl

JakeStarkey said:


> The American common sense thinking people, certainly not you.
> 
> You aren't qualified to make decisions for others, obviously.
> 
> 
> 
> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> If people like Sunni really believe what he wrote, regardless of the forgery, then such people should be disenfranchised and working for those who can think clearly.  *We *can't have people like Sunni making history, only working for those who can make history.
> 
> 
> 
> Who is "We" you nitwit??
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


You don't speak for the American people, the interests of the American people, or represent common sense, you extremist weirdo troll.


----------



## daveman

Bfgrn said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> While not all conservatives are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political *conservatives*.
> Robert Altmeyer - The Authoritarians
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Altmeyer's full of shit.  For proof, see Castro.  Stalin.  Lenin.  Marx.  Mao.  Pol Pot.
> 
> _All_ authoritarian.  _All_ on the left.  This is undeniable.
> 
> Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to vote Democrat.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your parochial indoctrination is the root cause of your ignorance.
> 
> Would a conservative in Russia want to conserve the US Constitution? Capitalism? The tenets and orthodoxy of American culture?
Click to expand...

Oh, that's right -- you're one of those "special" people who believes everything horrible comes from the right, and the ultimate leftist utopia is a unicorn in every meadow.


----------



## daveman

JakeStarkey said:


> Artevelde is a troll, and so are you if you are defending him.
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Adolph sounds like some of the far right extremists on the board here, such as Artevelde, for instance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Troll.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Didn't I see you on another thread decrying comparisons of Obama and Hitler?

But it's okay when you compare message board posters to Hitler?

Good Gaea, I'll be glad when middle school starts again and you're doing homework all evening.


----------



## Neotrotsky

daveman said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Adolph sounds like some of the far right extremists on the board here, such as Artevelde, for instance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Troll.
Click to expand...


Indeed, concerned troll as well
One who poorly attempts to use edits to
lie


The following quotes are interesting and sure to get the "hackles" of the left up 



A. "...above all the unity of a nation's spirit and will are worth far more than the freedom of the spirit and will of an individual... By this we understand only the individual's capacity to make sacrifices for the community, for his fellow men." 

B. "The [] people must march forward as a trained and loyal army willing to sacrifice for the good of a common discipline." 

C. "...moral law, binding together individual and the generations into a tradition and a mission, suppressing the instinct for a life enclosed within the brief round of pleasure in order to restore within duty a higher life free from the limits of time and space."


The choices are Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Who said which?

post time 5:19pm
---------------------------



Here boy


----------



## Jroc

Bfgrn said:


> _"Today Christians stand at the head of our country. I pledge that I will never tie myself to parties who want to destroy Christianity... We want to fill our culture again with the Christian spirit.... We want to burn out all the recent immoral developments in literature, in the theatre, and in the press - in short, *we want to burn out the poison of immorality which has entered into our whole life and culture as a result of liberal excess *during the past few years."
> 
> *Adolf Hitler*
> The Speeches of Adolph Hitler, 1922-1939, Vol. 1 (London, Oxford University Press, 1942), pg. 871-872._



Anyone who spends time trying to prove Hitler was a Christian has severe psychological problems and needs therapy. Such stupidity isn't even worth responding to by normal people


----------



## JakeStarkey

Oh, and Jroc, of course.

Sorry, I forgot you, Jroc.  I won't in the future.  You hide behind patriotism the way Hitler hid behind Christianity.



JakeStarkey said:


> Adolph sounds like some of the far right extremists on the board here, such as Artevelde, for instance.


----------



## Jroc

JakeStarkey said:


> Oh, and Jroc, of course.
> 
> Sorry, I forgot you, Jroc.  I won't in the future.  You hide behind patriotism the way Hitler hid behind Christianity.
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Adolph sounds like some of the far right extremists on the board here, such as Artevelde, for instance.
Click to expand...


You hide behind the GOP while your'e a clueless little boy living in your parents basement fraud


----------



## JakeStarkey

Sigh.  You sound like a teenager.  Grow up if you want to talk to the adults.


----------



## Neotrotsky

Jroc said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, and Jroc, of course.
> 
> Sorry, I forgot you, Jroc.  I won't in the future.  You hide behind patriotism the way Hitler hid behind Christianity.
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Adolph sounds like some of the far right extremists on the board here, such as Artevelde, for instance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You hide behind the GOP while your'e a clueless little boy living in your parents basement fraud
Click to expand...


Don't forget hiding behind edit posts to create fake impressions

little boy...?
Most of us think based on the "quality" of their posts,
he is actually Meghan Mccain

-------------------------------------------------------




Here boy  (post time 6:41pm)


----------



## Jroc

Neotrotsky said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, and Jroc, of course.
> 
> Sorry, I forgot you, Jroc.  I won't in the future.  You hide behind patriotism the way Hitler hid behind Christianity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You hide behind the GOP while your'e a clueless little boy living in your parents basement fraud
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't forget hiding behind edit posts to create fake impressions
> 
> little boy...?
> Most of us think based on the "quality" of their posts,
> he is actually Meghan Mccain
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here boy  (post time 6:41pm)
Click to expand...


We all know Jake is a fraud most liberals love him though


----------



## Neotrotsky

Jroc said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> You hide behind the GOP while your'e a clueless little boy living in your parents basement fraud
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't forget hiding behind edit posts to create fake impressions
> 
> little boy...?
> Most of us think based on the "quality" of their posts,
> he is actually Meghan Mccain
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here boy  (post time 6:41pm)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We all know Jake is a fraud most liberals love him though
Click to expand...


Indeed, some of the most extreme leftists thank his posts all the time, as well.

It is sad; it is exactly their kind of extreme Leftist ideas that drove voters to The Republicans and to kick out the radical Democrats in congress.
How soon the Left forgets

------------------------------------------------------------------





Here boy


----------



## JakeStarkey

The neo-cons like Jroc and the far right extremists like NeoTrotsky are finished with this election.

Romney will take their votes and then turn them out into the alley.

Responsible regulation and use of soft power in foreign affairs (a la Obama), and like his predecessor, willing to hurt Iran if necessary.

If the neo-cons had not corrupted the process in 2000 and McCain had been elected, the USA would be much better off today.

With President Romney, it is not too late to save America from the extreme right and the extreme left.

Now we will see what my little trolls have to say.

Come on, boys.    Come here, now.


----------



## daveman

Neotrotsky said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Adolph sounds like some of the far right extremists on the board here, such as Artevelde, for instance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Troll.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indeed, concerned troll as well
> One who poorly attempts to use edits to
> lie
> 
> 
> The following quotes are interesting and sure to get the "hackles" of the left up
> 
> 
> 
> A. "...above all the unity of a nation's spirit and will are worth far more than the freedom of the spirit and will of an individual... By this we understand only the individual's capacity to make sacrifices for the community, for his fellow men."
> 
> B. "The [] people must march forward as a trained and loyal army willing to sacrifice for the good of a common discipline."
> 
> C. "...moral law, binding together individual and the generations into a tradition and a mission, suppressing the instinct for a life enclosed within the brief round of pleasure in order to restore within duty a higher life free from the limits of time and space."
> 
> 
> The choices are Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt
> Who said which?
> 
> post time 5:19pm
> ---------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> Here boy
Click to expand...

Remember, anyone who exposes the common roots of progressivism and fascism is anti-American, according to Fakey.


----------



## Neotrotsky

Maybe he will do a post edit
and "predict" you were going to say that....


----------



## JakeStarkey

Progressivism has conservative and liberal wings.  You are a conservative progressive, daveyboy, a statist who wants big government to model society in the way you wish it to go.  Whether you are a fascist or not depends if you still believe in the roots of the Republic and the function of majority voting while respecting minority rights.


daveman said:


> Remember, anyone who exposes the common roots of progressivism and fascism is anti-American, according to Fakey.


----------



## Bfgrn

daveman said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Altmeyer's full of shit.  For proof, see Castro.  Stalin.  Lenin.  Marx.  Mao.  Pol Pot.
> 
> _All_ authoritarian.  _All_ on the left.  This is undeniable.
> 
> Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to vote Democrat.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your parochial indoctrination is the root cause of your ignorance.
> 
> Would a conservative in Russia want to conserve the US Constitution? Capitalism? The tenets and orthodoxy of American culture?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh, that's right -- you're one of those "special" people who believes everything horrible comes from the right, and the ultimate leftist utopia is a unicorn in every meadow.
Click to expand...


Projecting again? YOU are one of those "special" people who believes everything horrible comes from the left, and the ultimate rightist utopia is a unicorn in every meadow.

It is not my fault all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives. It is just a FACT of life.


----------



## Bfgrn

Jroc said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> _"Today Christians stand at the head of our country. I pledge that I will never tie myself to parties who want to destroy Christianity... We want to fill our culture again with the Christian spirit.... We want to burn out all the recent immoral developments in literature, in the theatre, and in the press - in short, *we want to burn out the poison of immorality which has entered into our whole life and culture as a result of liberal excess *during the past few years."
> 
> *Adolf Hitler*
> The Speeches of Adolph Hitler, 1922-1939, Vol. 1 (London, Oxford University Press, 1942), pg. 871-872._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone who spends time trying to prove Hitler was a Christian has severe psychological problems and needs therapy. Such stupidity isn't even worth responding to by normal people
Click to expand...


Well Jroc, it seem Hitler spent the time and effort to prove he was a Christian. Those are HIS words, not mine. Are you THAT fucking obtuse? As a young boy, Hitler's most ardent goal was to become a priest.


Hitler's religious beliefs and fanaticism

(Selected quotes from Mein Kampf)

People often make the claim that Adolph Hitler adhered to Atheism, Humanism or some ancient Nordic pagan mythology. None of these fanciful and wrong ideas hold. Although one of Hitler's henchmen, Alfred Rosenberg, did undertake a campaign of Nordic mythological propaganda, Hitler and most of his henchmen did not believe in it .

Many American books, television documentaries, and Sunday sermons that preach of Hitler's "evil" have eliminated Hitler's god for their Christian audiences, but one only has to read from his own writings to appreciate that Hitler's God equals the same God of the Christian Bible. Hitler held many hysterical beliefs which not only include, God and Providence but also Fate, Social Darwinism, and ideological politics. He spoke, unashamedly, about God, fanaticism, idealism, dogma, and the power of propaganda. Hitler held strong faith in all his convictions. He justified his fight for the German people and against Jews by using Godly and Biblical reasoning. Indeed, one of his most revealing statements makes this quite clear:

    "Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."

Although Hitler did not practice religion in a churchly sense, he certainly believed in the Bible's God. Raised as Catholic he went to a monastery school and, interestingly, walked everyday past a stone arch which was carved the monastery's coat of arms which included a swastika. As a young boy, Hitler's most ardent goal was to become a priest. Much of his philosophy came from the Bible, and more influentially, from the Christian Social movement. (The German Christian Social movement, remarkably, resembles the Christian Right movement in America today.) Many have questioned Hitler's stand on Christianity. Although he fought against certain Catholic priests who opposed him for political reasons, his belief in God and country never left him. Many Christians throughout history have opposed Christian priests for various reasons; this does not necessarily make one against one's own Christian beliefs. Nor did the Vatican's Pope & bishops ever disown him; in fact they blessed him! As evidence to his claimed Christianity, he said:

    "My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.

    -Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922 (Norman H. Baynes, ed. The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, pp. 19-20, Oxford University Press, 1942)


----------



## daveman

Bfgrn said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your parochial indoctrination is the root cause of your ignorance.
> 
> Would a conservative in Russia want to conserve the US Constitution? Capitalism? The tenets and orthodoxy of American culture?
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, that's right -- you're one of those "special" people who believes everything horrible comes from the right, and the ultimate leftist utopia is a unicorn in every meadow.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Projecting again? YOU are one of those "special" people who believes everything horrible comes from the left, and the ultimate rightist utopia is a unicorn in every meadow.
Click to expand...

Not only are you profoundly ignorant of history, you're incapable of originality, too.


Bfgrn said:


> It is not my fault all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives. It is just a FACT of life.


Anyone who believes Castro, Stalin, Lenin, Marx, Mao, and Pol Pot are on the right is too stupid to breath on his own.

Or are you saying they're not highly authoritarian?

Either way, you're astoundingly wrong.


----------



## Bfgrn

daveman said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, that's right -- you're one of those "special" people who believes everything horrible comes from the right, and the ultimate leftist utopia is a unicorn in every meadow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Projecting again? YOU are one of those "special" people who believes everything horrible comes from the left, and the ultimate rightist utopia is a unicorn in every meadow.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not only are you profoundly ignorant of history, you're incapable of originality, too.
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is not my fault all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives. It is just a FACT of life.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Anyone who believes Castro, Stalin, Lenin, Marx, Mao, and Pol Pot are on the right is too stupid to breath on his own.
> 
> Or are you saying they're not highly authoritarian?
> 
> Either way, you're astoundingly wrong.
Click to expand...


You are still stuck in left/right. Do you understand that conservatism is based on the country, tenets and orthodoxy you were raised to believe, and conserve?

WHY would a man like Stalin want to conserve the US Constitution, capitalism or American tenets and orthodoxy?

When Mikhail S. Gorbachev tried to liberalize the Soviet society in the late 1980's and implement democratic elections, Russian conservatives, an alliance including xenophobic fringe groups, like Pamyat, as well as large numbers of less extreme nationalists who yearned for what they saw as the simple values of Old Russia and the Orthodox church rebelled. 

At election rallies Russian conservatives called out against the influence of ''Zionist forces,'' and in campaign leaflets decried ''liberal yellow journalists.''

Russian conservatives regards the liberalization of Soviet society as a conspiracy by Jews, Masons and Westernizers.

Russian conservatives called THEMSELVES...Stalinists.

Here is what Mao Zedong said about liberalism.

"Liberalism is extremely harmful in a revolutionary collective. It is a corrosive which eats away unity, undermines cohesion, causes apathy and creates dissension.

It robs the revolutionary ranks of compact organization and strict discipline, prevents policies from being carried through and alienates the Party organizations from the masses which the Party leads.
Combat Liberalism


----------



## Jroc

fanaticism


----------



## JakeStarkey

Yes, Jroc, is stuck in fanaticism.  His is a ding-bat neo-conservatism that goal of which is to project American military and economic imperialism across the globe.

Jroc is an imperialist, fair and square.

I wish he would be honest enough to admit it.



Jroc said:


> fanaticism


----------



## koshergrl

Tyrants in modern times rise to power on the back of progressivism, because progressivism doesn't mind removing the rights of people and killing off the vulnerable. And that is where it starts.


----------



## JakeStarkey

It is not Progressivism that is the fault.  And kg misuse the term.  She is a statist, right wing conservative progressive quite willing to use big government to outlaw all abortion.  Can't do that with small government, because small governments will disagree with each other.

Note: And tyrants love to rise on the backs of the people as authoritarians that delegate small-government control to small-time tyrants.


----------



## koshergrl

Listen carefully. All modern day tyrants came to power on the backs of progressives.

Because progressives don't mind killing vulnerable people.


----------



## JakeStarkey

That's not true (you don't support it with examples, I note), and you won't deny that you want to use big government to outlaw abortion.  That makes you a Conservative big government statist Progressive.

You certainly are an example of your kind of Progressive tyrant.


----------



## koshergrl

"
Codevilla correctly identifies the source  of legitimacy for the ruling class: Darwinism. Darwinism removed God  from the vocabulary of self-accredited academia. Once liberated from the  doctrine of original sin, the Progressives regarded as illegitimate the  Constitutional limits placed on the Federal government.
 Note well the direction of Progress: Deny original sin, deny limited government. There is a corollary: Humanism, Tyranny.
 Deny original sin, deny the need for divine regeneration and renewal.  Yet mankind is &#8220;moving in the wrong direction,&#8221; according to the  Progressive creed. It still needs a &#8220;savior.&#8221; Say whatever you want  about God&#8212;Wilson was a Prebysterian, Ph.D.&#8212;salvation, that is,  &#8220;improving,&#8221; must come in the form of the enlightened forcing the  unenlightened to live, act, eat, work, buy, socialize, educate,  reproduce, exercise, breathe, and think rightly. Don&#8217;t call it tyranny,  call it Progress."


Progressive Tyranny | American Vision


----------



## JakeStarkey

Thus, you, AllieBaba, are a Progressive because you want to use big government to control the masses on the issue of abortion.


----------



## koshergrl

"Just as progressives were generally enthusiastic about socialist  movements in the Soviet Union and Europe, they were also overwhelmingly  supportive of the fascist movements in Italy and Germany during the  1920s and 1930s. &#8220;In many respects,&#8221; writes journalist Jonah Goldberg,  &#8220;the founding fathers of modern liberalism, the men and women who laid  the intellectual groundwork of the New Deal and the welfare state,  thought that fascism sounded like ... a worthwhile 'experiment'&#8221;:

Progressive Support for Italian and German Fascism - Discover the Networks


----------



## koshergrl

JakeStarkey said:


> Thus, you, AllieBaba, are a Progressive because you want to use big government to control the masses on the issue of abortion.



Yeah, cuz it's fascist to prevent the abuse and death of women and children, idiot.

Using your idiotic logic, those who fought to eliminate slavery were fascists as well.

Brain dead nutcase.


----------



## koshergrl

"H. G. Wells, one of the most influential progressives of the 20th  century, said in 1932 that progressives must become &#8220;liberal fascists&#8221;  and &#8220;enlightened Nazis.&#8221; Regarding totalitarianism, he stated: &#8220;I have  never been able to escape altogether from its relentless logic.&#8221; Calling  for a &#8220;&#8216;Phoenix Rebirth&#8217; of Liberalism&#8221; under the umbrella of &#8220;Liberal  Fascism,&#8221; Wells said: &#8220;I am asking for a Liberal Fascisti, for  enlightened Nazis.&#8221;

Progressive Support for Italian and German Fascism - Discover the Networks


----------



## Bfgrn

koshergrl said:


> "
> Codevilla correctly identifies the source  of legitimacy for the ruling class: Darwinism. Darwinism removed God  from the vocabulary of self-accredited academia. Once liberated from the  doctrine of original sin, the Progressives regarded as illegitimate the  Constitutional limits placed on the Federal government.
> Note well the direction of Progress: Deny original sin, deny limited government. There is a corollary: Humanism, Tyranny.
> Deny original sin, deny the need for divine regeneration and renewal.  Yet mankind is moving in the wrong direction, according to the  Progressive creed. It still needs a savior. Say whatever you want  about GodWilson was a Prebysterian, Ph.D.salvation, that is,  improving, must come in the form of the enlightened forcing the  unenlightened to live, act, eat, work, buy, socialize, educate,  reproduce, exercise, breathe, and think rightly. Dont call it tyranny,  call it Progress."
> 
> 
> Progressive Tyranny*|*American Vision



Hey koshergrl, WHO is espousing the Darwinist rhetoric of survival of the richest? Who is calling the working class 'parasites', 'takers' and 'moochers'?

Republican economics IS social Darwinism.


----------



## koshergrl

Why don't you dispute the facts instead of just trolling, loon?


----------



## koshergrl

I see you've dropped the pretense of being moderate, or (*cough*) republican.

What a piece of lying progressive shit you are. Anything for the cause, huh? Convinced any girls to get up in the stirrups for their state-approved abortion yet? Convinced any old folk that their lives just aren't worth living and they should do the world a favor?

Well the day is young.


----------



## Artevelde

JakeStarkey said:


> Oh, and Jroc, of course.
> 
> Sorry, I forgot you, Jroc.  I won't in the future.  You hide behind patriotism the way Hitler hid behind Christianity.
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Adolph sounds like some of the far right extremists on the board here, such as Artevelde, for instance.
Click to expand...


Hitler hiding behind Christianity. What a joke!


----------



## Dante

Ravi said:


> Doubt that Hitler had the support of the conservative right wing?
> 
> 1. "Hitler found his greatest support in *traditionally conservative small towns. He campaigned with attacks on Marxism, making it clear that by Marxism he meant the Social Democrats. Hitler appealed to morality, attacking free love and what he inferred was the immorality of Berlin and some other major cities. He promised to stamp out big city corruption. He called for a spiritual revolution, for a "positive Christianity" and a spirit of national pride. Hitler repeatedly called for national renewal. *He and his National Socialists benefited from the recent upheaval in the Soviet Union and the rise in fear and disgust for Bolshevism. His party's posters read:
> 
> *    If you want your country to go Bolshevik, vote Communist. If you want to remain free Germans, vote for the National Socialists.*"
> 
> Hitler and Germany: 1928 to 1935
> 
> 2. Neville Chamberlain, appeaser in chief, after the Sudetenland was handed over to Hitler, "But the Conservative leader has always expressed his desire to find a *peaceful solution to the Fuehrer's wish to create a new - and enlarged - German homeland in Europe.*"
> 
> BBC ON THIS DAY | 30 | 1938: 'Peace for our time' - Chamberlain
> 
> 3. The French right admired Hitler, "When Socialists and Communists formed a Popular front Government in 1936 there were many French conservatives who boldly announced that *Hitler was preferrable to the leadership of the French socialist Leon Blum*."
> 
> Road to War
> 
> 4. "right-to-work" anti-labor conservatives were also pro-Hitler. "There were a mulitude of other racists jumping on the Fascist bandwagon. Joseph P. Kamp printed over two million copies of his anti-labor pamphlet, "Join the C.I.O. and Help Build a Soviet America" which he advertised with the Ku Klux Klan. *Millionaire John Kirby in Houston began publishing the anti-black, anti-labor Christian American in support of "right to work" legislation"*
> 
> Support for Hitler (or Fascism) in the United States | Radical Reference
> 
> 5. Foreshadowing Republican views on the Clinton being concerned about bin laden as a distraction from Lewinsky, "The former president, Herbert Hoover, had become the Republican Party's chief spokesman in foreign affairs, and when Germany seized Moravia and Bohemia, *Hoover declared that no clear and present danger existed* and that Britain, France and others in Europe would be able to defend themselves should there be war. Hoover spoke of Roosevelt's "dangerous adventures" and argued that Roosevelt was trying to divert people's attention from his failure to end the depression"
> 
> The United States, War Preparation, China, and Jewish Immigration: 1938-39


----------



## JakeStarkey

Artevelde hiding behind nonsense.

Hitler used and hid behind Christianity.

You racists pretend you are American in values.

What a joke.





Artevelde said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, and Jroc, of course.
> 
> Sorry, I forgot you, Jroc.  I won't in the future.  You hide behind patriotism the way Hitler hid behind Christianity.
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Adolph sounds like some of the far right extremists on the board here, such as Artevelde, for instance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hitler hiding behind Christianity. What a joke!
Click to expand...


----------



## daveman

Bfgrn said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Projecting again? YOU are one of those "special" people who believes everything horrible comes from the left, and the ultimate rightist utopia is a unicorn in every meadow.
> 
> 
> 
> Not only are you profoundly ignorant of history, you're incapable of originality, too.
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is not my fault all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives. It is just a FACT of life.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Anyone who believes Castro, Stalin, Lenin, Marx, Mao, and Pol Pot are on the right is too stupid to breath on his own.
> 
> Or are you saying they're not highly authoritarian?
> 
> Either way, you're astoundingly wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are still stuck in left/right. Do you understand that conservatism is based on the country, tenets and orthodoxy you were raised to believe, and conserve?
> 
> WHY would a man like Stalin want to conserve the US Constitution, capitalism or American tenets and orthodoxy?
> 
> When Mikhail S. Gorbachev tried to liberalize the Soviet society in the late 1980's and implement democratic elections, Russian conservatives, an alliance including xenophobic fringe groups, like Pamyat, as well as large numbers of less extreme nationalists who yearned for what they saw as the simple values of Old Russia and the Orthodox church rebelled.
> 
> At election rallies Russian conservatives called out against the influence of ''Zionist forces,'' and in campaign leaflets decried ''liberal yellow journalists.''
> 
> Russian conservatives regards the liberalization of Soviet society as a conspiracy by Jews, Masons and Westernizers.
> 
> Russian conservatives called THEMSELVES...Stalinists.
> 
> Here is what Mao Zedong said about liberalism.
> 
> "Liberalism is extremely harmful in a revolutionary collective. It is a corrosive which eats away unity, undermines cohesion, causes apathy and creates dissension.
> 
> It robs the revolutionary ranks of compact organization and strict discipline, prevents policies from being carried through and alienates the Party organizations from the masses which the Party leads.
> Combat Liberalism
Click to expand...

Damn, you retards can make yourselves believe anything, no matter how stupid, can't you?



The totalitarians I named are on the left.  No amount of vapid mental gymnastics will ever change that fact.


----------



## daveman

Bfgrn said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> "
> Codevilla correctly identifies the source  of legitimacy for the ruling class: Darwinism. Darwinism removed God  from the vocabulary of self-accredited academia. Once liberated from the  doctrine of original sin, the Progressives regarded as illegitimate the  Constitutional limits placed on the Federal government.
> Note well the direction of Progress: Deny original sin, deny limited government. There is a corollary: Humanism, Tyranny.
> Deny original sin, deny the need for divine regeneration and renewal.  Yet mankind is &#8220;moving in the wrong direction,&#8221; according to the  Progressive creed. It still needs a &#8220;savior.&#8221; Say whatever you want  about God&#8212;Wilson was a Prebysterian, Ph.D.&#8212;salvation, that is,  &#8220;improving,&#8221; must come in the form of the enlightened forcing the  unenlightened to live, act, eat, work, buy, socialize, educate,  reproduce, exercise, breathe, and think rightly. Don&#8217;t call it tyranny,  call it Progress."
> 
> 
> Progressive Tyranny*|*American Vision
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hey koshergrl, WHO is espousing the Darwinist rhetoric of survival of the richest?
Click to expand...

If you'd get off your lazy ass, you could be rich, too.

Or is The Man keeping you down?


Bfgrn said:


> Who is calling the working class 'parasites', 'takers' and 'moochers'?
> 
> Republican economics IS social Darwinism.


We don't call  the working class "parasites", "takers" and "moochers".

We call parasites, takers and moochers "parasites", "takers" and "moochers".


----------



## JakeStarkey

You don't get it yet.

Lincoln used Big Government to end slavery.  He was a liberal progressive.

Truman used Big Government to end segregation in the Armed Forces.  He was a liberal progressive.

Johnson used Big Government to end the mockery of segregation in American culture.  He was a liberal progressive.

Hitler used Big Government to end the life of Jewry in Europe.  He was a conservative progressive.

If you want to use Big Government to enforce your will about abortion, you are a conservative Progressive.



koshergrl said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thus, you, AllieBaba, are a Progressive because you want to use big government to control the masses on the issue of abortion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, cuz it's fascist to prevent the abuse and death of women and children, idiot.
> 
> Using your idiotic logic, those who fought to eliminate slavery were fascists as well.
> 
> Brain dead nutcase.
Click to expand...


----------



## thanatos144

I dont think socialism is a right wing thing.....So the OP as normal is ignorant of the facts.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Hitler killed or jailed all the socialists.  Then all the communists.  Then all of the Jews.

Hitler did not nationalize any industry.

Hint: Hitler was not a socialist.

Hint: Hitler was a tyrant.

Hint: thanatos144 is wandering along deserted highways and biways of ill logic.


----------



## koshergrl

Hitler was a tyrant.

And Progressives supported him. Progressives like JS.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Allie is delusional.

Have another drink, Ms. Progressive.



koshergrl said:


> Hitler was a tyrant.  And Progressives supported him. Progressives like JS.


----------



## Ravi

JakeStarkey said:


> Adolph sounds like some of the far right extremists on the board here, such as Artevelde, for instance.



Yep.


----------



## Neotrotsky

daveman said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not only are you profoundly ignorant of history, you're incapable of originality, too.
> 
> Anyone who believes Castro, Stalin, Lenin, Marx, Mao, and Pol Pot are on the right is too stupid to breath on his own.
> 
> Or are you saying they're not highly authoritarian?
> 
> Either way, you're astoundingly wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are still stuck in left/right. Do you understand that conservatism is based on the country, tenets and orthodoxy you were raised to believe, and conserve?
> 
> WHY would a man like Stalin want to conserve the US Constitution, capitalism or American tenets and orthodoxy?
> 
> When Mikhail S. Gorbachev tried to liberalize the Soviet society in the late 1980's and implement democratic elections, Russian conservatives, an alliance including xenophobic fringe groups, like Pamyat, as well as large numbers of less extreme nationalists who yearned for what they saw as the simple values of Old Russia and the Orthodox church rebelled.
> 
> At election rallies Russian conservatives called out against the influence of ''Zionist forces,'' and in campaign leaflets decried ''liberal yellow journalists.''
> 
> Russian conservatives regards the liberalization of Soviet society as a conspiracy by Jews, Masons and Westernizers.
> 
> Russian conservatives called THEMSELVES...Stalinists.
> 
> Here is what Mao Zedong said about liberalism.
> 
> "Liberalism is extremely harmful in a revolutionary collective. It is a corrosive which eats away unity, undermines cohesion, causes apathy and creates dissension.
> 
> It robs the revolutionary ranks of compact organization and strict discipline, prevents policies from being carried through and alienates the Party organizations from the masses which the Party leads.
> Combat Liberalism
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Damn, you retards can make yourselves believe anything, no matter how stupid, can't you?
> 
> 
> 
> The totalitarians I named are on the left.  No amount of vapid mental gymnastics will ever change that fact.
Click to expand...


The Left is driven by the template to excuse away the horrific acts of gov't by
claiming they are right somehow

Most amusing is the claiming by the concerned trolls that Lincoln was a "progressive"
I am still laughing about that one- comparing a war (civil) powers a President might use as a template for all gov't


The Nazis organized  all German businesses into cartels. 

The argument was thatin contrast to the disorderliness and egoism of free market capitalismcentralization and state control would increase efficiency and a sense of German unity. 

In July of 1933, membership in a cartel became compulsory for businesses, and by early 1934 the cartel structure was re-organized and placed firmly under the direction of the German government.​
_By 1937, small businesses with capital under $40,000 were dissolved by the State; labor unions had been dissolved, as were the rights to strike and collective bargaining. Unemployment was dealt with by public works programs of road-building and so on.

All property and labor power was now either owned by the State or, if still owned by private parties, subject to almost-total control. Businesses were told by the State what to produce and in what quantities. Prices and wages were set by the State.

And if anyone complained, a commonly used Nazi slogan put them on the defensive: The common interest before self interest.[36] The argument was quite clear: You are not a private individual seeking profit or higher wages in a capitalist economy. You and your property belong in trust to the German people, and you have a duty to serve the public interest, even if it involves a personal sacrifice.​_

The left have spent decades trying to marginalize it right, to cover for the fact that, it is a creature of the left.

As we can see here, the extreme left continues everyday their big lie

They make the rather weak and limited argument that socialism is just pure nationalization of industry. 
This argument is either intentionally misleading or based on a rather simplistic and ignorant view of economics
Shallow people can get lost in discussions on socialism

Fascism, Communism, Socialism, Progressivism, Crony Capitalism 
all the other collectivist groups are all based on the Rousseauian vision. They are creatures of the left. 
They are all promoters of Statism 

They have more in common than not
which the left is trying to run from...

As I have quoted before"

Friedrich Hayek defined fascism best

"It is simply collectivism freed from all traces of an individualist tradition which might hamper its realization."


The Left's ignorance and intentional historical revisionism on these issues are 
big factors in why the US keeps making the sames mistakes when it comes
to centralizing power.

-------------------------------------------------------------------



Here boy


----------



## JakeStarkey

Progressivism is given to a process: organized effort; big government; channel changes in the entire society; by professionals and those with expertise.

Lincoln and the Civil War can easily be argued and be defended as as an early example of Progressivism.

Not all Progressive attempts are beneficial or classically liberal.  Strom Thurmond and the Dixiecrats, if victorious, would have resegregated the armed forces, which were under integration by Truman's order.  Woodrow Wilson was not a fan of civil rights or free speech.

All the examples in the paragraph above were actions or intended actions by Democrats.

Eisenhower used big government to initiate the Interstate Highway Act, a transportation project that had tremendous impact on the American economy in the last half of the 20th century.

The childish attempts to isolate "this" or "that" Progressivism as only "liberal" or "conservative" and as "good" or "bad" are not only erroneous, they are stupid.


----------



## koshergrl

Ravi said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Adolph sounds like some of the far right extremists on the board here, such as Artevelde, for instance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep.
Click to expand...


No, his policy in Poland sounds exactly like the population control policies thcies that progressives like Ravi & Jakey pull for.


----------



## Neotrotsky

daveman said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Troll.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, concerned troll as well
> One who poorly attempts to use edits to
> lie
> 
> 
> The following quotes are interesting and sure to get the "hackles" of the left up
> 
> 
> 
> A. "...above all the unity of a nation's spirit and will are worth far more than the freedom of the spirit and will of an individual... By this we understand only the individual's capacity to make sacrifices for the community, for his fellow men."
> 
> B. "The [] people must march forward as a trained and loyal army willing to sacrifice for the good of a common discipline."
> 
> C. "...moral law, binding together individual and the generations into a tradition and a mission, suppressing the instinct for a life enclosed within the brief round of pleasure in order to restore within duty a higher life free from the limits of time and space."
> 
> 
> The choices are Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt
> Who said which?
> 
> post time 5:19pm
> ---------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> Here boy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Remember, anyone who exposes the common roots of progressivism and fascism is anti-American, according to Fakey.
Click to expand...



The Meghan McCain of the posting board
The fake edit thing was so feminine, after all

Don't forget the Left needs identity politics.
The Nazi's were big promoters of identity politics

If it was not for identity politics, the left could not survive
The left's use of identity politics promotes the collective, as well.

If one puts the "group" above themselves and gets their worth
from it - it helps to promote and empower the left

Ironic...
The basic core of racism is the idea that the individual is meaningless and that membership in the collective, in this case race, is the only source of value. 

Thus the left's 'diversity' and identity politics entails exactly the same premise as racism -- one's political worth is determined by race or ethnic heritage.

The left is very racist; it is just racism they can live with,
"Progressive Approved"
--------------------------------------------


The Left's new motto should be

From each race according to their ability 
To each race according to their need

------------------------------------------------------




Here boy


----------



## daveman

Neotrotsky said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, concerned troll as well
> One who poorly attempts to use edits to
> lie
> 
> 
> The following quotes are interesting and sure to get the "hackles" of the left up
> 
> 
> 
> A. "...above all the unity of a nation's spirit and will are worth far more than the freedom of the spirit and will of an individual... By this we understand only the individual's capacity to make sacrifices for the community, for his fellow men."
> 
> B. "The [] people must march forward as a trained and loyal army willing to sacrifice for the good of a common discipline."
> 
> C. "...moral law, binding together individual and the generations into a tradition and a mission, suppressing the instinct for a life enclosed within the brief round of pleasure in order to restore within duty a higher life free from the limits of time and space."
> 
> 
> The choices are Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt
> Who said which?
> 
> post time 5:19pm
> ---------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> Here boy
> 
> 
> 
> Remember, anyone who exposes the common roots of progressivism and fascism is anti-American, according to Fakey.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The Meghan McCain of the posting board
> The fake edit thing was so feminine, after all
> 
> Don't forget the Left needs identity politics.
> The Nazi's were big promoters of identity politics
> 
> If it was not for identity politics, the left could not survive
> The left's use of identity politics promotes the collective, as well.
> 
> If one puts the "group" above themselves and gets their worth
> from it - it helps to promote and empower the left
> 
> Ironic...
> The basic core of racism is the idea that the individual is meaningless and that membership in the collective, in this case race, is the only source of value.
> 
> Thus the left's 'diversity' and identity politics entails exactly the same premise as racism -- one's political worth is determined by race or ethnic heritage.
> 
> The left is very racist; it is just racism they can live with,
> "Progressive Approved"
> --------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> The Left's new motto should be
> 
> From each race according to their ability
> To each race according to their need
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here boy
Click to expand...

At least Meghan McCain has a nice rack.  Fakey doesn't even have that redeeming feature.


----------



## Neotrotsky

daveman said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Remember, anyone who exposes the common roots of progressivism and fascism is anti-American, according to Fakey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Meghan McCain of the posting board
> The fake edit thing was so feminine, after all
> 
> Don't forget the Left needs identity politics.
> The Nazi's were big promoters of identity politics
> 
> If it was not for identity politics, the left could not survive
> The left's use of identity politics promotes the collective, as well.
> 
> If one puts the "group" above themselves and gets their worth
> from it - it helps to promote and empower the left
> 
> Ironic...
> The basic core of racism is the idea that the individual is meaningless and that membership in the collective, in this case race, is the only source of value.
> 
> Thus the left's 'diversity' and identity politics entails exactly the same premise as racism -- one's political worth is determined by race or ethnic heritage.
> 
> The left is very racist; it is just racism they can live with,
> "Progressive Approved"
> --------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> The Left's new motto should be
> 
> From each race according to their ability
> To each race according to their need
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here boy
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> At least Meghan McCain has a nice rack.  Fakey doesn't even have that redeeming feature.
Click to expand...


He makes up with these "teats"
No wonder Ravi and Dante "thank" him so much 








-------------------------






Here boy


----------



## daveman

Neotrotsky said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Meghan McCain of the posting board
> The fake edit thing was so feminine, after all
> 
> Don't forget the Left needs identity politics.
> The Nazi's were big promoters of identity politics
> 
> If it was not for identity politics, the left could not survive
> The left's use of identity politics promotes the collective, as well.
> 
> If one puts the "group" above themselves and gets their worth
> from it - it helps to promote and empower the left
> 
> Ironic...
> The basic core of racism is the idea that the individual is meaningless and that membership in the collective, in this case race, is the only source of value.
> 
> Thus the left's 'diversity' and identity politics entails exactly the same premise as racism -- one's political worth is determined by race or ethnic heritage.
> 
> The left is very racist; it is just racism they can live with,
> "Progressive Approved"
> --------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> The Left's new motto should be
> 
> From each race according to their ability
> To each race according to their need
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here boy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At least Meghan McCain has a nice rack.  Fakey doesn't even have that redeeming feature.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He makes up with these "teats"
> No wonder Ravi and Dante "thank" him so much
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here boy
Click to expand...

Of course.  Leftists always stick together.


----------



## Jroc

JakeStarkey said:


> Thus, you, AllieBaba, are a Progressive because you want to use big government to control the masses on the issue of abortion.



Wrong it was overreaching federal government who legalized and imposed abortion throughout the country. The conservative position is leave it to the people to decide, individually in each state, also the federal government should have no role in funding it or promoting it


----------



## Jroc

Hitler quotes..




> "There is more that binds us to Bolshevism than separates us from it. There is, above all, genuine, revolutionary feeling, which is alive everywhere in Russia except where there are Jewish Marxists. I have always made allowance for this circumstance, and given orders that former Communists are to be admitted to the party at once. The petit bourgeois Social-Democrat and the trade-union boss will never make a National Socialist, but the Communists always will."






> "Of what importance is all that, if I range men firmly within a discipline they cannot escape? Let them own land or factories as much as they please. The decisive factor is that the State, through the Party, is supreme over them regardless of whether they are owners or workers. All that is unessential; our socialism goes far deeper. It establishes a relationship of the individual to the State, the national community. Why need we trouble to socialize banks and factories? We socialize human beings."




The Voice of Destruction: Conversations with Hitler 1940 - Hermann Rauschning - Google Books


----------



## thanatos144

I enjoy watching progressives twist and turn trying to spin the truth about socialism and how it is truly just facism hidden.


----------



## Artevelde

JakeStarkey said:


> Artevelde hiding behind nonsense.
> 
> Hitler used and hid behind Christianity.
> 
> You racists pretend you are American in values.
> 
> What a joke.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Artevelde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, and Jroc, of course.
> 
> Sorry, I forgot you, Jroc.  I won't in the future.  You hide behind patriotism the way Hitler hid behind Christianity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hitler hiding behind Christianity. What a joke!
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


You're an ignorant moron.


----------



## Artevelde

daveman said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not only are you profoundly ignorant of history, you're incapable of originality, too.
> 
> Anyone who believes Castro, Stalin, Lenin, Marx, Mao, and Pol Pot are on the right is too stupid to breath on his own.
> 
> Or are you saying they're not highly authoritarian?
> 
> Either way, you're astoundingly wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are still stuck in left/right. Do you understand that conservatism is based on the country, tenets and orthodoxy you were raised to believe, and conserve?
> 
> WHY would a man like Stalin want to conserve the US Constitution, capitalism or American tenets and orthodoxy?
> 
> When Mikhail S. Gorbachev tried to liberalize the Soviet society in the late 1980's and implement democratic elections, Russian conservatives, an alliance including xenophobic fringe groups, like Pamyat, as well as large numbers of less extreme nationalists who yearned for what they saw as the simple values of Old Russia and the Orthodox church rebelled.
> 
> At election rallies Russian conservatives called out against the influence of ''Zionist forces,'' and in campaign leaflets decried ''liberal yellow journalists.''
> 
> Russian conservatives regards the liberalization of Soviet society as a conspiracy by Jews, Masons and Westernizers.
> 
> Russian conservatives called THEMSELVES...Stalinists.
> 
> Here is what Mao Zedong said about liberalism.
> 
> "Liberalism is extremely harmful in a revolutionary collective. It is a corrosive which eats away unity, undermines cohesion, causes apathy and creates dissension.
> 
> It robs the revolutionary ranks of compact organization and strict discipline, prevents policies from being carried through and alienates the Party organizations from the masses which the Party leads.
> Combat Liberalism
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Damn, you retards can make yourselves believe anything, no matter how stupid, can't you?
> 
> 
> 
> The totalitarians I named are on the left.  No amount of vapid mental gymnastics will ever change that fact.
Click to expand...


Correct.


----------



## JakeStarkey

From one of the most ignorant individuals on the Board.  Thanks.  



Artevelde said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Artevelde hiding behind nonsense.
> 
> Hitler used and hid behind Christianity.
> 
> You racists pretend you are American in values.
> 
> What a joke.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Artevelde said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hitler hiding behind Christianity. What a joke!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're an ignorant moron.
Click to expand...


----------



## Ravi

koshergrl said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Adolph sounds like some of the far right extremists on the board here, such as Artevelde, for instance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, his policy in Poland sounds exactly like the population control policies thcies that progressives like Ravi & Jakey pull for.
Click to expand...


Which population control policies do Jake and I pull for?


----------



## Ravi

daveman said:


> At least Meghan McCain has a nice rack.  Fakey doesn't even have that redeeming feature.



Creep.


----------



## daveman

Ravi said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> At least Meghan McCain has a nice rack.  Fakey doesn't even have that redeeming feature.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Creep.
Click to expand...

Oh, look:  A leftist rushing to Fakey's defense.  

Fakey, even the leftists know you're one of them.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

thanatos144 said:


> I enjoy watching progressives twist and turn trying to spin the truth about socialism and how it is truly just facism hidden.



That's because Progressives fall into two categories: the ignorant and the stupid. 

The Ignorant are exactly that ignorant, they lack the facts about what Progressivism (American Socialism/Fascism) is and they support it anyway; the Stupid know that Progressives are progressing toward Socialism and fully embrace a system with a guaranteed 100% Fail Rate, so bad that they have walls and armed guards to keep talented people from fleeing.


----------



## Ravi

daveman said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> At least Meghan McCain has a nice rack.  Fakey doesn't even have that redeeming feature.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Creep.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh, look:  A leftist rushing to Fakey's defense.
> 
> Fakey, even the leftists know you're one of them.
Click to expand...

Nothing to do with Jake. You simply are a creep.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Oh, look, daveyboy pretending to be a Republican mainstream American.


----------



## koshergrl

You don't defend rightwingers. They could be on fire, screaming for help, and you could be sitting in a lawnchair next to a fire extinguisher and a bucket of water, and you wouldn't lift a finger.

Truth.


----------



## Ravi

Ravi said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, his policy in Poland sounds exactly like the population control policies thcies that progressives like Ravi & Jakey pull for.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which population control policies do Jake and I pull for?
Click to expand...

Hello?


----------



## koshergrl

You support abortion. I don't know about Jake, I can't remember.


----------



## Ravi

koshergrl said:


> You support abortion. I don't know about Jake, I can't remember.


What does that have to do with population control, exactly. You've claimed that I support Hitler's population control policies. I do no such thing.

You're a liar.


----------



## Valerie

Ravi said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> You support abortion. I don't know about Jake, I can't remember.
> 
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with population control, exactly. You've claimed that I support Hitler's population control policies. I do no such thing.
> 
> You're a liar.
Click to expand...





   She tried to pull that same crap on me too.  Everyone woman who is pro-choice is a major skank who has had a zillion abortions AND they also support eugenics to boot!




Diagnosis:  _Delusional!  _


----------



## Ravi

Valerie said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> You support abortion. I don't know about Jake, I can't remember.
> 
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with population control, exactly. You've claimed that I support Hitler's population control policies. I do no such thing.
> 
> You're a liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She tried to pull that same crap on me too.  Everyone woman who is pro-choice is a major skank who has had a zillion abortions AND they also support eugenics to boot!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diagnosis:  _Delusional!  _
Click to expand...

Yep. In reality her own beliefs are more Hitler-like. She wants government to decide who gives birth and when. Smells like Adolph!


----------



## CMike

Hitler was a leftist. His party was the socialist party.


----------



## thanatos144

Socialism is fascism....Socialists are racist.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Ravi, what population control policies do we support?

I hope that Allie is not equating legalized abortion with population control or eugenics, for that would be a monumental error.

Abortion?  Rape and Incest to the 20th week, and serious danger to the mother's physical health at any stage.



Ravi said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, his policy in Poland sounds exactly like the population control policies thcies that progressives like Ravi & Jakey pull for.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which population control policies do Jake and I pull for?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hello?
Click to expand...


----------



## JakeStarkey

Disproved many times on USMB.

Move along.



CMike said:


> Hitler was a leftist. His party was the socialist party.


----------



## daveman

Ravi said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Creep.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, look:  A leftist rushing to Fakey's defense.
> 
> Fakey, even the leftists know you're one of them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nothing to do with Jake. You simply are a creep.
Click to expand...

...says the idiot woman who calls people Nazis for the singular crime of disagreeing with her.

Did you really think your moral judgement is worth a shit?


----------



## JakeStarkey

daveyboy loves to call names 'cause he has nothing else, certainly no logic or evidence or decency.


----------



## daveman

JakeStarkey said:


> Oh, look, daveyboy pretending to be a Republican mainstream American.


Don't you have an Obama rally to attend, boy?


----------



## thanatos144

JakeStarkey said:


> Disproved many times on USMB.
> 
> Move along.
> 
> 
> 
> CMike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hitler was a leftist. His party was the socialist party.
Click to expand...


Ignoring the truth is not disproving something you hack.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Attending a luncheon for Mitt later today, to raise some money.

Hey, be happy, you got Ted Cruz instead of David Dewhurst to run for Senate in Texas.


----------



## daveman

JakeStarkey said:


> daveyboy loves to call names 'cause he has nothing else, certainly no logic or evidence or decency.


Oh, look:  Fakey rushing to the defense of a fellow leftist.

You simply can't help it, can you?  No enemies on the left.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Very good.  Yes, you admitting that you are ignoring the truth is a step in the right direction.



thanatos144 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Disproved many times on USMB.
> 
> Move along.
> 
> 
> 
> CMike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hitler was a leftist. His party was the socialist party.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ignoring the truth is not disproving something you hack.
Click to expand...


----------



## JakeStarkey

Oh, look, daveboy calling names because you have no logic or evidence or decency.  



daveman said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> daveyboy loves to call names 'cause he has nothing else, certainly no logic or evidence or decency.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, look:  Fakey rushing to the defense of a fellow leftist.
> 
> You simply can't help it, can you?  No enemies on the left.
Click to expand...


----------



## thanatos144

JakeStarkey said:


> Attending a luncheon for Mitt later today, to raise some money.
> 
> Hey, be happy, you got Ted Cruz instead of David Dewhurst to run for Senate in Texas.



Why do you lie about what you support when it is obvious to us all what you are? Is it a mental disorder all you progressives have?


----------



## daveman

JakeStarkey said:


> Attending a luncheon for Mitt later today, to raise some money.


For what it's worth, I think you're lying.


----------



## JakeStarkey

For what it is worth, no one of worth cares what you think, I imagine.


----------



## Ravi

daveman said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, look:  A leftist rushing to Fakey's defense.
> 
> Fakey, even the leftists know you're one of them.
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing to do with Jake. You simply are a creep.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...says the idiot woman who calls people Nazis for the singular crime of disagreeing with her.
> 
> Did you really think your moral judgement is worth a shit?
Click to expand...

That's not why I called you a nazi, creep.


----------



## daveman

JakeStarkey said:


> Oh, look, daveboy calling names because you have no logic or evidence or decency.



Yeah.  Whatever you do, don't condemn Ravi for calling people Nazis because she doesn't like what they say.

Because that shows a lack of logic or evidence or decency.  But -- she's a fellow leftist, so it's okay, right?

Retard.


----------



## thanatos144

JakeStarkey said:


> Very good.  Yes, you admitting that you are ignoring the truth is a step in the right direction.
> 
> 
> 
> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Disproved many times on USMB.
> 
> Move along.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ignoring the truth is not disproving something you hack.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Truth is you piece of progressive filth. Is that Nazi were are and always will be socialist.....How is this you say???? Well if you understood honesty you would see all socialism is is just another way of reaching its  true goal and that is fascism. You see Nazi are progressives with out all the lies.


----------



## daveman

JakeStarkey said:


> For what it is worth, no one of worth cares what you think, I imagine.



You'd have to have an active imagination to pretend you're a Republican, boy.


----------



## thanatos144

Ravi said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing to do with Jake. You simply are a creep.
> 
> 
> 
> ...says the idiot woman who calls people Nazis for the singular crime of disagreeing with her.
> 
> Did you really think your moral judgement is worth a shit?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's not why I called you a nazi, creep.
Click to expand...


Why does he support National take over of business and eugenics to take out the undesirables????? Oh wait no that would mean he is a progressive.


----------



## daveman

Ravi said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing to do with Jake. You simply are a creep.
> 
> 
> 
> ...says the idiot woman who calls people Nazis for the singular crime of disagreeing with her.
> 
> Did you really think your moral judgement is worth a shit?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's not why I called you a nazi, creep.
Click to expand...


Then why did you?  I asked you for quotes of mine that show Nazi leanings -- several times -- but you never provided any.

Now you get one more chance.  Will you punk out yet again?


----------



## Bfgrn

thanatos144 said:


> I dont think socialism is a right wing thing.....So the OP as normal is ignorant of the facts.



Socialism is a liberal thing. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the economy works. Democracy is liberal. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the government works.

Communism and fascism are conservative things. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just the Party Secretary) have any say in how the economy works. Republicans are conservative. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just people controlling the Party figurehead) have any say in how the government works.

Glad I could clear that up for you. Now your response will be the obligatory but, but, but...it was called the national socialist party. Hitler objected to the party's previous leader's decision to use the word "Socialist" in its name as Hitler at the time instead preferred to use "Social Revolutionary" wiki


----------



## daveman

daveman said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...says the idiot woman who calls people Nazis for the singular crime of disagreeing with her.
> 
> Did you really think your moral judgement is worth a shit?
> 
> 
> 
> That's not why I called you a nazi, creep.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Then why did you?  I asked you for quotes of mine that show Nazi leanings -- several times -- but you never provided any.
> 
> Now you get one more chance.  Will you punk out yet again?
Click to expand...

Well, Ravi?


----------



## daveman

Bfgrn said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I dont think socialism is a right wing thing.....So the OP as normal is ignorant of the facts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism is a liberal thing. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the economy works. Democracy is liberal. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the government works.
> 
> Communism and fascism are conservative things. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just the Party Secretary) have any say in how the economy works. Republicans are conservative. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just people controlling the Party figurehead) have any say in how the government works.
> 
> Glad I could clear that up for you. Now your response will be the obligatory but, but, but...it was called the national socialist party. Hitler objected to the party's previous leader's decision to use the word "Socialist" in its name as Hitler at the time instead preferred to use "Social Revolutionary" wiki
Click to expand...

So I was right in describing your inability to think, wasn't I?

Everything good is on the left.  Everything bad is on the right.


And I was right about something else, too:  There is nothing so stupid that you can't make yourself believe it.


----------



## Bfgrn

daveman said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I dont think socialism is a right wing thing.....So the OP as normal is ignorant of the facts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism is a liberal thing. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the economy works. Democracy is liberal. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the government works.
> 
> Communism and fascism are conservative things. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just the Party Secretary) have any say in how the economy works. Republicans are conservative. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just people controlling the Party figurehead) have any say in how the government works.
> 
> Glad I could clear that up for you. Now your response will be the obligatory but, but, but...it was called the national socialist party. Hitler objected to the party's previous leader's decision to use the word "Socialist" in its name as Hitler at the time instead preferred to use "Social Revolutionary" wiki
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So I was right in describing your inability to think, wasn't I?
> 
> Everything good is on the left.  Everything bad is on the right.
> 
> 
> And I was right about something else, too:  There is nothing so stupid that you can't make yourself believe it.
Click to expand...


The child-like level of your replies require one at an equal cognitive level...'I know you are, but what am I'


----------



## JakeStarkey

You engage in the same nonsense, daveyboy.  Everything on the far right is good nonsense, and on the far left is bad nonsense.

Nonsense.  Until you are willing to use traditional definitions and historical narratives, you and the far left, are simply crippling the national narrative.

You have to stop that if you want to worthy of being an American.



daveman said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I dont think socialism is a right wing thing.....So the OP as normal is ignorant of the facts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism is a liberal thing. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the economy works. Democracy is liberal. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the government works.
> 
> Communism and fascism are conservative things. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just the Party Secretary) have any say in how the economy works. Republicans are conservative. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just people controlling the Party figurehead) have any say in how the government works.
> 
> Glad I could clear that up for you. Now your response will be the obligatory but, but, but...it was called the national socialist party. Hitler objected to the party's previous leader's decision to use the word "Socialist" in its name as Hitler at the time instead preferred to use "Social Revolutionary" wiki
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So I was right in describing your inability to think, wasn't I?
> 
> Everything good is on the left.  Everything bad is on the right.
> 
> 
> And I was right about something else, too:  There is nothing so stupid that you can't make yourself believe it.
Click to expand...


----------



## thanatos144

Bfgrn said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism is a liberal thing. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the economy works. Democracy is liberal. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the government works.
> 
> Communism and fascism are conservative things. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just the Party Secretary) have any say in how the economy works. Republicans are conservative. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just people controlling the Party figurehead) have any say in how the government works.
> 
> Glad I could clear that up for you. Now your response will be the obligatory but, but, but...it was called the national socialist party. Hitler objected to the party's previous leader's decision to use the word "Socialist" in its name as Hitler at the time instead preferred to use "Social Revolutionary" wiki
> 
> 
> 
> So I was right in describing your inability to think, wasn't I?
> 
> Everything good is on the left.  Everything bad is on the right.
> 
> 
> And I was right about something else, too:  There is nothing so stupid that you can't make yourself believe it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The child-like level of your replies require one at an equal cognitive level...'I know you are, but what am I'
Click to expand...

 so say you get your socialist country will you be one of the first to turn in your fellow americans for not doing as the party say? Will you be one of the staunch defenders of the death camps and prisons for political prisoners?


----------



## JakeStarkey

thanatos, check out socialism in Great Britain, France, Denmark, Sweden, Australia, New Zealand, and realize your are nattering mindlessly.


----------



## thanatos144

JakeStarkey said:


> thanatos, check out socialism in Great Britain, France, Denmark, Sweden, Australia, New Zealand, and realize your are nattering mindlessly.



Awww look at the progressive trying to make socialism seem main stream.... None of those countries are truly socialist yet.


----------



## Neotrotsky

thanatos144 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> thanatos, check out socialism in Great Britain, France, Denmark, Sweden, Australia, New Zealand, and realize your are nattering mindlessly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Awww look at the progressive trying to make socialism seem main stream.... None of those countries are truly socialist yet.
Click to expand...


The PIGS,  Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain
have moved further along their "socialist dream"

Notice how the left never talks about them

Funny how that works



----------------------------------------------------------------------------




Here boy


----------



## Ravi

daveman said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...says the idiot woman who calls people Nazis for the singular crime of disagreeing with her.
> 
> Did you really think your moral judgement is worth a shit?
> 
> 
> 
> That's not why I called you a nazi, creep.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Then why did you?  I asked you for quotes of mine that show Nazi leanings -- several times -- but you never provided any.
> 
> Now you get one more chance.  Will you punk out yet again?
Click to expand...

Since you dave so much, it's because you keep repeating lies that you know to be lies simply because you believe they will be believed.


----------



## thanatos144

Neotrotsky said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> thanatos, check out socialism in Great Britain, France, Denmark, Sweden, Australia, New Zealand, and realize your are nattering mindlessly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Awww look at the progressive trying to make socialism seem main stream.... None of those countries are truly socialist yet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The PIGS,  Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain
> have moved further along their "socialist dream"
> 
> Notice how the left never talks about them
> 
> Funny how that works
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here boy
Click to expand...

 nor do they ever talk about this ultimate goal of remaking the ussr


----------



## daveman

Bfgrn said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism is a liberal thing. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the economy works. Democracy is liberal. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the government works.
> 
> Communism and fascism are conservative things. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just the Party Secretary) have any say in how the economy works. Republicans are conservative. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just people controlling the Party figurehead) have any say in how the government works.
> 
> Glad I could clear that up for you. Now your response will be the obligatory but, but, but...it was called the national socialist party. Hitler objected to the party's previous leader's decision to use the word "Socialist" in its name as Hitler at the time instead preferred to use "Social Revolutionary" wiki
> 
> 
> 
> So I was right in describing your inability to think, wasn't I?
> 
> Everything good is on the left.  Everything bad is on the right.
> 
> 
> And I was right about something else, too:  There is nothing so stupid that you can't make yourself believe it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The child-like level of your replies require one at an equal cognitive level...'I know you are, but what am I'
Click to expand...

"Everything good is on the left.  Everything bad is on the right."

Why are you running from it?  That's exactly what you're saying.


----------



## daveman

JakeStarkey said:


> You engage in the same nonsense, daveyboy.  Everything on the far right is good nonsense, and on the far left is bad nonsense.
> 
> Nonsense.  Until you are willing to use traditional definitions and historical narratives, you and the far left, are simply crippling the national narrative.
> 
> You have to stop that if you want to worthy of being an American.


Fuck off, you little piece of Poli Sci 101 shit.


----------



## daveman

Ravi said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's not why I called you a nazi, creep.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then why did you?  I asked you for quotes of mine that show Nazi leanings -- several times -- but you never provided any.
> 
> Now you get one more chance.  Will you punk out yet again?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since you dave so much, it's because you keep repeating lies that you know to be lies simply because you believe they will be believed.
Click to expand...


THAT'S a reason to call somebody a Nazi?  

Don't take this the wrong way, but you're fucked in the head.

Okay, I really don't care how you take it.


----------



## JakeStarkey

daveyboy is a simple, silly, extremist right wing wacko.

He clearly hates America's narrative, its values, and he and friends want to change all that.

Not going to happen.


----------



## Ravi

JakeStarkey said:


> daveyboy is a simple, silly, extremist right wing wacko.
> 
> He clearly hates America's narrative, its values, and he and friends want to change all that.
> 
> Not going to happen.



Thank you Captain Obvious.


----------



## daveman

JakeStarkey said:


> daveyboy is a simple, silly, extremist right wing wacko.
> 
> He clearly hates America's narrative, its values, and he and friends want to change all that.
> 
> Not going to happen.


I'm tired of your bullshit lies, you little troll.


----------



## daveman

Ravi said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> daveyboy is a simple, silly, extremist right wing wacko.
> 
> He clearly hates America's narrative, its values, and he and friends want to change all that.
> 
> Not going to happen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you Captain Obvious.
Click to expand...

And fuck you too, bitch.


----------



## Bfgrn

daveman said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> So I was right in describing your inability to think, wasn't I?
> 
> Everything good is on the left.  Everything bad is on the right.
> 
> 
> And I was right about something else, too:  There is nothing so stupid that you can't make yourself believe it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The child-like level of your replies require one at an equal cognitive level...'I know you are, but what am I'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "Everything good is on the left.  Everything bad is on the right."
> 
> Why are you running from it?  That's exactly what you're saying.
Click to expand...


Why are you projecting dave? Your constant drone is "Everything good is on the right.  Everything bad is on the left." As a matter of fact, that is the seminal tenet of Rush Limbaugh and hate radio. It is why Rush is the leader of the conservative movement and why every Republican who criticizes Limbaugh has to crawl back and beg forgiveness.


----------



## Jroc

Bfgrn said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I dont think socialism is a right wing thing.....So the OP as normal is ignorant of the facts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism is a liberal thing. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the economy works. Democracy is liberal. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the government works.
> 
> Communism and fascism are conservative things. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just the Party Secretary) have any say in how the economy works. Republicans are conservative. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just people controlling the Party figurehead) have any say in how the government works.
> 
> Glad I could clear that up for you. Now your response will be the obligatory but, but, but...it was called the national socialist party. Hitler objected to the party's previous leader's decision to use the word "Socialist" in its name as Hitler at the time instead preferred to use "Social Revolutionary" wiki
Click to expand...





> Auschwitz meant that six million Jews were killed, and thrown on the waste--heap of Europe, for what they were considered: money-Jews. Finance capital and the banks, the hard core of the system of imperialism and capitalism, had turned the hatred of men against money and exploitation, and against the Jews.... Anti-Semitism is really a hatred of capitalism.- Ulrike Meinhof, left-wing German terrorist of the 1970s. 1
> 
> Capitalism and the market economy encourage racial, ethnic, and religious tolerance, while supporting a plurality of diverse lifestyles and customs. Heavily regulated or socialist economies, in contrast, tend to breed intolerance and ethnic persecution. Socialism leads to low or negative rates of economic growth, disputes over resource use, and concentrated political power-all conditions which encourage conflict rather than cooperation. Ethnic and religious minorities usually do poorly when political coercion is prevalent. Economic collapses - usually associated with interventionism-worsen the problem by unleashing the destructive psychological forces of envy and resentment, which feed prejudice and persecution.
> 
> While discrimination is present in societies of all kinds, discriminators must pay pecuniary costs for indulging their prejudices in a market setting. Even the prejudiced usually will trade with minorities; bigots attempt to oppress minorities by socializing the costs through government action, but bigots usually are less willing to bear these costs themselves. Repeated commercial interactions also increase the social familiarity of customs or lifestyles that otherwise might be found unusual or alien. Sustained economic growth alleviates political and social tensions by creating more for everybody.
> 
> The history of the Jewish people illustrates the relatively favorable position of minorities in a market setting. Hostility toward trade and commerce has often fueled hostility toward Jews, and vice versa. The societies most congenial to commercial life for their time - Renaissance Italy, the growing capitalist economies of England and the Netherlands in the seventeenth century, and the United States - typically have shown the most toleration for Jews. Ellis Rivkin, in his neglected masterpiece, The Shaping of Jewish History.- A Radical New Interpretation, wrote:
> 
> Since World War II Jews and Judaism have been liberated in every country and territory where capitalism has been restored to vigorous growth-and this includes Germany. By contrast, wherever anti-capitalism or pre-capitalism has prevailed the status of Jews and Judaism has either undergone deterioration or is highly precarious. Thus at this very moment the country where developing global capitalism is most advanced, the United States, accords Jews and Judaism a freedom that is known nowhere else in the world and that was never known in the past. It is a freedom that is not matched even in Israel... By contrast, in the Soviet Union, the citadel of anti-capitalism, the Jews are cowed by anti-Semitism, threatened by extinction, and barred from access to their God.2



FrontPage Magazine - The Socialist Roots of Anti-Semitism


----------



## daveman

Bfgrn said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The child-like level of your replies require one at an equal cognitive level...'I know you are, but what am I'
> 
> 
> 
> "Everything good is on the left.  Everything bad is on the right."
> 
> Why are you running from it?  That's exactly what you're saying.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why are you projecting dave?
Click to expand...

No projection.  That's what you said when you so ridiculously tried to claim the leftist totalitarians I listed were on the right.

Embrace your moonbattery.  


Bfgrn said:


> Your constant drone is "Everything good is on the right.  Everything bad is on the left."


Speaking of projection...


Bfgrn said:


> As a matter of fact, that is the seminal tenet of Rush Limbaugh and hate radio. It is why Rush is the leader of the conservative movement and why every Republican who criticizes Limbaugh has to crawl back and beg forgiveness.


I don't listen to Rush.  Talk radio bores me.  Give me classic rock and country any day.  

Meanwhile, you're still a moron.


----------



## Jroc

Capitalism the great equalizer



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5Gppi-O3a8]Power of the Market - The Pencil - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Bfgrn

Jroc said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I dont think socialism is a right wing thing.....So the OP as normal is ignorant of the facts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism is a liberal thing. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the economy works. Democracy is liberal. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the government works.
> 
> Communism and fascism are conservative things. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just the Party Secretary) have any say in how the economy works. Republicans are conservative. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just people controlling the Party figurehead) have any say in how the government works.
> 
> Glad I could clear that up for you. Now your response will be the obligatory but, but, but...it was called the national socialist party. Hitler objected to the party's previous leader's decision to use the word "Socialist" in its name as Hitler at the time instead preferred to use "Social Revolutionary" wiki
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Auschwitz meant that six million Jews were killed, and thrown on the waste--heap of Europe, for what they were considered: money-Jews. Finance capital and the banks, the hard core of the system of imperialism and capitalism, had turned the hatred of men against money and exploitation, and against the Jews.... Anti-Semitism is really a hatred of capitalism.- Ulrike Meinhof, left-wing German terrorist of the 1970s. 1
> 
> Capitalism and the market economy encourage racial, ethnic, and religious tolerance, while supporting a plurality of diverse lifestyles and customs. Heavily regulated or socialist economies, in contrast, tend to breed intolerance and ethnic persecution. Socialism leads to low or negative rates of economic growth, disputes over resource use, and concentrated political power-all conditions which encourage conflict rather than cooperation. Ethnic and religious minorities usually do poorly when political coercion is prevalent. Economic collapses - usually associated with interventionism-worsen the problem by unleashing the destructive psychological forces of envy and resentment, which feed prejudice and persecution.
> 
> While discrimination is present in societies of all kinds, discriminators must pay pecuniary costs for indulging their prejudices in a market setting. Even the prejudiced usually will trade with minorities; bigots attempt to oppress minorities by socializing the costs through government action, but bigots usually are less willing to bear these costs themselves. Repeated commercial interactions also increase the social familiarity of customs or lifestyles that otherwise might be found unusual or alien. Sustained economic growth alleviates political and social tensions by creating more for everybody.
> 
> The history of the Jewish people illustrates the relatively favorable position of minorities in a market setting. Hostility toward trade and commerce has often fueled hostility toward Jews, and vice versa. The societies most congenial to commercial life for their time - Renaissance Italy, the growing capitalist economies of England and the Netherlands in the seventeenth century, and the United States - typically have shown the most toleration for Jews. Ellis Rivkin, in his neglected masterpiece, The Shaping of Jewish History.- A Radical New Interpretation, wrote:
> 
> Since World War II Jews and Judaism have been liberated in every country and territory where capitalism has been restored to vigorous growth-and this includes Germany. By contrast, wherever anti-capitalism or pre-capitalism has prevailed the status of Jews and Judaism has either undergone deterioration or is highly precarious. Thus at this very moment the country where developing global capitalism is most advanced, the United States, accords Jews and Judaism a freedom that is known nowhere else in the world and that was never known in the past. It is a freedom that is not matched even in Israel... By contrast, in the Soviet Union, the citadel of anti-capitalism, the Jews are cowed by anti-Semitism, threatened by extinction, and barred from access to their God.2
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> FrontPage Magazine - The Socialist Roots of Anti-Semitism
Click to expand...


The Hard Road to Fascism

*Todays antiliberal revolt looks a lot like 1920s Europe. 
*

A more apt (and troubling) comparison is with the 1920s, when an earlier liberal order collapsed and was replaced by imperial and mega-state regimes.

*  *  *

Traditional conservatives have persistently criticized modern liberalism for its alleged softness. After the First World War right-wing German and Italian critics abused the governments of Weimar Germany and pre-Mussolini Italy for their commitment to social welfare, which their critics linked to an unwillingness to use force in international relations. To use Robert Kagans expression, the Weimar Republic could only do the dishes, not prepare the feast.

German and Italian critics of liberalismwriters such as Ernst Jünger and Giovanni Gentilelonged for the military spirit that allegedly typified the front-fighter generation that had lived through the horrors of trench warfare during World War I. The experience of war, they said, could redeem the anti-national Weimar Republic and the spineless decadence of Italian liberalism by reintroducing them to the necessity of using forcewhich would mean a much more ready resort to military power and a reorientation of government to promote its use. Both men and nations could thereby reestablish their virility.

Extreme right-wing theoreticiansfor example, German jurist and political philosopher Carl Schmittbelieved that the European states in general had to choose between defending the interests of their national communitiesat the end of the day by forceand sustaining a debilitating commitment to popular welfare, which more and more absorbed the energies of a weak-kneed liberalism that precariously clung to power in many European states. Schmitt believed that the state existed exclusively to oppose the enemies of the national community and ensure domestic order. Politics, he famously said, is founded on the friend-enemy polarity. Liberals had embarked on a fruitless crusade to escape inevitable political conflict within their societies by expanding the welfare function of the modern state to appease the demands of the masses, and thereby weakening its executive function.

The proximate causes of this revulsion against liberalism in Italy, Germany, and elsewhere are not far to seek. And the underlying anti-liberal logic was more cultural than political-economic. After defeat in World War I neither Germany nor Italy was able to advance its interests effectively in Europe. The Italians were widely regarded as pathetic soldiers. The Italians, Bismarck said, have such large appetites and such poor teeth. Giovanni Gentile, subsequently a Fascist minister for Mussolini, lamented the dolce far niente (sweet do nothing) that he found characterized the Italians as a nation. As for the Germans, they had of course lost the war, but they were encouraged to believe that their armies and fighting men had not been defeated on the battlefield but had been betrayed by an unpatriotic cabal of Jews, Francophiles, liberals, and socialists.

So for these men and like-minded others, there was a necessary connection between reviving militarism and imperialism and curtailing the states commitment to popular welfare. Only a new political elitebattle-hardened, ruthless, and devoted to authoritarian governmentcould achieve the reforms needed to restore these states to the ranks of the European powerful. The new governments would not be parliamentary: talk shops never get anything done. In Italy the Fascist elite developed an imperial ideology focusing on Rome; in Germany, too, there was an imperial elementthe Thousand Year Empirealthough we correctly understand the racism of the National Socialists to have been their most memorable contribution to the horrors of the 20th century. 

The Hard Road to Fascism


----------



## Jroc

Sorry loon&#8230; Conservatives are fighting for liberty, the liberty of the individual to pursue his own self-interests. Totally the opposite of what todays liberals favor "social justice" at the expense of the individual big government socialism. Marxism, fascism same principals, one also just has a racial component  to it


----------



## Bfgrn

Jroc said:


> Sorry loon Conservatives are fighting for liberty, the liberty of the individual to pursue his own self-interests. Totally the opposite of what todays liberals favor "social justice" at the expense of the individual big government socialism. Marxism, fascism same principals, one also just has a racial component  to it



I've seen and heard the 'liberty' conservatives are fighting for. It represents the lowest form of life. The subservient...


----------



## del

Jroc said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I dont think socialism is a right wing thing.....So the OP as normal is ignorant of the facts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism is a liberal thing. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the economy works. Democracy is liberal. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the government works.
> 
> Communism and fascism are conservative things. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just the Party Secretary) have any say in how the economy works. Republicans are conservative. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just people controlling the Party figurehead) have any say in how the government works.
> 
> Glad I could clear that up for you. Now your response will be the obligatory but, but, but...it was called the national socialist party. Hitler objected to the party's previous leader's decision to use the word "Socialist" in its name as Hitler at the time instead preferred to use "Social Revolutionary" wiki
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Auschwitz meant that six million Jews were killed, and thrown on the waste--heap of Europe, for what they were considered: money-Jews. Finance capital and the banks, the hard core of the system of imperialism and capitalism, had turned the hatred of men against money and exploitation, and against the Jews.... Anti-Semitism is really a hatred of capitalism.- Ulrike Meinhof, left-wing German terrorist of the 1970s. 1
> 
> Capitalism and the market economy encourage racial, ethnic, and religious tolerance, while supporting a plurality of diverse lifestyles and customs. Heavily regulated or socialist economies, in contrast, tend to breed intolerance and ethnic persecution. Socialism leads to low or negative rates of economic growth, disputes over resource use, and concentrated political power-all conditions which encourage conflict rather than cooperation. Ethnic and religious minorities usually do poorly when political coercion is prevalent. Economic collapses - usually associated with interventionism-worsen the problem by unleashing the destructive psychological forces of envy and resentment, which feed prejudice and persecution.
> 
> While discrimination is present in societies of all kinds, discriminators must pay pecuniary costs for indulging their prejudices in a market setting. Even the prejudiced usually will trade with minorities; bigots attempt to oppress minorities by socializing the costs through government action, but bigots usually are less willing to bear these costs themselves. Repeated commercial interactions also increase the social familiarity of customs or lifestyles that otherwise might be found unusual or alien. Sustained economic growth alleviates political and social tensions by creating more for everybody.
> 
> The history of the Jewish people illustrates the relatively favorable position of minorities in a market setting. Hostility toward trade and commerce has often fueled hostility toward Jews, and vice versa. The societies most congenial to commercial life for their time - Renaissance Italy, the growing capitalist economies of England and the Netherlands in the seventeenth century, and the United States - typically have shown the most toleration for Jews. Ellis Rivkin, in his neglected masterpiece, The Shaping of Jewish History.- A Radical New Interpretation, wrote:
> 
> Since World War II Jews and Judaism have been liberated in every country and territory where capitalism has been restored to vigorous growth-and this includes Germany. By contrast, wherever anti-capitalism or pre-capitalism has prevailed the status of Jews and Judaism has either undergone deterioration or is highly precarious. Thus at this very moment the country where developing global capitalism is most advanced, the United States, accords Jews and Judaism a freedom that is known nowhere else in the world and that was never known in the past. It is a freedom that is not matched even in Israel... By contrast, in the Soviet Union, the citadel of anti-capitalism, the Jews are cowed by anti-Semitism, threatened by extinction, and barred from access to their God.2
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> FrontPage Magazine - The Socialist Roots of Anti-Semitism
Click to expand...


yeah, edward longshanks and queen isabella were noted socialists. 

fuckwit


----------



## JakeStarkey

None of that makes any sense.

Try that in a high school or college class, and you will fail.

You simply make no sense.



Jroc said:


> Sorry loon Conservatives are fighting for liberty, the liberty of the individual to pursue his own self-interests. Totally the opposite of what todays liberals favor "social justice" at the expense of the individual big government socialism. Marxism, fascism same principals, one also just has a racial component  to it


----------



## daveman

Bfgrn said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry loon Conservatives are fighting for liberty, the liberty of the individual to pursue his own self-interests. Totally the opposite of what todays liberals favor "social justice" at the expense of the individual big government socialism. Marxism, fascism same principals, one also just has a racial component  to it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've seen and heard the 'liberty' conservatives are fighting for. It represents the lowest form of life. The subservient...
Click to expand...


And I've seen what progressives are fighting for:  The USSR circa 1958.  

That's "progress", Comrade!


----------



## Jroc

JakeStarkey said:


> None of that makes any sense.
> 
> Try that in a high school or college class, and you will fail.
> 
> You simply make no sense.
> 
> 
> 
> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry loon Conservatives are fighting for liberty, the liberty of the individual to pursue his own self-interests. Totally the opposite of what todays liberals favor "social justice" at the expense of the individual big government socialism. Marxism, fascism same principals, one also just has a racial component  to it
Click to expand...


Which is why most universities are useless brainwashing machines for clueless college boys such as yourself?


----------



## thanatos144

del said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism is a liberal thing. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the economy works. Democracy is liberal. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the government works.
> 
> Communism and fascism are conservative things. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just the Party Secretary) have any say in how the economy works. Republicans are conservative. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just people controlling the Party figurehead) have any say in how the government works.
> 
> Glad I could clear that up for you. Now your response will be the obligatory but, but, but...it was called the national socialist party. Hitler objected to the party's previous leader's decision to use the word "Socialist" in its name as Hitler at the time instead preferred to use "Social Revolutionary" wiki
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> &#8220;Auschwitz meant that six million Jews were killed, and thrown on the waste--heap of Europe, for what they were considered: money-Jews. Finance capital and the banks, the hard core of the system of imperialism and capitalism, had turned the hatred of men against money and exploitation, and against the Jews.... Anti-Semitism is really a hatred of capitalism.&#8220;- Ulrike Meinhof, left-wing German terrorist of the 1970s. 1
> 
> Capitalism and the market economy encourage racial, ethnic, and religious tolerance, while supporting a plurality of diverse lifestyles and customs. Heavily regulated or socialist economies, in contrast, tend to breed intolerance and ethnic persecution. Socialism leads to low or negative rates of economic growth, disputes over resource use, and concentrated political power-all conditions which encourage conflict rather than cooperation. Ethnic and religious minorities usually do poorly when political coercion is prevalent. Economic collapses - usually associated with interventionism-worsen the problem by unleashing the destructive psychological forces of envy and resentment, which feed prejudice and persecution.
> 
> While discrimination is present in societies of all kinds, discriminators must pay pecuniary costs for indulging their prejudices in a market setting. Even the prejudiced usually will trade with minorities; bigots attempt to oppress minorities by socializing the costs through government action, but bigots usually are less willing to bear these costs themselves. Repeated commercial interactions also increase the social familiarity of customs or lifestyles that otherwise might be found unusual or alien. Sustained economic growth alleviates political and social tensions by creating more for everybody.
> 
> The history of the Jewish people illustrates the relatively favorable position of minorities in a market setting. Hostility toward trade and commerce has often fueled hostility toward Jews, and vice versa. The societies most congenial to commercial life for their time - Renaissance Italy, the growing capitalist economies of England and the Netherlands in the seventeenth century, and the United States - typically have shown the most toleration for Jews. Ellis Rivkin, in his neglected masterpiece, The Shaping of Jewish History.- A Radical New Interpretation, wrote:
> 
> Since World War II Jews and Judaism have been liberated in every country and territory where capitalism has been restored to vigorous growth-and this includes Germany. By contrast, wherever anti-capitalism or pre-capitalism has prevailed the status of Jews and Judaism has either undergone deterioration or is highly precarious. Thus at this very moment the country where developing global capitalism is most advanced, the United States, accords Jews and Judaism a freedom that is known nowhere else in the world and that was never known in the past. It is a freedom that is not matched even in Israel... By contrast, in the Soviet Union, the citadel of anti-capitalism, the Jews are cowed by anti-Semitism, threatened by extinction, and barred from access to their God.2
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> FrontPage Magazine - The Socialist Roots of Anti-Semitism
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> yeah, edward longshanks and queen isabella were noted socialists.
> 
> fuckwit
Click to expand...

What a half ass post. Hey dumbass do you think cause your dictators  are socialists it makes them different?


----------



## Bfgrn

daveman said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry loon Conservatives are fighting for liberty, the liberty of the individual to pursue his own self-interests. Totally the opposite of what todays liberals favor "social justice" at the expense of the individual big government socialism. Marxism, fascism same principals, one also just has a racial component  to it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've seen and heard the 'liberty' conservatives are fighting for. It represents the lowest form of life. The subservient...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And I've seen what progressives are fighting for:  The USSR circa 1958.
> 
> That's "progress", Comrade!
Click to expand...


American liberals have never fought for anything but a better America, for everyone, not just your beloved plutocrats. 

But there is no doubt that the USSR circa 1958 was a vast improvement over the previous years.

The Khrushchev Era

The end of the Stalin era brought immediate* liberalization* in several aspects of Soviet life. Party leader Nikita S. Khrushchev denounced Stalin's tyrannical reign in 1956, signaling a sharp break with the past. Because Khrushchev lacked the all-encompassing power of Stalin, his time in office was marked by continuous maneuvering against political enemies much more real than Stalin's had been. Party control of cultural activity became much less restrictive with the onset of the first "thaw" in the mid-1950s.

Soviet relations with the West, especially the United States, seesawed between moments of relative relaxation and periods of tension and crisis. For his part, Khrushchev wanted peaceful coexistence with the West, not only to avoid nuclear war but also to permit the Soviet Union to develop its economy. Khrushchev's meetings with President Eisenhower in 1955 and President John F. Kennedy in 1961 and his tour of the United States in 1959 demonstrated the Soviet leader's desire for fundamentally smooth relations between the West and the Soviet Union and its allies. Yet Khrushchev also needed to demonstrate to *Soviet conservatives* and the militant Chinese that the Soviet Union was a firm defender of the socialist camp.


----------



## Neotrotsky

Indeed any word conservative equates to conservative in the US
Is your command of English this poor"

Soviet Conservative equates to any of the wacko left in the US congress




Goat Cheese & Brie Flatbread Dessert Recipe

Top the prebaked flatbread with this apple mixture then add *liberally* 1/4 cup diced brie cheese and 1/4 cup goat cheese


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Bfgrn said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry loon Conservatives are fighting for liberty, the liberty of the individual to pursue his own self-interests. Totally the opposite of what todays liberals favor "social justice" at the expense of the individual big government socialism. Marxism, fascism same principals, one also just has a racial component  to it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've seen and heard the 'liberty' conservatives are fighting for. It represents the lowest form of life. The subservient...
Click to expand...


Oh, that's such a cute cartoon! Did you pull that from your refrigerator?


----------



## JakeStarkey

The major brainwashing occurs in the extremist right.  You all listen to Savage, Rush, Sean, Glenn, etc., and run around with your eyes rolling around in your  heads.

Truly, you cannot critically think and you clearly do not understand the American narrative.

Thank heavens folks like Brown, Cruz, and others are playing you for fools.

Oh, watch, NeoSimpleton, post some silly videos below.  So predictable, my little troll.



Jroc said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> None of that makes any sense.
> 
> Try that in a high school or college class, and you will fail.
> 
> You simply make no sense.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry loon&#8230; Conservatives are fighting for liberty, the liberty of the individual to pursue his own self-interests. Totally the opposite of what todays liberals favor "social justice" at the expense of the individual big government socialism. Marxism, fascism same principals, one also just has a racial component  to it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which is why most universities are useless brainwashing machines for clueless college boys such as yourself?
Click to expand...


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Bfgrn said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I dont think socialism is a right wing thing.....So the OP as normal is ignorant of the facts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism is a liberal thing. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the economy works. Democracy is liberal. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the government works.
> 
> Communism and fascism are conservative things. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just the Party Secretary) have any say in how the economy works. Republicans are conservative. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just people controlling the Party figurehead) have any say in how the government works.
> 
> Glad I could clear that up for you. Now your response will be the obligatory but, but, but...it was called the national socialist party. Hitler objected to the party's previous leader's decision to use the word "Socialist" in its name as Hitler at the time instead preferred to use "Social Revolutionary" wiki
Click to expand...


"Socialism is a liberal thing."  Yeah, that's what we've been trying to tell you!  So are Communism and Fascism!


----------



## Neotrotsky

Speaking of brainwashing 

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAlrSRVdKZY]Children singing to Obama! - YouTube[/ame]

-------------------

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBoBc-ifDmk]Lenin's Little Potatoes - YouTube[/ame]

--------------------------------------------------------







Here boy


----------



## Artevelde

Bfgrn said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry loon Conservatives are fighting for liberty, the liberty of the individual to pursue his own self-interests. Totally the opposite of what todays liberals favor "social justice" at the expense of the individual big government socialism. Marxism, fascism same principals, one also just has a racial component  to it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've seen and heard the 'liberty' conservatives are fighting for. It represents the lowest form of life. The subservient...
Click to expand...


Just the same stupid old slogans.


----------



## Bfgrn

Artevelde said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry loon Conservatives are fighting for liberty, the liberty of the individual to pursue his own self-interests. Totally the opposite of what todays liberals favor "social justice" at the expense of the individual big government socialism. Marxism, fascism same principals, one also just has a racial component  to it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've seen and heard the 'liberty' conservatives are fighting for. It represents the lowest form of life. The subservient...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just the same stupid old slogans.
Click to expand...


It couldn't be more right on. It is who and what you folks are. You get down on your knees and worship the opulent every single day.

     Q: What is conservatism?
    A: Conservatism is the domination of society by an aristocracy.

    Q: What is wrong with conservatism?
    A: Conservatism is incompatible with democracy, prosperity, and civilization in general. It is a destructive system of inequality and prejudice that is founded on deception and has no place in the modern world. 

These ideas are not new. Indeed they were common sense until recently. Nowadays, though, most of the people who call themselves "conservatives" have little notion of what conservatism even is. They have been deceived by one of the great public relations campaigns of human history. Only by analyzing this deception will it become possible to revive democracy in the United States.

The Main Arguments of Conservatism

From the pharaohs of ancient Egypt to the self-regarding thugs of ancient Rome to the glorified warlords of medieval and absolutist Europe, in nearly every urbanized society throughout human history, there have been people who have tried to constitute themselves as an aristocracy. These people and their allies are the conservatives.

The tactics of conservatism vary widely by place and time. But the most central feature of conservatism is deference: a psychologically internalized attitude on the part of the common people that the aristocracy are better people than they are. Modern-day liberals often theorize that conservatives use "social issues" as a way to mask economic objectives, but this is almost backward: the true goal of conservatism is to establish an aristocracy, which is a social and psychological condition of inequality. Economic inequality and regressive taxation, while certainly welcomed by the aristocracy, are best understood as a means to their actual goal, which is simply to be aristocrats. More generally, it is crucial to conservatism that the people must literally love the order that dominates them.


----------



## Neotrotsky

Phil Agre?
the radical leftist who suffers from mental illness  
Is that the best you have 

An opinion piece by a nut
Wait, it is someone you can identity with,,,



That explains why the writings are so, so
wrong


----------



## editec

Peasants and their MASTERS tend to be reactionary.

Hitler was reactionary.

Peasants and their MASTERS supported Hitler.

Rather typical, really.

We saw the same thing happen in the USA and the French revolutions.


----------



## Neotrotsky

Good example of the last  election of Papa Obama


----------



## OohPooPahDoo

Charles_Main said:


> Partisan Hackery Alert. Engage at your own risk. The Author of this Thread has no interest in Real Debate.
> 
> She is 100% sure of her Premise and is simply looking for a chance to call you some names.



Are the quotations inaccurate?


----------



## Black_Label

Bfgrn said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry loon Conservatives are fighting for liberty, the liberty of the individual to pursue his own self-interests. Totally the opposite of what todays liberals favor "social justice" at the expense of the individual big government socialism. Marxism, fascism same principals, one also just has a racial component  to it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've seen and heard the 'liberty' conservatives are fighting for. It represents the lowest form of life. The subservient...
Click to expand...


Perfect image of the radical right wing idiots. A bunch of dumb hicks that worship at their master's feet. 

Being a right winger must be one the most serious forms of mental illness.


----------



## Bfgrn

Black_Label said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry loon Conservatives are fighting for liberty, the liberty of the individual to pursue his own self-interests. Totally the opposite of what todays liberals favor "social justice" at the expense of the individual big government socialism. Marxism, fascism same principals, one also just has a racial component  to it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've seen and heard the 'liberty' conservatives are fighting for. It represents the lowest form of life. The subservient...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Perfect image of the radical right wing idiots. A bunch of dumb hicks that worship at their master's feet.
> 
> Being a right winger must be one the most serious forms of mental illness.
Click to expand...


It is crucial to conservatism that the people must literally love the order that dominates them.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Communism certainly wanted the people devoted to the cult of the leader and the cult of the worker and farmer, so political cultism is not limited to just the right.


----------



## L.K.Eder

hilter had a dog.

as a cat person, i can not approve.


----------



## JakeStarkey

And . . . he killed said dog.


----------



## Bfgrn

JakeStarkey said:


> Communism certainly wanted the people devoted to the cult of the leader and the cult of the worker and farmer, so political cultism is not limited to just the right.



There is nothing liberal or socialist about communism. Socialism, where the people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the economy works never happened in Russia, China, Cuba or Cambodia. The Soviet Union officially abandoned socialism in 1921 when Lenin instituted the New Economic Policy allowing for taxation, local trade, some state capitalism... and extreme profiteering.


----------



## L.K.Eder

JakeStarkey said:


> And . . . he killed said dog.



that act of mercy can not mitigate his prior transgressions.


----------



## JakeStarkey

I was waiting for this nonsense.  Bfgrn and others in the leftist cause do not get to recreate definitions and historical narratives to meet their own desired results, any more than do wack right wing extremists.

No, kiddo, the commies were not conservatives.



Bfgrn said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism certainly wanted the people devoted to the cult of the leader and the cult of the worker and farmer, so political cultism is not limited to just the right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is nothing liberal or socialist about communism. Socialism, where the people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the economy works never happened in Russia, China, Cuba or Cambodia. The Soviet Union officially abandoned socialism in 1921 when Lenin instituted the New Economic Policy allowing for taxation, local trade, some state capitalism... and extreme profiteering.
Click to expand...


----------



## Jroc

Bfgrn said:


> Artevelde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've seen and heard the 'liberty' conservatives are fighting for. It represents the lowest form of life. The subservient...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just the same stupid old slogans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It couldn't be more right on. It is who and what you folks are. You get down on your knees and worship the opulent every single day.
> 
> Q: What is conservatism?
> A: Conservatism is the domination of society by an aristocracy.
> 
> Q: What is wrong with conservatism?
> A: Conservatism is incompatible with democracy, prosperity, and civilization in general. It is a destructive system of inequality and prejudice that is founded on deception and has no place in the modern world.
> 
> These ideas are not new. Indeed they were common sense until recently. Nowadays, though, most of the people who call themselves "conservatives" have little notion of what conservatism even is. They have been deceived by one of the great public relations campaigns of human history. Only by analyzing this deception will it become possible to revive democracy in the United States.
> 
> The Main Arguments of Conservatism
> 
> From the pharaohs of ancient Egypt to the self-regarding thugs of ancient Rome to the glorified warlords of medieval and absolutist Europe, in nearly every urbanized society throughout human history, there have been people who have tried to constitute themselves as an aristocracy. These people and their allies are the conservatives.
> 
> The tactics of conservatism vary widely by place and time. But the most central feature of conservatism is deference: a psychologically internalized attitude on the part of the common people that the aristocracy are better people than they are. Modern-day liberals often theorize that conservatives use "social issues" as a way to mask economic objectives, but this is almost backward: the true goal of conservatism is to establish an aristocracy, which is a social and psychological condition of inequality. Economic inequality and regressive taxation, while certainly welcomed by the aristocracy, are best understood as a means to their actual goal, which is simply to be aristocrats. More generally, it is crucial to conservatism that the people must literally love the order that dominates them.
Click to expand...



Man you're screwed up..How do you function in the real world? That stupid post is exactly the opposite of what a conservative is. "individual liberty" is what conservatives are fighting for.... You're a nut case


----------



## Bfgrn

JakeStarkey said:


> I was waiting for this nonsense.  Bfgrn and others in the leftist cause do not get to recreate definitions and historical narratives to meet their own desired results, any more than do wack right wing extremists.
> 
> No, kiddo, the commies were not conservatives.
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism certainly wanted the people devoted to the cult of the leader and the cult of the worker and farmer, so political cultism is not limited to just the right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is nothing liberal or socialist about communism. Socialism, where the people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the economy works never happened in Russia, China, Cuba or Cambodia. The Soviet Union officially abandoned socialism in 1921 when Lenin instituted the New Economic Policy allowing for taxation, local trade, some state capitalism... and extreme profiteering.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Oh yes they were Jake. You are disoriented by your parochial indoctrination. You don't know what the definition of conservatism is.


----------



## koshergrl

Jake maintains he represents the majority as a proud Republican.

Seriously.


----------



## Bfgrn

Jroc said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Artevelde said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just the same stupid old slogans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It couldn't be more right on. It is who and what you folks are. You get down on your knees and worship the opulent every single day.
> 
> Q: What is conservatism?
> A: Conservatism is the domination of society by an aristocracy.
> 
> Q: What is wrong with conservatism?
> A: Conservatism is incompatible with democracy, prosperity, and civilization in general. It is a destructive system of inequality and prejudice that is founded on deception and has no place in the modern world.
> 
> These ideas are not new. Indeed they were common sense until recently. Nowadays, though, most of the people who call themselves "conservatives" have little notion of what conservatism even is. They have been deceived by one of the great public relations campaigns of human history. Only by analyzing this deception will it become possible to revive democracy in the United States.
> 
> The Main Arguments of Conservatism
> 
> From the pharaohs of ancient Egypt to the self-regarding thugs of ancient Rome to the glorified warlords of medieval and absolutist Europe, in nearly every urbanized society throughout human history, there have been people who have tried to constitute themselves as an aristocracy. These people and their allies are the conservatives.
> 
> The tactics of conservatism vary widely by place and time. But the most central feature of conservatism is deference: a psychologically internalized attitude on the part of the common people that the aristocracy are better people than they are. Modern-day liberals often theorize that conservatives use "social issues" as a way to mask economic objectives, but this is almost backward: the true goal of conservatism is to establish an aristocracy, which is a social and psychological condition of inequality. Economic inequality and regressive taxation, while certainly welcomed by the aristocracy, are best understood as a means to their actual goal, which is simply to be aristocrats. More generally, it is crucial to conservatism that the people must literally love the order that dominates them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Man you're screwed up..How do you function in the real world? That stupid post is exactly the opposite of what a conservative is. "individual liberty" is what conservatives are fighting for.... You're a nut case
Click to expand...


Sure you are...your idea of 'individual liberty' is social Darwinism...survival of the richest.


----------



## Ravi

Bfgrn said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was waiting for this nonsense.  Bfgrn and others in the leftist cause do not get to recreate definitions and historical narratives to meet their own desired results, any more than do wack right wing extremists.
> 
> No, kiddo, the commies were not conservatives.
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is nothing liberal or socialist about communism. Socialism, where the people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the economy works never happened in Russia, China, Cuba or Cambodia. The Soviet Union officially abandoned socialism in 1921 when Lenin instituted the New Economic Policy allowing for taxation, local trade, some state capitalism... and extreme profiteering.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh yes they were Jake. You are disoriented by your parochial indoctrination. You don't know what the definition of conservatism is.
Click to expand...

I don't think communists are conservatives. Stalinists, probably were.


----------



## Bfgrn

Ravi said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was waiting for this nonsense.  Bfgrn and others in the leftist cause do not get to recreate definitions and historical narratives to meet their own desired results, any more than do wack right wing extremists.
> 
> No, kiddo, the commies were not conservatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh yes they were Jake. You are disoriented by your parochial indoctrination. You don't know what the definition of conservatism is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't think communists are conservatives. Stalinists, probably were.
Click to expand...


Define conservative.

Russia is one of the most conservative countries in the world. Liberal are an endangered species in Russia. More than 300 journalists have been killed in Russia since 1993.


----------



## daveman

Bfgrn said:


> Sure you are...your idea of 'individual liberty' is social Darwinism...survival of the richest.



So, which particular The Man is keeping you down?


----------



## Bfgrn

daveman said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sure you are...your idea of 'individual liberty' is social Darwinism...survival of the richest.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, which particular The Man is keeping you down?
Click to expand...


Thanks for the verification dave.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Get over yourself, Bfgrn.  You don't get to redefine the traditional political and historical narrative of communism.  You are nonsensical as the far right extremists who want to make fascism a left wing philosophy.

Your side of the lefties are as bad as the the far side of the righties when you try, miserably, to pull this off.

For shame.




Bfgrn said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh yes they were Jake. You are disoriented by your parochial indoctrination. You don't know what the definition of conservatism is.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think communists are conservatives. Stalinists, probably were.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Define conservative.
> 
> Russia is one of the most conservative countries in the world. Liberal are an endangered species in Russia. More than 300 journalists have been killed in Russia since 1993.
Click to expand...


----------



## JakeStarkey

You mean classical liberalism, which in today's world is neither the left nor the right.



Bfgrn said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh yes they were Jake. You are disoriented by your parochial indoctrination. You don't know what the definition of conservatism is.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think communists are conservatives. Stalinists, probably were.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Define conservative.
> 
> Russia is one of the most conservative countries in the world. Liberal are an endangered species in Russia. More than 300 journalists have been killed in Russia since 1993.
Click to expand...


----------



## EdwardBaiamonte

Ravi said:


> Doubt that Hitler had the support of the conservative right wing?
> 
> "Hitler found his greatest support in traditionally conservative small towns."




that was when he had a very conservative message in the very very beginning. If Hitler had told the truth and said his plan was to conquer the entire world militarily and kill every jew on earth he would have had no support.

Sorry but that makes your premise absurd


----------



## Ravi

Bfgrn said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh yes they were Jake. You are disoriented by your parochial indoctrination. You don't know what the definition of conservatism is.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think communists are conservatives. Stalinists, probably were.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Define conservative.
> 
> Russia is one of the most conservative countries in the world. Liberal are an endangered species in Russia. More than 300 journalists have been killed in Russia since 1993.
Click to expand...


I have never considered that Russia was a communist country. It may have pretended to be one, but it never was.

For most of recent history it has been an authoritarian rightwing dream world.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Edward has the story backward, as usual.



EdwardBaiamonte said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doubt that Hitler had the support of the conservative right wing?
> 
> "Hitler found his greatest support in traditionally conservative small towns."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that was when he had a very conservative message in the very very beginning. If Hitler had told the truth and said his plan was to conquer the entire world militarily and kill every jew on earth he would have had no support.
> 
> Sorry but that makes your premise absurd
Click to expand...


----------



## Ravi

JakeStarkey said:


> Edward has the story backward, as usual.
> 
> 
> 
> EdwardBaiamonte said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doubt that Hitler had the support of the conservative right wing?
> 
> "Hitler found his greatest support in traditionally conservative small towns."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that was when he had a very conservative message in the very very beginning. If Hitler had told the truth and said his plan was to conquer the entire world militarily and kill every jew on earth he would have had no support.
> 
> Sorry but that makes your premise absurd
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Maybe he never heard of Hitler's little book.


----------



## JakeStarkey

He may read read right to left.

OK, that was unintentional, but I find it funny.


----------



## EdwardBaiamonte

Ravi said:


> I have never considered that Russia was a communist country..



it was the perfect communist country!!! A dictatorship with an fake ideology it sold the people to trick them into surrendering their power to the state.  HIlter stalin Mao Castro Pol pot were perfect too, and not unlike George 3 & 4, and not unlike Napoleaon and Caesar. You use some gibberish to concentrate power in your hands.

Jefferson studied history and realized all the gibberish was the same and so he gave us freedom from all of it.

That liberals like to study the gibberish and take it seriously is merely testimony to  their stupidity.


----------



## daveman

Bfgrn said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sure you are...your idea of 'individual liberty' is social Darwinism...survival of the richest.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, which particular The Man is keeping you down?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thanks for the verification dave.
Click to expand...


Don't wuss out, now.  If you're not rich, it's because someone's jackboot is on your neck.  Whose is it?

I mean, really, your status in life has NOTHING to do with the level of effort you put in it, right?


----------



## JakeStarkey

Edward, stop your gibberish, please.  It gets stale and always is fail.



EdwardBaiamonte said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have never considered that Russia was a communist country..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it was the perfect communist country!!! A dictatorship with an fake ideology it sold the people to trick them into surrendering their power to the state.  HIlter stalin Mao Castro Pol pot were perfect too, and not unlike George 3 & 4, and not unlike Napoleaon and Caesar. You use some gibberish to concentrate power in your hands.
> 
> Jefferson studied history and realized all the gibberish was the same and so he gave us freedom from all of it.
> 
> That liberals like to study the gibberish and take it seriously is merely testimony to  their stupidity.
Click to expand...


----------



## Ravi

EdwardBaiamonte said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have never considered that Russia was a communist country..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it was the perfect communist country!!! A dictatorship with an fake ideology it sold the people to trick them into surrendering their power to the state.  HIlter stalin Mao Castro Pol pot were perfect too, and not unlike George 3 & 4, and not unlike Napoleaon and Caesar. You use some gibberish to concentrate power in your hands.
> 
> Jefferson studied history and realized all the gibberish was the same and so he gave us freedom from all of it.
> 
> That liberals like to study the gibberish and take it seriously is merely testimony to  their stupidity.
Click to expand...

No, it was so far from communism that it became rightwing. Not that I think communism is anything but a pipe dream. Its pretty sad that you can't see the difference between actual communism and Stalinism but not surprising.


----------



## EdwardBaiamonte

Ravi said:


> No, it was so far from communism that it became rightwing.



if it became rightwing then the government became smaller and smaller!!

see why we are positive a liberal will be slow, very very slow??


----------



## Ravi

EdwardBaiamonte said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it was so far from communism that it became rightwing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> if it became rightwing then the government became smaller and smaller!!
> 
> see why we are positive a liberal will be slow, very very slow??
Click to expand...


There has never been a rightwing government that became smaller.

Are you this stupid in real life?


----------



## EdwardBaiamonte

Ravi said:


> you can't see the difference between actual communism and Stalinism but not surprising.



1) neither could Jefferson thats why he gave us freedom from all big liberal central government regardless of the rhetoric they used to take power fro the people


2) neither could the liberals who spied for Stalin!!! What does that tell you idiot about how smart Jefferson was!!! And that was without seeing the 20th Century.

You 've seen it and you're still no smarter than a snake in the dirt.


----------



## EdwardBaiamonte

Ravi said:


> There has never been a rightwing government that became smaller.



then there never has been a right wing government!! Jefferson's entire objective was to keep government small! Now even you know the principle of America.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Edward, stop talking loony, please.


----------



## Ravi

EdwardBaiamonte said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> There has never been a rightwing government that became smaller.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> then there never has been a right wing government!! Jefferson's entire objective was to keep government small! Now even you know the principle of America.
Click to expand...

Thank you for answering my question (that you deleted) in the affirmative.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Yes, he did.


----------



## Bfgrn

JakeStarkey said:


> Get over yourself, Bfgrn.  You don't get to redefine the traditional political and historical narrative of communism.  You are nonsensical as the far right extremists who want to make fascism a left wing philosophy.
> 
> Your side of the lefties are as bad as the the far side of the righties when you try, miserably, to pull this off.
> 
> For shame.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think communists are conservatives. Stalinists, probably were.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Define conservative.
> 
> Russia is one of the most conservative countries in the world. Liberal are an endangered species in Russia. More than 300 journalists have been killed in Russia since 1993.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


You are not only disorientated by your parochial indoctrination, you are stuck in the left/right paradigm.

Let's first define what conservatism is.

Conservatism (Latin: conservare, "to retain") is a political and social philosophy that promotes retaining traditional institutions and supports, at most, minimal and gradual change in society. A person who follows the philosophies of conservatism is referred to as a traditionalist or conservative.

Conservatism: the disposition to preserve or restore what is established and traditional and to limit change.

Conservatism: The inclination, especially in politics, to maintain the existing or traditional order. 

Conservatism is adherence to the tenets, orthodoxy, values and traditions of the society that person is raised and educated in (indoctrination)

NOW Jake, let's consider parochial indoctrination. A child raised in America is taught what tenets, orthodoxy, values and traditions? Are they the SAME tenets, orthodoxy, values and traditions a child raised in Russia?? OR, is it the polar opposite???

While not all conservatives are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.
Robert Altmeyer - The Authoritarians


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Ravi said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think communists are conservatives. Stalinists, probably were.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Define conservative.
> 
> Russia is one of the most conservative countries in the world. Liberal are an endangered species in Russia. More than 300 journalists have been killed in Russia since 1993.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have never considered that Russia was a communist country. It may have pretended to be one, but it never was.
> 
> For most of recent history it has been an authoritarian rightwing dream world.
Click to expand...


LOL

Libs say the darndest things!


----------



## JakeStarkey

I will step asideand let Frank and Bfrgn bang each other over their pointy heads with their nonsense comments.


----------



## Bfgrn

JakeStarkey said:


> I will step asideand let Frank and Bfrgn bang each other over their pointy heads with their nonsense comments.



Hey Jake, maybe you should get off your self righteous high horse and stop being such an ass.

What I presented is irrefutable and logically sound. Why don't you try to disprove it? I will tell you why...you CAN'T.

Oh that's right...Russian conservatives espouse all the virtues of Americana; they warmly embrace the US Constitution, can recite the Declaration of Independence by heart. They love capitalism and the 'invisible hand'

Conservatism is based on latitude, longitude and date of birth.


----------



## Jroc

Bfgrn said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> I will step asideand let Frank and Bfrgn bang each other over their pointy heads with their nonsense comments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hey Jake, maybe you should get off your self righteous high horse and stop being such an ass.
> 
> What I presented is irrefutable and logically sound. Why don't you try to disprove it? I will tell you why...you CAN'T.
> 
> Oh that's right...Russian conservatives espouse all the virtues of Americana; they warmly embrace the US Constitution, can recite the Declaration of Independence by heart. They love capitalism and the 'invisible hand'
> 
> Conservatism is based on latitude, longitude and date of birth.
Click to expand...


Umm...ok too bad the USSR never embraced it and Russia is a dysfunctional, fraudulent, dictatorship. Putin runs the place there is not true Capitalism there and it&#8217;s fading here because of too much big government control over the free market


----------



## thanatos144

Ever notice when progressive ideology is shown for the failure it is and how it normally causes facism and death they just deny that it is true socialism or communism like we are all to Fucking stupid to see them punking out.


----------



## Jroc

Bfgrn said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> I will step asideand let Frank and Bfrgn bang each other over their pointy heads with their nonsense comments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hey Jake, maybe you should get off your self righteous high horse and stop being such an ass.
> 
> What I presented is irrefutable and logically sound. Why don't you try to disprove it? I will tell you why...you CAN'T.
> 
> Oh that's right...Russian conservatives espouse all the virtues of Americana; they warmly embrace the US Constitution, can recite the Declaration of Independence by heart. They love capitalism and the 'invisible hand'
> 
> Conservatism is based on latitude, longitude and date of birth.
Click to expand...


*The Wrath of Putin*







Mikhail Khodorkovsky was the richest man in Russia when he dared confront then president Vladimir Putin, criticizing state corruption at a meeting with Putin in February 2003. Arrested that fall, then convicted in two Kafka-esque trials, Khodorkovsky has been imprisoned ever since, the once powerful oligarch now an invisible hero for the growing opposition to Putins tyranny. From Moscow, as elections approach and demonstrators spill into the streets, Masha Gessen chronicles the clash of two titans, each of whom has badly underestimated the other.

Vladimir Putin and Mikhail Khodorkovsky: One Man


----------



## Jroc

> *Good for Mitt Romney, telling the truth about Putin's Russian tyranny*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On foreign policy he has also just made an important intervention. His speech in Poland, hailing the country as a key bastion of democracy, was notable for the way in which he also told the truth about Russia under Vladimir Putin. The show trials, oppression of the opposition and sinister security apparat demonstrate that Russia is back in a very dark place. Romney bracketed the country's government with other tyrannies:
> 
> "Unfortunately, there are parts of the world today where the desire to be free is met with brutal oppression. Just to the east of here, the people of Belarus suffer under the oppressive weight of dictatorship. The Arab world is undergoing a historic upheaval, one that holds promise, but also risk and uncertainty. A ruthless dictator in Syria has killed thousands of his own people. In Latin America, Hugo Chávez leads a movement characterised by authoritarianism and repression. Nations in Africa are fighting to resist the threat of violent radical jihadism. And in Russia, once-promising advances toward a free and open society have faltered."




Good for Mitt Romney, telling the truth about Putin's Russian tyranny &#8211; Telegraph Blogs


----------



## Jroc

See the difference?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsFR8DbSRQE]Obama open mic slip: &#39;After my election I have more flexibility&#39; - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## westwall

Ravi said:


> Doubt that Hitler had the support of the conservative right wing?
> 
> 1. "Hitler found his greatest support in *traditionally conservative small towns. He campaigned with attacks on Marxism, making it clear that by Marxism he meant the Social Democrats. Hitler appealed to morality, attacking free love and what he inferred was the immorality of Berlin and some other major cities. He promised to stamp out big city corruption. He called for a spiritual revolution, for a "positive Christianity" and a spirit of national pride. Hitler repeatedly called for national renewal. *He and his National Socialists benefited from the recent upheaval in the Soviet Union and the rise in fear and disgust for Bolshevism. His party's posters read:
> 
> *    If you want your country to go Bolshevik, vote Communist. If you want to remain free Germans, vote for the National Socialists.*"
> 
> Hitler and Germany: 1928 to 1935
> 
> 2. Neville Chamberlain, appeaser in chief, after the Sudetenland was handed over to Hitler, "But the Conservative leader has always expressed his desire to find a *peaceful solution to the Fuehrer's wish to create a new - and enlarged - German homeland in Europe.*"
> 
> BBC ON THIS DAY | 30 | 1938: 'Peace for our time' - Chamberlain
> 
> 3. The French right admired Hitler, "When Socialists and Communists formed a Popular front Government in 1936 there were many French conservatives who boldly announced that *Hitler was preferrable to the leadership of the French socialist Leon Blum*."
> 
> Road to War
> 
> 4. "right-to-work" anti-labor conservatives were also pro-Hitler. "There were a mulitude of other racists jumping on the Fascist bandwagon. Joseph P. Kamp printed over two million copies of his anti-labor pamphlet, "Join the C.I.O. and Help Build a Soviet America" which he advertised with the Ku Klux Klan. *Millionaire John Kirby in Houston began publishing the anti-black, anti-labor Christian American in support of "right to work" legislation"*
> 
> Support for Hitler (or Fascism) in the United States | Radical Reference
> 
> 5. Foreshadowing Republican views on the Clinton being concerned about bin laden as a distraction from Lewinsky, "The former president, Herbert Hoover, had become the Republican Party's chief spokesman in foreign affairs, and when Germany seized Moravia and Bohemia, *Hoover declared that no clear and present danger existed* and that Britain, France and others in Europe would be able to defend themselves should there be war. Hoover spoke of Roosevelt's "dangerous adventures" and argued that Roosevelt was trying to divert people's attention from his failure to end the depression"
> 
> The United States, War Preparation, China, and Jewish Immigration: 1938-39







The problem with the thesis however is that Nazi's, Communists, and other socialists of that ilk are fundamentally the same.  They are all collectivist governments where the State takes precedence over the individual.  Show me how living under Hitlers Germany was any different from living under Stalins Russia....well Stalin murdered more of his population than Hitler did, that's one difference.


----------



## Neotrotsky

Hayek 
Fascism defined it the best:
_"It is simply collectivism freed from all traces of an individualist tradition which might hamper its realization"_​


Peter Drucker had a nice one:
_"the complete collapse of the belief in the attainability of freedom and equality through Marxism has forced Russia 
to travel the same road toward a totalitarian society of un-freedom and inequality which Germany has been following. 
Not that communism and fascism are essentially the same. Fascism is the stage reached after communism has proved an illusion, 
and it has proved as much an illusion in Russia as in pre-Hitler Germany."_​


----------



## JakeStarkey

Hayek and Drucker?  Oh, my.


----------



## koshergrl

What remains the same is the people who support the tyrants...they are always progressive types who can be duped into lowering the importance of human rights in order to serve the alleged "greater good".


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Ravi said:


> EdwardBaiamonte said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it was so far from communism that it became rightwing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> if it became rightwing then the government became smaller and smaller!!
> 
> see why we are positive a liberal will be slow, very very slow??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There has never been a rightwing government that became smaller.
> 
> Are you this stupid in real life?
Click to expand...


You must be ignorant of the Coolidge and Harding Administrations


----------



## regent

CrusaderFrank said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EdwardBaiamonte said:
> 
> 
> 
> if it became rightwing then the government became smaller and smaller!!
> 
> see why we are positive a liberal will be slow, very very slow??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There has never been a rightwing government that became smaller.
> 
> Are you this stupid in real life?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You must be ignorant of the Coolidge and Harding Administrations
Click to expand...


Coolidge and Harding? Surely, Reagan reduced the size of government? After all his many quotes on the size of government I suspect he at least halved the size. Anyone know?


----------



## Ravi

regent said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> There has never been a rightwing government that became smaller.
> 
> Are you this stupid in real life?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You must be ignorant of the Coolidge and Harding Administrations
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Coolidge and Harding? Surely, Reagan reduced the size of government? After all his many quotes on the size of government I suspect he at least halved the size. Anyone know?
Click to expand...


I hope that isn't a serious question. The answer is no, he more than doubled it.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

thanatos144 said:


> Ever notice when progressive ideology is shown for the failure it is and how it normally causes facism and death they just deny that it is true socialism or communism like we are all to Fucking stupid to see them punking out.



Yes like how Reagan is in charge of Obama's economy. Progressives are pathological lairs


----------



## Jroc

regent said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> There has never been a rightwing government that became smaller.
> 
> Are you this stupid in real life?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You must be ignorant of the Coolidge and Harding Administrations
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Coolidge and Harding? Surely, Reagan reduced the size of government? After all his many quotes on the size of government I suspect he at least halved the size. Anyone know?
Click to expand...


Regan tried to cut much more but he was screwed by the Demcratic congress, and no he didn't cut defense nor should he have. Bush and Clinton benefited from the fall of the Soviet Union   



> President Reagan is the only president to have cut the budget of the Department of Housing and Urban Development in one of his terms (a total of 40.1 percent during his second term).
> President Reagan is the only president to have cut the budget of the Department of Transportation. He cut it by 10.5 percent during his first term and by 7.5 percent during his second term.
> During his first term in office, President Reagan cut the real budget of the Department of Education by 18.6 percent, while President Nixon increased it (that is the education part of what was then the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare) by 19.1 percent. That budget increased by 22.2 percent under Bush 41 and by 38.5 percent under Carter. Our current president has increased it by a whooping 67.6 percent.
> Reagan managed to cut the budget of the Department of Commerce by 29 percent in constant dollars during his first term and by 3 percent during his second one. President Clinton by contrast increased the departments budget by 24 percent in his first term and then by 96.7 percent in his second term.
> President Reagan cut the real budget of the Department of Agriculture by 24 percent during his second term in office.
> President Reagan never cut the budgets of the departments of Defense, Health and Human Services, Justice, or State.



President Reagan, Champion Budget-Cutter - Economics - AEI


----------



## EdwardBaiamonte

Ravi said:


> EdwardBaiamonte said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it was so far from communism that it became rightwing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> if it became rightwing then the government became smaller and smaller!!
> 
> see why we are positive a liberal will be slow, very very slow??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There has never been a rightwing government that became smaller.
Click to expand...


The issue is whether government should be smaller as our Founders believed, not whether it normally follows the path to liberal tyranny.

Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms [of government] those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.- Jefferson


----------



## Bfgrn

Jroc said:


> *Good for Mitt Romney, telling the truth about Putin's Russian tyranny*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On foreign policy he has also just made an important intervention. His speech in Poland, hailing the country as a key bastion of democracy, was notable for the way in which he also told the truth about Russia under Vladimir Putin. The show trials, oppression of the opposition and sinister security apparat demonstrate that Russia is back in a very dark place. Romney bracketed the country's government with other tyrannies:
> 
> "Unfortunately, there are parts of the world today where the desire to be free is met with brutal oppression. Just to the east of here, the people of Belarus suffer under the oppressive weight of dictatorship. The Arab world is undergoing a historic upheaval, one that holds promise, but also risk and uncertainty. A ruthless dictator in Syria has killed thousands of his own people. In Latin America, Hugo Chávez leads a movement characterised by authoritarianism and repression. Nations in Africa are fighting to resist the threat of violent radical jihadism. *And in Russia, once-promising advances toward a free and open society have faltered*."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good for Mitt Romney, telling the truth about Putin's Russian tyranny  Telegraph Blogs
Click to expand...


Yes, that is right. In Russia, once-promising advances toward a free and open society *have* faltered. Those once promising advance were initiated by Mikhail Gorbachev, and here is WHY they have faltered.

February 27, 1989

Soviet Conservatives Try to Turn Back the Clock on Gorbachev's Policies

Russian conservatives, uneasy with the liberalization of Soviet society under Mikhail S. Gorbachev, have seized on the country's experiment in more democratic elections as a chance to fight for a return to more authoritarian ways.

While many candidates and voters say they view the elections to the new Congress of Deputies as a way to further the candor and freedoms allowed by the Soviet leader, conservatives in this city and around the country were boasting last week that they had already succeeded in blocking the nomination of several prominent people regarded as liberals.

''You see the work of our hand,'' said Pavel G. Ivanov, a retired truck driver, gloating at the defeat of Vitaly A. Korotich, a magazine editor despised by conservatives as the exemplar of the new permissiveness. ''And you will see it more.'' 

A Disparate Alliance

The conservatives are a disparate alliance, including xenophobic fringe groups, like Pamyat, as well as large numbers of less extreme nationalists who yearn for what they see as the simple values of Old Russia and the Orthodox church.

It is impossible to accurately gauge the extent of their influence or their support among nominees, but it is clear that conservatives are seizing upon the March 26 election, which Mr. Gorbachev has described as the key step toward greater democracy, to promote their political platform.

At election rallies where speakers call out against the influence of ''Zionist forces,'' and in campaign leaflets decrying ''liberal yellow journalists'' 

Nikita F. Zherbin, head of the Leningrad chapter of Pamyat, delighted in the fact that Mr. Korotich had been forced off the ballot in Moscow's Sverdlovsk region, and described this as the first successful step in the conservative campaign to use the elections as a vehicle for its political ideas. 

'I Am a Stalinist'

''We brought our case to the people, and the outcome speaks for us,'' said Mr. Zherbin, whose group regards the liberalization of Soviet society as a conspiracy by Jews, Masons and Westernizers.

Prominent among the speeches and the placards at conservative political gatherings is support for Pamyat (Russian for ''memory''), which has been repeatedly criticized in the Soviet press for anti-Semitism.

Kira A. Korneyenkova was at the rally last Sunday outside the Ostankino Television Center, and she joined several hundred other people in enthusiastic cheers as speaker after speaker called for a fight against ''liberal, Zionist forces'' that seek to control Soviet society.

''I am a Stalinist,'' the 53-year-old schoolteacher said proudly, ''and I think our so-called glasnost has divided our nation. It is our duty to fight against such elements.''


----------



## westwall

Only a leftist imbecile would accuse conservatives of being communists!  Here's a primer for you idiot, conservatives support limited government with maximum freedoms for the citizen.

Leftist collectivists (like you) believe the State should have the power and the individual should be subjugated to the power of that State.

Got it?


----------



## Bfgrn

westwall said:


> Only a leftist imbecile would accuse conservatives of being communists!  Here's a primer for you idiot, conservatives support limited government with maximum freedoms for the citizen.
> 
> Leftist collectivists (like you) believe the State should have the power and the individual should be subjugated to the power of that State.
> 
> Got it?



Oh, thats right! Conservatives in Russia support limited government with maximum freedoms for the citizen. Conservatives in Russia espouse all the virtues of Americana; they warmly embrace the US Constitution, can recite the Declaration of Independence by heart. They love capitalism and the 'invisible hand'


----------



## Neotrotsky

westwall said:


> Only a leftist imbecile would accuse conservatives of being communists!  Here's a primer for you idiot, conservatives support limited government with maximum freedoms for the citizen.
> 
> Leftist collectivists (like you) believe the State should have the power and the individual should be subjugated to the power of that State.
> 
> Got it?



They also have a poor understanding of the language

They somehow think the  "conservative" equates to all conservatives
and the word liberal equates all liberals.

Either a purposely deceptive interpretation or
one of true ignorance 

I suspect it is the last 


No doubt rap and Beethoven's Symphony #9 can both be called
music- that is where it ends


But, in keeping with the logic of the left
Pizza must be liberal since it says:

" Apply cheese liberally"


Even the Soviet Communists called other Soviet Communists who did not
agree with them moving too slowing in the direction of communism , "Fascists"


By their measure

JFK has more in common with Reagan than Papa Obama
Therefore JFK was a conservative, just like today


----------



## daveman

Bfgrn said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only a leftist imbecile would accuse conservatives of being communists!  Here's a primer for you idiot, conservatives support limited government with maximum freedoms for the citizen.
> 
> Leftist collectivists (like you) believe the State should have the power and the individual should be subjugated to the power of that State.
> 
> Got it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, thats right! Conservatives in Russia support limited government with maximum freedoms for the citizen. Conservatives in Russia espouse all the virtues of Americana; they warmly embrace the US Constitution, can recite the Declaration of Independence by heart. They love capitalism and the 'invisible hand'
Click to expand...

There's some of that binary, black-and-white thinking the left accuses the right of practicing -- but it's almost exclusive to the left.  

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, 
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

-- Hamlet by William Shakespeare: Act 1. Scene V


----------



## Bfgrn

daveman said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only a leftist imbecile would accuse conservatives of being communists!  Here's a primer for you idiot, conservatives support limited government with maximum freedoms for the citizen.
> 
> Leftist collectivists (like you) believe the State should have the power and the individual should be subjugated to the power of that State.
> 
> Got it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, thats right! Conservatives in Russia support limited government with maximum freedoms for the citizen. Conservatives in Russia espouse all the virtues of Americana; they warmly embrace the US Constitution, can recite the Declaration of Independence by heart. They love capitalism and the 'invisible hand'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There's some of that binary, black-and-white thinking the left accuses the right of practicing -- but it's almost exclusive to the left.
> 
> There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
> Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
> 
> -- Hamlet by William Shakespeare: Act 1. Scene V
Click to expand...


WOW, you should take Shakespeare's wisdom. But, conservatives in America believe they are the center of the universe, and any other philosophy must be dismissed. EVEN when it is the conservatism of other conservatives on this planet.

October 16, 2001

What's truly ironic about this whole war is that the conservatives in our country do not seem to realize that the Taliban is simply an extreme version of the same primal impulse that drives them.

In every population there is a distribution of conservative to progressive, aggressive to peaceful, etc. 

Of course, it's funny how the same personality type seems to latch on to radically different ideas depending on the society. "Conservatives" here profess a belief in capitalism and extol the virtues of the good old days of the 1950's, a half century ago; "conservatives" in Russia pine for the bygone days of the stability of the old Soviet empire. I believe that the propensity in conservatives is not towards ideologies per se, but rather towards status quo versus change. I'd bet you'd find much more psychologically (and perhaps genetically?) similar between conservatives here and in Russia, despite the fact that they profess supposedly opposite nostalgias.

But of course a typical conservative doesn't look at the conservatism of their enemy and learn to moderate themselves; they see the enemy as an "other", as confirmation of their own rigid views, despite the evident similarity between the two stances. 
_M. Hadeishi_


----------



## daveman

Bfgrn said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, thats right! Conservatives in Russia support limited government with maximum freedoms for the citizen. Conservatives in Russia espouse all the virtues of Americana; they warmly embrace the US Constitution, can recite the Declaration of Independence by heart. They love capitalism and the 'invisible hand'
> 
> 
> 
> There's some of that binary, black-and-white thinking the left accuses the right of practicing -- but it's almost exclusive to the left.
> 
> There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
> Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
> 
> -- Hamlet by William Shakespeare: Act 1. Scene V
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> WOW, you should take Shakespeare's wisdom. But, conservatives in America believe they are the center of the universe, and any other philosophy must be dismissed. EVEN when it is the conservatism of other conservatives on this planet.
> 
> October 16, 2001
> 
> What's truly ironic about this whole war is that the conservatives in our country do not seem to realize that the Taliban is simply an extreme version of the same primal impulse that drives them.
> 
> In every population there is a distribution of conservative to progressive, aggressive to peaceful, etc.
> 
> Of course, it's funny how the same personality type seems to latch on to radically different ideas depending on the society. "Conservatives" here profess a belief in capitalism and extol the virtues of the good old days of the 1950's, a half century ago; "conservatives" in Russia pine for the bygone days of the stability of the old Soviet empire. I believe that the propensity in conservatives is not towards ideologies per se, but rather towards status quo versus change. I'd bet you'd find much more psychologically (and perhaps genetically?) similar between conservatives here and in Russia, despite the fact that they profess supposedly opposite nostalgias.
Click to expand...

When discussing American politics, only American conservatism is applicable.


Bfgrn said:


> But of course a typical conservative doesn't look at the conservatism of their enemy and learn to moderate themselves; they see the enemy as an "other", as confirmation of their own rigid views, despite the evident similarity between the two stances.
> _M. Hadeishi_


The American left calls for the same policies that are sinking Europe, but insists what's happening to the European economies can't happen here.

Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to vote Democrat.


----------



## Bfgrn

daveman said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> There's some of that binary, black-and-white thinking the left accuses the right of practicing -- but it's almost exclusive to the left.
> 
> There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
> Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
> 
> -- Hamlet by William Shakespeare: Act 1. Scene V
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WOW, you should take Shakespeare's wisdom. But, conservatives in America believe they are the center of the universe, and any other philosophy must be dismissed. EVEN when it is the conservatism of other conservatives on this planet.
> 
> October 16, 2001
> 
> What's truly ironic about this whole war is that the conservatives in our country do not seem to realize that the Taliban is simply an extreme version of the same primal impulse that drives them.
> 
> In every population there is a distribution of conservative to progressive, aggressive to peaceful, etc.
> 
> Of course, it's funny how the same personality type seems to latch on to radically different ideas depending on the society. "Conservatives" here profess a belief in capitalism and extol the virtues of the good old days of the 1950's, a half century ago; "conservatives" in Russia pine for the bygone days of the stability of the old Soviet empire. I believe that the propensity in conservatives is not towards ideologies per se, but rather towards status quo versus change. I'd bet you'd find much more psychologically (and perhaps genetically?) similar between conservatives here and in Russia, despite the fact that they profess supposedly opposite nostalgias.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When discussing American politics, only American conservatism is applicable.
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> But of course a typical conservative doesn't look at the conservatism of their enemy and learn to moderate themselves; they see the enemy as an "other", as confirmation of their own rigid views, despite the evident similarity between the two stances.
> _M. Hadeishi_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The American left calls for the same policies that are sinking Europe, but insists what's happening to the European economies can't happen here.
> 
> Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to vote Democrat.
Click to expand...


Hitler was an American?

Oh yea, the Sarah Palin syndrome... Africa (Europe) is a country...

"Eighty percent of Republicans are just Democrats that don't know what's going on"
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.


----------



## Jroc

Bfgrn said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only a leftist imbecile would accuse conservatives of being communists!  Here's a primer for you idiot, conservatives support limited government with maximum freedoms for the citizen.
> 
> Leftist collectivists (like you) believe the State should have the power and the individual should be subjugated to the power of that State.
> 
> Got it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, thats right! Conservatives in Russia support limited government with maximum freedoms for the citizen. Conservatives in Russia espouse all the virtues of Americana; they warmly embrace the US Constitution, can recite the Declaration of Independence by heart. They love capitalism and the 'invisible hand'
Click to expand...


You're delusional Conservatives in Russia long for the days of the Soviet Union. Conservatives in America long for the days of limited Constitutional government. The two don't equate. I hate keeping this stupid ass thread going. It should be in the conspriacy room with the rest of the nut job threads


----------



## Ravi

Jroc said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only a leftist imbecile would accuse conservatives of being communists!  Here's a primer for you idiot, conservatives support limited government with maximum freedoms for the citizen.
> 
> Leftist collectivists (like you) believe the State should have the power and the individual should be subjugated to the power of that State.
> 
> Got it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, thats right! Conservatives in Russia support limited government with maximum freedoms for the citizen. Conservatives in Russia espouse all the virtues of Americana; they warmly embrace the US Constitution, can recite the Declaration of Independence by heart. They love capitalism and the 'invisible hand'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're delusional Conservatives in Russia long for the days of the Soviet Union. Conservatives in America long for the days of limited Constitutional government. The two don't equate. I hate keeping this stupid ass thread going. It should be in the conspriacy room with the rest of the nut job threads
Click to expand...

What nonsense. Conservatives in America long for the days when women were "in their place", the government decided who gives birth and when, and the government decided whom may marry whom.

They wouldn't know limited constitutional government if it bit them in the ass.


----------



## Bfgrn

Jroc said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only a leftist imbecile would accuse conservatives of being communists!  Here's a primer for you idiot, conservatives support limited government with maximum freedoms for the citizen.
> 
> Leftist collectivists (like you) believe the State should have the power and the individual should be subjugated to the power of that State.
> 
> Got it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, thats right! Conservatives in Russia support limited government with maximum freedoms for the citizen. Conservatives in Russia espouse all the virtues of Americana; they warmly embrace the US Constitution, can recite the Declaration of Independence by heart. They love capitalism and the 'invisible hand'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're delusional Conservatives in Russia long for the days of the Soviet Union. Conservatives in America long for the days of limited Constitutional government. The two don't equate. I hate keeping this stupid ass thread going. It should be in the conspriacy room with the rest of the nut job threads
Click to expand...


The last 30 years has been the conservative era. How much did Republicans limit government? Oh, that right, they GREW government. But they didn't want to PAY for it.

Where did our debt come from? When did massive debt become part of the American economy?

Reagan switched the federal government from what he critically called, a tax and spend policy, to a borrow and spend policy, where the government continued its heavy spending, but used borrowed money instead of tax revenue to pay the bills. The results were catastrophic. Although it had taken the United States more than 200 years to accumulate the first $1 trillion of national debt, it took only five years under Reagan to add the second one trillion dollars to the debt. By the end of the 12 years of the Reagan-Bush administrations, the national debt had quadrupled to $4 trillion!

daveman accuses me of wanting to implement European policies in America. The TRUTH is Russia is the model conservatives want to turn America into.

Conservative Russia

People simply do not realize that Russia is a deeply conservative country.

Fiscal policy is buttressed on a low, flat rate of income tax (13%), and there is virtually no social safety net, with spending on unemployment security, medical provision, disability aid, infrastructure, the environment, and urban regeneration far lower, in both absolute terms and as a percentage of GDP, than its G8 contemporaries.

Similarly, military spending is high in comparison  and growing  medical care is available free in theory, but requires private insurance or additional cash payment in practice, and businesses are in reality pretty un-regulated.

If that doesnt sound to you like a set of policies Newt Gingrich or William F Buckley would support, then you dont know your dyed in the wool conservatives from your woolly jumper wearing liberals.

After 80 years of Marxist indoctrination, young ladies in Russia often reject feminism, men ooze with unrepentant machismo, and the population appears to generally support a penal code that could have been based on Dostoyevskys work.

Many cities and regions across Russia have passed "anti-gay" laws that ban gay parades and gay propaganda. St.Petersburg's recently proposed legislation

"Under the proposed legislation, promoting homosexuality will be punishable by fines ranging from 5,000 rubles ($168) for individuals to 500,000 rubles ($16,800) for legal entities. This is almost 10 times more than in the first version of the law."

Mothers petition St. Petersburg to drop anti-gay legislation &mdash; RT

Russia and Belarus are the only countries in Europe to still use the death penalty (ban expired 2011). Russia forces sex offenders to have chemical castration.

"From now on people found guilty of sex crimes against children under the age of 14 will face chemical castration, while repeat offenders face a life sentence."

Russia introduces chemical castration for pedophiles &mdash; RT

A few months ago, Russia passed strict new anti-abortion laws.

"President Dmitri A. Medvedev has signed into law the first steps intended to restrict abortion since the collapse of communism. The new law made mandatory a waiting period of two to seven days before an abortion can be performed, to allow the woman to "reconsider her decision"

Russia Restricts Abortions As Population Dips


----------



## thanatos144

Isn't it humorous that Progressives keep trying to paint their failures as rightwing?


----------



## daveman

Bfgrn said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> WOW, you should take Shakespeare's wisdom. But, conservatives in America believe they are the center of the universe, and any other philosophy must be dismissed. EVEN when it is the conservatism of other conservatives on this planet.
> 
> October 16, 2001
> 
> What's truly ironic about this whole war is that the conservatives in our country do not seem to realize that the Taliban is simply an extreme version of the same primal impulse that drives them.
> 
> In every population there is a distribution of conservative to progressive, aggressive to peaceful, etc.
> 
> Of course, it's funny how the same personality type seems to latch on to radically different ideas depending on the society. "Conservatives" here profess a belief in capitalism and extol the virtues of the good old days of the 1950's, a half century ago; "conservatives" in Russia pine for the bygone days of the stability of the old Soviet empire. I believe that the propensity in conservatives is not towards ideologies per se, but rather towards status quo versus change. I'd bet you'd find much more psychologically (and perhaps genetically?) similar between conservatives here and in Russia, despite the fact that they profess supposedly opposite nostalgias.
> 
> 
> 
> When discussing American politics, only American conservatism is applicable.
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> But of course a typical conservative doesn't look at the conservatism of their enemy and learn to moderate themselves; they see the enemy as an "other", as confirmation of their own rigid views, despite the evident similarity between the two stances.
> _M. Hadeishi_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The American left calls for the same policies that are sinking Europe, but insists what's happening to the European economies can't happen here.
> 
> Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to vote Democrat.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hitler was an American?
Click to expand...

Stop drinking the bong water.

You want America to follow European nations' economic policies.  You ignore the reality that shows such policies are unsustainable and are failing.

They're running out of Other People's Money.  You simply aren't capable of understanding that.


Bfgrn said:


> Oh yea, the Sarah Palin syndrome... Africa (Europe) is a country...
> 
> "Eighty percent of Republicans are just Democrats that don't know what's going on"
> Robert F. Kennedy Jr.


I'll bet RFK wouldn't stupidly insist that Communism is a conservative philosophy.  

You know, like you do.  Moron.


----------



## daveman

thanatos144 said:


> Isn't it humorous that Progressives keep trying to paint their failures as rightwing?


It's like Obama's campaign:  There are no successes to trumpet, so they have to blame their failures on others.


----------



## Peach

Bfgrn said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only a leftist imbecile would accuse conservatives of being communists!  Here's a primer for you idiot, conservatives support limited government with maximum freedoms for the citizen.
> 
> Leftist collectivists (like you) believe the State should have the power and the individual should be subjugated to the power of that State.
> 
> Got it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, thats right! Conservatives in Russia support limited government with maximum freedoms for the citizen. Conservatives in Russia espouse all the virtues of Americana; they warmly embrace the US Constitution, can recite the Declaration of Independence by heart. They love capitalism and the 'invisible hand'
Click to expand...


Totalitarians cannot be neatly stacked as "left" or "right". But those that were D students in high school history like to play 'PRETEND'.


----------



## Bfgrn

Peach said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only a leftist imbecile would accuse conservatives of being communists!  Here's a primer for you idiot, conservatives support limited government with maximum freedoms for the citizen.
> 
> Leftist collectivists (like you) believe the State should have the power and the individual should be subjugated to the power of that State.
> 
> Got it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, thats right! Conservatives in Russia support limited government with maximum freedoms for the citizen. Conservatives in Russia espouse all the virtues of Americana; they warmly embrace the US Constitution, can recite the Declaration of Independence by heart. They love capitalism and the 'invisible hand'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Totalitarians cannot be neatly stacked as "left" or "right". But those that were D students in high school history like to play 'PRETEND'.
Click to expand...


Reading without reflecting is like eating without digesting.
Edmund Burke

The D student is unable to complete even the most basic functions like reading. When their failure is explained to them, they PRETEND they knew all along.

While not all *conservatives* are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political *conservatives*.
Robert Altmeyer - The Authoritarians

Conservatism is based on latitude, longitude and date of birth.


----------



## westwall

Bfgrn said:


> Peach said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, thats right! Conservatives in Russia support limited government with maximum freedoms for the citizen. Conservatives in Russia espouse all the virtues of Americana; they warmly embrace the US Constitution, can recite the Declaration of Independence by heart. They love capitalism and the 'invisible hand'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Totalitarians cannot be neatly stacked as "left" or "right". But those that were D students in high school history like to play 'PRETEND'.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Reading without reflecting is like eating without digesting.
> Edmund Burke
> 
> The D student is unable to complete even the most basic functions like reading. When their failure is explained to them, they PRETEND they knew all along.
> 
> While not all *conservatives* are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political *conservatives*.
> Robert Altmeyer - The Authoritarians
> 
> Conservatism is based on latitude, longitude and date of birth.
Click to expand...






All highly authoritarian figures are conservative?  Really?  Tell us then, what was conservative about Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot and Mugabe.


----------



## Bfgrn

westwall said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Peach said:
> 
> 
> 
> Totalitarians cannot be neatly stacked as "left" or "right". But those that were D students in high school history like to play 'PRETEND'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Reading without reflecting is like eating without digesting.
> Edmund Burke
> 
> The D student is unable to complete even the most basic functions like reading. When their failure is explained to them, they PRETEND they knew all along.
> 
> While not all *conservatives* are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political *conservatives*.
> Robert Altmeyer - The Authoritarians
> 
> Conservatism is based on latitude, longitude and date of birth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All highly authoritarian figures are conservative?  Really?  Tell us then, what was conservative about Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot and Mugabe.
Click to expand...


They all professed the same survival of the fittest, social Darwinism you folks spew every day. They all considered some group of people less than human, just like you folks profess every day.

There is NOTHING liberal about any of those depots.

What Mao Zedong said about liberalism 






"Liberalism is extremely harmful in a revolutionary collective. It is a corrosive which eats away unity, undermines cohesion, causes apathy and creates dissension.

It robs the revolutionary ranks of compact organization and strict discipline, prevents policies from being carried through and alienates the Party organizations from the masses which the Party leads."

Combat Liberalism


----------



## thanatos144

Bfgrn said:


> Peach said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, thats right! Conservatives in Russia support limited government with maximum freedoms for the citizen. Conservatives in Russia espouse all the virtues of Americana; they warmly embrace the US Constitution, can recite the Declaration of Independence by heart. They love capitalism and the 'invisible hand'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Totalitarians cannot be neatly stacked as "left" or "right". But those that were D students in high school history like to play 'PRETEND'.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Reading without reflecting is like eating without digesting.
> Edmund Burke
> 
> The D student is unable to complete even the most basic functions like reading. When their failure is explained to them, they PRETEND they knew all along.
> 
> While not all *conservatives* are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political *conservatives*.
> Robert Altmeyer - The Authoritarians
> 
> Conservatism is based on latitude, longitude and date of birth.
Click to expand...

And yet the largest Totalitarian governments were all socialist...


----------



## EdwardBaiamonte

Bfgrn said:


> What Mao Zedong said about liberalism



a liberal will actually be so stupid as to not know that liberalism has many meanings. Where does such stupidity come from??


----------



## EdwardBaiamonte

Bfgrn said:


> The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.
> John Kenneth Galbraith



John Kenneth Galbraith, an intellectual icon of the Old Left and New Left, said of the Soviets overtaking of Poland after World War II: Russia should be permitted to absorb Poland, the Balkans, and the whole of Eastern Europe in order to spread the benefits of Communism (Emphasis added).


For example, who can forget his infamous 1984 quote that the communist system in the former Soviet Union was superior to capitalism because, according to Galbraith, the communists somehow made better and more efficient use of its "manpower" than did the West? Indeed, to the very end, Galbraith was a socialist impersonating an economist


----------



## Peach

Bfgrn said:


> Peach said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, thats right! Conservatives in Russia support limited government with maximum freedoms for the citizen. Conservatives in Russia espouse all the virtues of Americana; they warmly embrace the US Constitution, can recite the Declaration of Independence by heart. They love capitalism and the 'invisible hand'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Totalitarians cannot be neatly stacked as "left" or "right". But those that were D students in high school history like to play 'PRETEND'.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Reading without reflecting is like eating without digesting.
> Edmund Burke
> 
> The D student is unable to complete even the most basic functions like reading. When their failure is explained to them, they PRETEND they knew all along.
> 
> While not all *conservatives* are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political *conservatives*.
> Robert Altmeyer - The Authoritarians
> 
> Conservatism is based on latitude, longitude and date of birth.
Click to expand...


No, a stage is reached wherein "right" and "left" no longer apply, totalitarians seek not conversion to ideas, rather the elimination OF thought(.) Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mussolini are examples.


----------



## EdwardBaiamonte

Peach said:


> No, a stage is reached wherein "right" and "left" no longer apply, totalitarians seek not conversion to ideas, rather the elimination OF thought(.) Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mussolini are examples.




too stupid!!! the Jeffersonian right seeks elimination of government so there is evolutionary thinking.

The history of human kind is the struggle between liberal government and freedom. Guess which side our Founders were on??


----------



## Bfgrn

thanatos144 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Peach said:
> 
> 
> 
> Totalitarians cannot be neatly stacked as "left" or "right". But those that were D students in high school history like to play 'PRETEND'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Reading without reflecting is like eating without digesting.
> Edmund Burke
> 
> The D student is unable to complete even the most basic functions like reading. When their failure is explained to them, they PRETEND they knew all along.
> 
> While not all *conservatives* are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political *conservatives*.
> Robert Altmeyer - The Authoritarians
> 
> Conservatism is based on latitude, longitude and date of birth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And yet the largest Totalitarian governments were all socialist...
Click to expand...


The Soviet Union officially abandoned socialism in 1921 when Lenin instituted the New Economic Policy allowing for taxation, local trade, some state capitalism... and extreme profiteering.

Hitler removed the socialists from the party in 1934, the night of the long knives. The anti-capitalist, anti-tradition sentiments often expressed by SA leaders and echoed by the restless masses of storm troopers also caused great concern to big industry leaders who had helped put Hitler in power. Hitler had promised them he would put down the trade union movement and Marxists, which he had done. However, now his own storm troopers with their talk of a 'second revolution' were sounding more and more like Marxists themselves.


----------



## thanatos144

Bfgrn said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reading without reflecting is like eating without digesting.
> Edmund Burke
> 
> The D student is unable to complete even the most basic functions like reading. When their failure is explained to them, they PRETEND they knew all along.
> 
> While not all *conservatives* are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political *conservatives*.
> Robert Altmeyer - The Authoritarians
> 
> Conservatism is based on latitude, longitude and date of birth.
> 
> 
> 
> And yet the largest Totalitarian governments were all socialist...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Soviet Union officially abandoned socialism in 1921 when Lenin instituted the New Economic Policy allowing for taxation, local trade, some state capitalism... and extreme profiteering.
> 
> Hitler removed the socialists from the party in 1934, the night of the long knives. The anti-capitalist, anti-tradition sentiments often expressed by SA leaders and echoed by the restless masses of storm troopers also caused great concern to big industry leaders who had helped put Hitler in power. Hitler had promised them he would put down the trade union movement and Marxists, which he had done. However, now his own storm troopers with their talk of a 'second revolution' were sounding more and more like Marxists themselves.
Click to expand...


You pathetic spin is nothing but air......They were socialists and that is what socialism looks like. It is sad you are to ignorant to see that.


----------



## Bfgrn

thanatos144 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And yet the largest Totalitarian governments were all socialist...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Soviet Union officially abandoned socialism in 1921 when Lenin instituted the New Economic Policy allowing for taxation, local trade, some state capitalism... and extreme profiteering.
> 
> Hitler removed the socialists from the party in 1934, the night of the long knives. The anti-capitalist, anti-tradition sentiments often expressed by SA leaders and echoed by the restless masses of storm troopers also caused great concern to big industry leaders who had helped put Hitler in power. Hitler had promised them he would put down the trade union movement and Marxists, which he had done. However, now his own storm troopers with their talk of a 'second revolution' were sounding more and more like Marxists themselves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You pathetic spin is nothing but air......They were socialists and that is what socialism looks like. It is sad you are to ignorant to see that.
Click to expand...


I understand why you NEED it to be that way. Otherwise the truth would overwhelm your dogma driven beliefs.

True socialism looks NOTHING like that. Fascism and communism look like that. Fascism and communism are not liberal beliefs, they are conservative beliefs.


----------



## thanatos144

Bfgrn said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Soviet Union officially abandoned socialism in 1921 when Lenin instituted the New Economic Policy allowing for taxation, local trade, some state capitalism... and extreme profiteering.
> 
> Hitler removed the socialists from the party in 1934, the night of the long knives. The anti-capitalist, anti-tradition sentiments often expressed by SA leaders and echoed by the restless masses of storm troopers also caused great concern to big industry leaders who had helped put Hitler in power. Hitler had promised them he would put down the trade union movement and Marxists, which he had done. However, now his own storm troopers with their talk of a 'second revolution' were sounding more and more like Marxists themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You pathetic spin is nothing but air......They were socialists and that is what socialism looks like. It is sad you are to ignorant to see that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I understand why you NEED it to be that way. Otherwise the truth would overwhelm your dogma driven beliefs.
> 
> True socialism looks NOTHING like that. Fascism and communism look like that. Fascism and communism are not liberal beliefs, they are conservative beliefs.
Click to expand...

 fascism is the true face of socialism you fool.


----------



## EdwardBaiamonte

Bfgrn said:


> Fascism and communism are not liberal beliefs, they are conservative beliefs.



too stupid by 1000%!!! Fascism, communism, liberalism, and monarchy are all based on big powerful central government.

Conservatism is 100% the exact opposite, it is about Jeffersonian freedom from big central government.

It is hard to imagine how stupid one would have to be  to lack the IQ to grasp that simple point.


----------



## EdwardBaiamonte

Bfgrn said:


> all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives



that makes perfect sense given that our liberals spied for Stalin!! Stalin was very authoritarian which will come as a surprise to you.

It is hard to comprehend how stupid a liberal is.

One does not debate a liberal, one instructs a child with a low IQ!!


----------



## regent

EdwardBaiamonte said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fascism and communism are not liberal beliefs, they are conservative beliefs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> too stupid by 1000%!!! Fascism, communism, liberalism, and monarchy are all based on big powerful central government.
> 
> Conservatism is 100% the exact opposite, it is about Jeffersonian freedom from big central government.
> 
> It is hard to imagine how stupid one would have to be  to lack the IQ to grasp that simple point.
Click to expand...


With Marxian communism there is no government, and no government is about as limited a government as a nation can get, and for some conservatives a dream come true.  Maybe forget the IQ thing and read up a bit. If you do read up on Marx and communism you might  discover that no country has ever practiced Marxian communism. The USSR never quite got to it and dropped the whole idea early on, perhaps somewhere around 1921, replacing Marx's first stage with the NEP. Later, Stalin will even drop the NEP. But here's a question for you as you read, if the USSR did not practice Marxian communism, what economic system did they end up practcing?


----------



## thanatos144

One of the greatest tragedies is that people let the left paint their socialist failures as right wing when history clearly shows it is the left wing steeped in hate and killing.


----------



## EdwardBaiamonte

regent said:


> if the USSR did not practice Marxian communism, what economic system did they end up practcing?



communism of course!! this is why our liberals spied for Stalin and were hung!!

For example, who can forget his infamous 1984 quote that the communist system in the former Soviet Union was superior to capitalism because, according to Galbraith, the communists somehow made better and more efficient use of its "manpower" than did the West? Indeed, to the very end, Galbraith was a socialist impersonating an economist.


John Kenneth Galbraith, an intellectual icon of the Old Left and New Left, said of the Soviets overtaking of Poland after World War II: Russia should be permitted to absorb Poland, the Balkans, and the whole of Eastern Europe in order to spread the benefits of Communism (Emphasis added).


----------



## EdwardBaiamonte

thanatos144 said:


> One of the greatest tragedies is that people let the left paint their socialist failures as right wing when history clearly shows it is the left wing steeped in hate and killing.



yes when communist big government turns into tyranny just as Jefferson said it would the brain dead liberals then call it right-wing!!!

It is too stupid to imagine, but then most of human history is merely about stupid people using one excuse after another to follow a genocidal liberal's big government schemes.


----------



## Mr.Nick

Ravi said:


> Doubt that Hitler had the support of the conservative right wing?
> 
> 1. "Hitler found his greatest support in *traditionally conservative small towns. He campaigned with attacks on Marxism, making it clear that by Marxism he meant the Social Democrats. Hitler appealed to morality, attacking free love and what he inferred was the immorality of Berlin and some other major cities. He promised to stamp out big city corruption. He called for a spiritual revolution, for a "positive Christianity" and a spirit of national pride. Hitler repeatedly called for national renewal. *He and his National Socialists benefited from the recent upheaval in the Soviet Union and the rise in fear and disgust for Bolshevism. His party's posters read:
> 
> *    If you want your country to go Bolshevik, vote Communist. If you want to remain free Germans, vote for the National Socialists.*"
> 
> Hitler and Germany: 1928 to 1935
> 
> 2. Neville Chamberlain, appeaser in chief, after the Sudetenland was handed over to Hitler, "But the Conservative leader has always expressed his desire to find a *peaceful solution to the Fuehrer's wish to create a new - and enlarged - German homeland in Europe.*"
> 
> BBC ON THIS DAY | 30 | 1938: 'Peace for our time' - Chamberlain
> 
> 3. The French right admired Hitler, "When Socialists and Communists formed a Popular front Government in 1936 there were many French conservatives who boldly announced that *Hitler was preferrable to the leadership of the French socialist Leon Blum*."
> 
> Road to War
> 
> 4. "right-to-work" anti-labor conservatives were also pro-Hitler. "There were a mulitude of other racists jumping on the Fascist bandwagon. Joseph P. Kamp printed over two million copies of his anti-labor pamphlet, "Join the C.I.O. and Help Build a Soviet America" which he advertised with the Ku Klux Klan. *Millionaire John Kirby in Houston began publishing the anti-black, anti-labor Christian American in support of "right to work" legislation"*
> 
> Support for Hitler (or Fascism) in the United States | Radical Reference
> 
> 5. Foreshadowing Republican views on the Clinton being concerned about bin laden as a distraction from Lewinsky, "The former president, Herbert Hoover, had become the Republican Party's chief spokesman in foreign affairs, and when Germany seized Moravia and Bohemia, *Hoover declared that no clear and present danger existed* and that Britain, France and others in Europe would be able to defend themselves should there be war. Hoover spoke of Roosevelt's "dangerous adventures" and argued that Roosevelt was trying to divert people's attention from his failure to end the depression"
> 
> The United States, War Preparation, China, and Jewish Immigration: 1938-39



Hitler was a totalitarian lunatic - he only didn't murder Jews, he murdered just about anyone who was a potential threat to his cult of personality - including Catholics....

Also - Stalin was no better - as a matter of fact he killed more than Hitler 6X more than Hitler, but Stalin is considered left??

The only difference between Stalin and Hitler was the mustache...


----------



## wayne

Ravi said:


> "The former president, Herbert Hoover, had become the Republican Party's chief spokesman in foreign affairs, and when Germany seized Moravia and Bohemia, *Hoover declared that no clear and present danger existed* [/url]



You are distorting history. In the thirties the people of America were desperate to stay out of a foreign war. Hovers opinion was mainstream. The same people who in their youth were in the majority in opposing WWII were in the minority when they starting demonstrating against the war in Vietnam.
It appears that liberals have a preference for totalitarian government.


----------



## regent

EdwardBaiamonte said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> if the USSR did not practice Marxian communism, what economic system did they end up practcing?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> communism of course!! this is why our liberals spied for Stalin and were hung!!
> 
> For example, who can forget his infamous 1984 quote that the communist system in the former Soviet Union was superior to capitalism because, according to Galbraith, the communists somehow made better and more efficient use of its "manpower" than did the West? Indeed, to the very end, Galbraith was a socialist impersonating an economist.
> 
> 
> John Kenneth Galbraith, an intellectual icon of the Old Left and New Left, said of the Soviets overtaking of Poland after World War II: Russia should be permitted to absorb Poland, the Balkans, and the whole of Eastern Europe in order to spread the benefits of Communism (Emphasis added).
Click to expand...

So is the definition of communism whatever people want to call it or was it a political/economic system that Marx defined? If communism is whatever we want to call it it correct to call the Republican party communist, or does the word just have no meaning?


----------



## ERGO

* Fascism vs Communism vs Totalitarianism*

There are various political and economic ideologies in the world such as capitalism, socialism, fascism, communism and totalitarianism. There was a time when these ideologies were in force in different countries of the world. The world was divided along several lines because of these ideologies. It was the breakup of the communist Soviet Union in the eighties and the beginning of a revolution called internet that has brought about a sea change in the geo political conditions of the world. Ideologies have melted with free flow of information and no country today can be said to be following a particular ideology in the strictest sense of the word. This is because of the intense desire of the countries to be in the mainstream and also to take maximum advantage of economic liberalization. However, it is important to know the differences between different ideologies and this article intends to clarify fascism, communism and totalitarianism.

*Fascism*

This ideology where nation or race is kept above everything else originated in Mussolini&#8217;s Italy and later spread to Germany where Adolf Hitler led to the downfall of his nation and plunged the world into World War II because of his thinking that Nazi was the most superior race and that it was meant to rule the world. Fascism makes use of state machinery for false propaganda and censorship to suppress political opposition. In fascism, state is supreme and absolute, and individuals and groups are only relative. Political analysts consider fascism to be on the far right of the political spectrum. Contrary to popular belief, fascism opposes communism, democracy, liberalism, conservatism, and even capitalism. Fascists believe in war and violence as they think that these help in national regeneration and supremacy over other nations.

*Communism*

Communism is one ideology that is still popular in some parts of the world though it has got much diluted after the demise of Soviet Union in the eighties. The erstwhile breakaway republics of USSR today have leanings towards capitalism as they are impressed by the progress western countries have made.

Communism aims for a classless society where everyone is equal, and even the state is redundant. This is an ideal scenario which is not possible to achieve hence communism can never be perfect. It believes in common ownership and free access to articles of consumption. Communism does not believe in private property and even profit of the individual.

There are many who think that socialism and communism are same but according to Marx, socialism is only the beginning to a long march towards communism.

*Totalitarianism*

Totalitarianism is an ideology that believes in total political power to be in the hands of a single person, or a particular class. This political system does not recognize the rights of the individuals and places no restrictions on the authority of the state. This is akin to personality cultism where the charisma of a single person works upon the masses through false propaganda and ruthless use of brute state power. Other means to suppress any opposition are state terrorism, mass surveillance and restriction of speech and liberty of action. This political system is close to authoritarianism and dictatorship but falls short of both.

*Summary*

Fascism has its roots in the superiority of a person or a class and is closer to totalitarianism but communism is different from both these ideologies as it believes in a class less and stateless society.* Fascism and totalitarianism on the other hand believe in unbridled power in the hands of a person or class and believe in restriction of thinking and action of the individuals in the society.*

source link:http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-fascism-and-vs-communism-and-vs-totalitarianism/


----------



## thanatos144

Communism and socialism and all progressive ideologies are fascist.....Thats just historical fact no mater how many time all you progressive liars try to spin it otherwise.


----------



## ERGO

thanatos144 said:


> Communism and socialism and all progressive ideologies are fascist.....Thats just historical fact no mater how many time all you progressive liars try to spin it otherwise.



Communism is different from Socialism and neither ideologies are Fascist in their ideology and your stating that "Communism and socialism and all progressive ideologies are fascist" just shows you are ignorant and you don't know the difference between them. I don't know what your source for historical knowledge is, but I can assure you that it is wrong.

I cite the differences between them in the post previous to yours, included is a video.


----------



## thanatos144

ERGO said:


> thanatos144 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism and socialism and all progressive ideologies are fascist.....Thats just historical fact no mater how many time all you progressive liars try to spin it otherwise.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Communism is different from Socialism and neither ideologies are Fascist in their ideology and your stating that "Communism and socialism and all progressive ideologies are fascist" just shows you are ignorant and you don't know the difference between them. I don't know what your source for historical knowledge is, but I can assure you that it is wrong.
> 
> I cite the differences between them in the post previous to yours, included is a video.
Click to expand...


Nether are facist huh? Except giant central government forcing people to do what they want must something other then facism? Lol every time you idiot progressive ideologies is used it is Jain facism. No mater what your guru told you socialism and communism are facist.


----------



## Wiseacre

I always thought fascism was the political system where the gov't does not have ownership of the means of production but controls it nonetheless.   Individual rights are subordinate to the state, which means it is a far left ideology.   The extreme far right is anarchy, no gov't at all.  From there you have libertarianism, limited gov't and as much individual rights as possible.


----------



## regent

What these boards indicate is that few classes on comparative economics and comparative political systems are taught on the high school level. To teach them could bring all sorts of problems to the schools and administrators. Add to that, most students would not be interested in those topics. Nope, best let well enough alone and let people learn that material from their politicial party and others. 
But there are a number of small booklets written on political ideologies and most available.


----------



## Bfgrn

Wiseacre said:


> I always thought fascism was the political system where the gov't does not have ownership of the means of production but controls it nonetheless.   Individual rights are subordinate to the state, which means it is a far left ideology.   The extreme far right is anarchy, no gov't at all.  From there you have libertarianism, limited gov't and as much individual rights as possible.



Except that the anarchism in America during the 20th century was a radical left-wing ideology. Mainly during the 1960's and 70's. The philosophies which posit a future society in which private property is replaced by reciprocity and non-hierarchical society.

Those are NOT conservative beliefs. Conservatives put property above people and strongly believe in a hierarchical society. 

"Republicans care more about property, Democrats care more about people"
Ted Sorensen - President Kennedy's Special Counsel & Adviser, and primary speechwriter


----------



## thanatos144

Hitler was a socialist....The left want socialism....Socialism is just another form of fascism....Thus the left are fascists...It is simple 1+1+1=3


----------



## Wiseacre

Bfgrn said:


> Wiseacre said:
> 
> 
> 
> I always thought fascism was the political system where the gov't does not have ownership of the means of production but controls it nonetheless.   Individual rights are subordinate to the state, which means it is a far left ideology.   The extreme far right is anarchy, no gov't at all.  From there you have libertarianism, limited gov't and as much individual rights as possible.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except that the anarchism in America during the 20th century was a radical left-wing ideology. Mainly during the 1960's and 70's. The philosophies which posit a future society in which private property is replaced by reciprocity and non-hierarchical society.
> 
> Those are NOT conservative beliefs. Conservatives put property above people and strongly believe in a hierarchical society.
> 
> "Republicans care more about property, Democrats care more about people"
> Ted Sorensen - President Kennedy's Special Counsel & Adviser, and primary speechwriter
Click to expand...



Leave it to a democratic speechwriter to spout bullshit.   The idea that conservatives put property above people is an absolute fucking lie, spread by left wing ideological fools.   And I don't think democrats give a flying fuck about people any more than the republicans do, as long as they can get their vote.   Democrats want slaves, with no dignity, no self respect, no independence.   

You are mistaken about the 60s and 70s, what was once called the counter culture.   These people wanted no central gov't at all, total independence to do whatever they wanted.   That is extreme far right ideology, not left.


----------



## CandySlice

daveman said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, that's right -- you're one of those "special" people who believes everything horrible comes from the right, and the ultimate leftist utopia is a unicorn in every meadow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Projecting again? YOU are one of those "special" people who believes everything horrible comes from the left, and the ultimate rightist utopia is a unicorn in every meadow.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not only are you profoundly ignorant of history, you're incapable of originality, too.
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is not my fault all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives. It is just a FACT of life.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Anyone who believes Castro, Stalin, Lenin, Marx, Mao, and Pol Pot are on the right is too stupid to breath on his own.
> 
> Or are you saying they're not highly authoritarian?
> 
> Either way, you're astoundingly wrong.
Click to expand...


Im appalled at these people's absolutely intolerable abscence of historic knowledge. What ARE they teaching in schools these days..... Or is that the problem....they never attended?


----------



## CandySlice

Wiseacre said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wiseacre said:
> 
> 
> 
> I always thought fascism was the political system where the gov't does not have ownership of the means of production but controls it nonetheless.   Individual rights are subordinate to the state, which means it is a far left ideology.   The extreme far right is anarchy, no gov't at all.  From there you have libertarianism, limited gov't and as much individual rights as possible.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except that the anarchism in America during the 20th century was a radical left-wing ideology. Mainly during the 1960's and 70's. The philosophies which posit a future society in which private property is replaced by reciprocity and non-hierarchical society.
> 
> Those are NOT conservative beliefs. Conservatives put property above people and strongly believe in a hierarchical society.
> 
> "Republicans care more about property, Democrats care more about people"
> Ted Sorensen - President Kennedy's Special Counsel & Adviser, and primary speechwriter
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Leave it to a democratic speechwriter to spout bullshit.   The idea that conservatives put property above people is an absolute fucking lie, spread by left wing ideological fools.   And I don't think democrats give a flying fuck about people any more than the republicans do, as long as they can get their vote.   Democrats want slaves, with no dignity, no self respect, no independence.
> 
> You are mistaken about the 60s and 70s, what was once called the counter culture.   These people wanted no central gov't at all, total independence to do whatever they wanted.   That is extreme far right ideology, not left.
Click to expand...


Im left with only one conclusion to draw here. You never lived through the 60's OR the 70's or if you did you must have been one clueless square.

There's something going on here
But you don't know what it is
Do you, Mr. Jones?


----------



## Wiseacre

CandySlice said:


> Wiseacre said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Except that the anarchism in America during the 20th century was a radical left-wing ideology. Mainly during the 1960's and 70's. The philosophies which posit a future society in which private property is replaced by reciprocity and non-hierarchical society.
> 
> Those are NOT conservative beliefs. Conservatives put property above people and strongly believe in a hierarchical society.
> 
> "Republicans care more about property, Democrats care more about people"
> Ted Sorensen - President Kennedy's Special Counsel & Adviser, and primary speechwriter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Leave it to a democratic speechwriter to spout bullshit.   The idea that conservatives put property above people is an absolute fucking lie, spread by left wing ideological fools.   And I don't think democrats give a flying fuck about people any more than the republicans do, as long as they can get their vote.   Democrats want slaves, with no dignity, no self respect, no independence.
> 
> You are mistaken about the 60s and 70s, what was once called the counter culture.   These people wanted no central gov't at all, total independence to do whatever they wanted.   That is extreme far right ideology, not left.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Im left with only one conclusion to draw here. You never lived through the 60's OR the 70's or if you did you must have been one clueless square.
> 
> There's something going on here
> But you don't know what it is
> Do you, Mr. Jones?
Click to expand...



Why don't you can the crap and respond to the post.   Tell you what, when I see bullshit like that, my BP goes up and patience goes down.   BTW, I'm 64 and I was around.   Also, who the hell is Mr Jones?   

Bfrgn was wrong about the anti-establishment movement back then, some might've wanted some form of collectivism, but the way I remember it they mostly wanted no gov't at all.


----------



## Bfgrn

Wiseacre said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wiseacre said:
> 
> 
> 
> I always thought fascism was the political system where the gov't does not have ownership of the means of production but controls it nonetheless.   Individual rights are subordinate to the state, which means it is a far left ideology.   The extreme far right is anarchy, no gov't at all.  From there you have libertarianism, limited gov't and as much individual rights as possible.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except that the anarchism in America during the 20th century was a radical left-wing ideology. Mainly during the 1960's and 70's. The philosophies which posit a future society in which private property is replaced by reciprocity and non-hierarchical society.
> 
> Those are NOT conservative beliefs. Conservatives put property above people and strongly believe in a hierarchical society.
> 
> "Republicans care more about property, Democrats care more about people"
> Ted Sorensen - President Kennedy's Special Counsel & Adviser, and primary speechwriter
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Leave it to a democratic speechwriter to spout bullshit.   The idea that conservatives put property above people is an absolute fucking lie, spread by left wing ideological fools.   And I don't think democrats give a flying fuck about people any more than the republicans do, as long as they can get their vote.   Democrats want slaves, with no dignity, no self respect, no independence.
> 
> You are mistaken about the 60s and 70s, what was once called the counter culture.   These people wanted no central gov't at all, total independence to do whatever they wanted.   That is extreme far right ideology, not left.
Click to expand...


You can't be serious. The right wing mind is a wonder...I always 'wonder' where you come up with this shit. Ted Sorensen is right on the mark. And there are enough threads and posts on this board that PROVE conservatives put property before people.

Your false accusation that Democrats don't care about people ONLY tells us who and what YOU are. You can't accept that liberals DO put people first, because it would make you question yourself. And THAT will never happen. The right wing mind is infested with dogma, disdain and dismissal for anyone who isn't rich and materially wealthy. 

But you take first prize for the moron of the year award...

Conservatives in the 60s and 70s...













The epicenter of conservatism...






Have you ever heard of a bleeding heart Republican?
Paul Craig Roberts - the father of Reaganomics


----------



## Wiseacre

Bfgrn said:


> Wiseacre said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Except that the anarchism in America during the 20th century was a radical left-wing ideology. Mainly during the 1960's and 70's. The philosophies which posit a future society in which private property is replaced by reciprocity and non-hierarchical society.
> 
> Those are NOT conservative beliefs. Conservatives put property above people and strongly believe in a hierarchical society.
> 
> "Republicans care more about property, Democrats care more about people"
> Ted Sorensen - President Kennedy's Special Counsel & Adviser, and primary speechwriter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Leave it to a democratic speechwriter to spout bullshit.   The idea that conservatives put property above people is an absolute fucking lie, spread by left wing ideological fools.   And I don't think democrats give a flying fuck about people any more than the republicans do, as long as they can get their vote.   Democrats want slaves, with no dignity, no self respect, no independence.
> 
> You are mistaken about the 60s and 70s, what was once called the counter culture.   These people wanted no central gov't at all, total independence to do whatever they wanted.   That is extreme far right ideology, not left.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You can't be serious. The right wing mind is a wonder...I always 'wonder' where you come up with this shit. Ted Sorensen is right on the mark. And there are enough threads and posts on this board that PROVE conservatives put property before people.
> 
> Your false accusation that Democrats don't care about people ONLY tells us who and what YOU are. You can't accept that liberals DO put people first, because it would make you question yourself. And THAT will never happen. The right wing mind is infested with dogma, disdain and dismissal for anyone who isn't rich and materially wealthy.
> 
> But you take first prize for the moron of the year award...
> 
> Conservatives in the 60s and 70s...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The epicenter of conservatism...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have you ever heard of a bleeding heart Republican?
> Paul Craig Roberts - the father of Reaganomics
Click to expand...



You just ain't worth the trouble.   Have a nice day.


----------



## Bfgrn

Wiseacre said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wiseacre said:
> 
> 
> 
> Leave it to a democratic speechwriter to spout bullshit.   The idea that conservatives put property above people is an absolute fucking lie, spread by left wing ideological fools.   And I don't think democrats give a flying fuck about people any more than the republicans do, as long as they can get their vote.   Democrats want slaves, with no dignity, no self respect, no independence.
> 
> You are mistaken about the 60s and 70s, what was once called the counter culture.   These people wanted no central gov't at all, total independence to do whatever they wanted.   That is extreme far right ideology, not left.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can't be serious. The right wing mind is a wonder...I always 'wonder' where you come up with this shit. Ted Sorensen is right on the mark. And there are enough threads and posts on this board that PROVE conservatives put property before people.
> 
> Your false accusation that Democrats don't care about people ONLY tells us who and what YOU are. You can't accept that liberals DO put people first, because it would make you question yourself. And THAT will never happen. The right wing mind is infested with dogma, disdain and dismissal for anyone who isn't rich and materially wealthy.
> 
> But you take first prize for the moron of the year award...
> 
> Conservatives in the 60s and 70s...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The epicenter of conservatism...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have you ever heard of a bleeding heart Republican?
> Paul Craig Roberts - the father of Reaganomics
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You just ain't worth the trouble.   Have a nice day.
Click to expand...


Peace, make love not war, there mr hippie...

Right wing anarchists


----------



## EdwardBaiamonte

Bfgrn said:


> Your false accusation that Democrats don't care about people ONLY tells us who and what YOU are.



if libs cared why did they spy for Stalin and why do they give far less to charity???s


* Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

* Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.

* Residents of the states that voted for John Kerry in 2004 gave smaller percentages of their incomes to charity than did residents of states that voted for George Bush.

* Bush carried 24 of the 25 states where charitable giving was above average.

* In the 10 reddest states, in which Bush got more than 60 percent majorities, the average percentage of personal income donated to charity was 3.5. Residents of the bluest states, which gave Bush less than 40 percent, donated just 1.9 percent.

* People who reject the idea that "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.

Brooks demonstrates a correlation between charitable behavior and "the values that lie beneath" liberal and conservative labels. Two influences on charitable behavior are religion and attitudes about the proper role of government.


In a message dated 3/30/2010 4:41:07 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, Bje1000@aol.com writes:
Nicholas D. Kristof: Liberal tightwads
Dec 23, 2008 ... Nicholas D. Kristof: Liberal tightwads ... Arthur Brooks, the author of a book on donors to charity, "Who Really Cares," cites data that ...

Nicholas D. Kristof: Liberal tightwads - Pittsburgh Post-Gazette - Similar 

Op-Ed Columnist - Bleeding Heart Tightwads - NYTimes.com
Dec 21, 2008 ... Nicholas Kristof addresses reader feedback and posts short takes from his travels. ... Americans give sums to charity equivalent to 1.67 percent of G.N.P. ... liberal donations frequently sustain art museums, symphonies, ...

www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html -


----------



## Bfgrn

EdwardBaiamonte said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your false accusation that Democrats don't care about people ONLY tells us who and what YOU are.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> if libs cared why did they spy for Stalin and why do they give far less to charity???s
> 
> 
> * Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).
> 
> * Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.
> 
> * Residents of the states that voted for John Kerry in 2004 gave smaller percentages of their incomes to charity than did residents of states that voted for George Bush.
> 
> * Bush carried 24 of the 25 states where charitable giving was above average.
> 
> * In the 10 reddest states, in which Bush got more than 60 percent majorities, the average percentage of personal income donated to charity was 3.5. Residents of the bluest states, which gave Bush less than 40 percent, donated just 1.9 percent.
> 
> * People who reject the idea that "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.
> 
> Brooks demonstrates a correlation between charitable behavior and "the values that lie beneath" liberal and conservative labels. Two influences on charitable behavior are religion and attitudes about the proper role of government.
> 
> 
> In a message dated 3/30/2010 4:41:07 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, Bje1000@aol.com writes:
> Nicholas D. Kristof: Liberal tightwads
> Dec 23, 2008 ... Nicholas D. Kristof: Liberal tightwads ... Arthur Brooks, the author of a book on donors to charity, "Who Really Cares," cites data that ...
> 
> Nicholas D. Kristof: Liberal tightwads - Pittsburgh Post-Gazette - Similar
> 
> Op-Ed Columnist - Bleeding Heart Tightwads - NYTimes.com
> Dec 21, 2008 ... Nicholas Kristof addresses reader feedback and posts short takes from his travels. ... Americans give sums to charity equivalent to 1.67 percent of G.N.P. ... liberal donations frequently sustain art museums, symphonies, ...
> 
> www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html -
Click to expand...


Ah, *THE Arthur Brooks study*

Arthur Brooks writes: "When it comes to giving or not giving, conservatives and liberals look a lot alike. *Conservative people are a percentage point or two more likely to give money* each year than liberal people, *but* a percentage point or so* less likely to volunteer* [citing the 2002 General Social Survey (GSS) and the 2000 Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey (SCCBS)]". (pp. 21-22)


----------



## CandySlice

Wiseacre said:


> CandySlice said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wiseacre said:
> 
> 
> 
> Leave it to a democratic speechwriter to spout bullshit.   The idea that conservatives put property above people is an absolute fucking lie, spread by left wing ideological fools.   And I don't think democrats give a flying fuck about people any more than the republicans do, as long as they can get their vote.   Democrats want slaves, with no dignity, no self respect, no independence.
> 
> You are mistaken about the 60s and 70s, what was once called the counter culture.   These people wanted no central gov't at all, total independence to do whatever they wanted.   That is extreme far right ideology, not left.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Im left with only one conclusion to draw here. You never lived through the 60's OR the 70's or if you did you must have been one clueless square.
> 
> There's something going on here
> But you don't know what it is
> Do you, Mr. Jones?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Why don't you can the crap and respond to the post.   Tell you what, when I see bullshit like that, my BP goes up and patience goes down.   BTW, I'm 64 and I was around.   Also, who the hell is Mr Jones?
> 
> Bfrgn was wrong about the anti-establishment movement back then, some might've wanted some form of collectivism, but the way I remember it they mostly wanted no gov't at all.
Click to expand...


It's a song by Bob Dylan aimed at folks like you and BTW I rest my case.


----------



## Wiseacre

CandySlice said:


> Wiseacre said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CandySlice said:
> 
> 
> 
> Im left with only one conclusion to draw here. You never lived through the 60's OR the 70's or if you did you must have been one clueless square.
> 
> There's something going on here
> But you don't know what it is
> Do you, Mr. Jones?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why don't you can the crap and respond to the post.   Tell you what, when I see bullshit like that, my BP goes up and patience goes down.   BTW, I'm 64 and I was around.   Also, who the hell is Mr Jones?
> 
> Bfrgn was wrong about the anti-establishment movement back then, some might've wanted some form of collectivism, but the way I remember it they mostly wanted no gov't at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's a song by Bob Dylan aimed at folks like you and BTW I rest my case.
Click to expand...



You didn't make a case.


----------



## EdwardBaiamonte

Bfgrn said:


> Arthur Brooks writes: "When it comes to giving or not giving, conservatives and liberals look a lot alike.



" but this number fades away very quickly when you consider that conservatives earn less but in terms of dollars given, give 35% more than liberals."- Authur Brooks writes in the very next paragraph!!!!!

Bfgrn is just plain lying!!


----------

