Evil As An Element Of Politics

[PoliticalChic]

7. Whenever one is faced with the question of which political viewpoint represents evil.....simply look at the body count.
Under the ne plus ultra of Leftism, Communism, over 100 million men, women and children were slaughtered fairly recently.

Add to Stalin and Mao's totals, the evil of Pol Pot.



I can name two Communist college professors who aimed to 'fundamentally transform their nation. This one studied in Paris, where he received a scholarship in technical studies. He studied radio electronics ....a notch or two above 'community organizing.'
But....he did work with the community..... an international labor brigade building roads...also a notch or two above 'community organizing.'




8. "Pol Pot, was the leader of the Cambodian communist movement known as the Khmer Rouge[3] and was Prime Minister of Democratic Kampuchea from 1976–1979. Pol Pot's leadership, in which he attempted to "cleanse" the country, resulted in thedeaths of an estimated 1.7–2.5 million people…. he qualified for a scholarship that allowed for technical study in France. He studied radio electronics at the EFR in Paris from 1949 to 1953"
Pol Pot - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


a. "Starting in April ’75, the Communist Khmer Rouge defeated Lon Nol in Cambodia. Democrats, starting with the 1974 budget, refused to allocate another penny, and forbade US military action “in or over” Indochina. Just as the right had warned, the communists began a systematic war on the entire populations of their nation, so savage, it is hard to comprehend. It is estimated that the number of dead numbered between 1.7 to 2.5 million out of a population of around 8 million. "
Killing Fields - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


b. "Frequently found in totalitarian death cults, the Khmer Rouge cadres were mostly teenagers, some as young as ten or twelve, produced by cruelty and indoctrination. Consistent with other communist conquests, the Khmer Rouge began the massive and grotesque project of remaking society from scratch. They began by emptying the cities: every single person in Phnom Penh- including the lame, hospital patients on intravenous drips, the sick and the elderly, mothers who had just given birth, the pregnant, and infants, - everyone was forced to march."
Khmer Rouge rule of Cambodia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


c. "Later, to save bullets, the Khmer Rouge switched to other methods of execution, including clubbing, asphyxiation, and dousing the head with gasoline and setting it on fire. "
Courtois, et.al., “The Black Book of Communism,” p. 611




"....the number of dead numbered between 1.7 to 2.5 million out of a population of around 8 million. "


That's what Leftists do.

 

[PoliticalChic]

9. The French Revolution aimed to replace religion and morality with science and reason.
It was a terrible mistake, attributable to man's faith in his own genius.

The result was not just that nation becoming an abattoir, but the same repeated in every Leftist revolution: wholesale slaughter of its own citizens.



a. Cambodia was just one Leftist slaughterhouses, and a case in point.

“The pedicab did not move to the side of the road so a soldier killed the driver with machine gun fire….A young soldier thrust his rifle through the window of the car, then shot the driver through the heart, and he crumpled in the arms of his wife…”I’m going to pick up my family,” Without warning, a soldier sprayed him with machine gun bullets….The frantic parents protested and sought to reclaim their children on the other side of the communist column. The patrol leader thereupon fired a volley of rifle shots, killing both mother and father.”
Barron and Paul, “Murder of a Gentle Land, “ p.26-28


b. Later, to save bullets, the Khmer Rouge switched to other methods of execution, including clubbing, asphyxiation, and dousing the head with gasoline and setting it on fire.
Courtois, et.al., “The Black Book of Communism,” p. 611



The view can be summarized this way:

"We must rid ourselves once and for all of the Quaker-Papist babble about the sanctity of human life." Leon Trotsky

 

[NYcarbineer]

You agree with her that Liberalism and Nazism are the same thing?

Let's debate that.

I'm fairly confident that you don't know what either one of those actually mean.

That's because you're an idiot.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[



You forgot to include any aspect of my posts that is not 100% true, accurate and correct.

Liberals and Nazis are not the same thing.

Happy now?

 

[NYcarbineer]

You agree with her that Liberalism and Nazism are the same thing?

Let's debate that.

I'm fairly confident that you don't know what either one of those actually mean.

Didn't you dare answer the question?

 

[NYcarbineer]

This thread again?
Fuckinay...

And yet EVERY time she makes a great post, there you are....sissy ass fisher-price toy rifles in hand....trying your best to shoot her down.

(But you always miss.....of course)

You think it takes a good shot to point out that she's retarded if she thinks Liberalism and Nazism are the same thing?

 

[NYcarbineer]

The aims and designs for society of the Communist Party and the Democrat Party are nearly identical.

The Democrat Party or some members of the Democrat Party?

ALL the Democrat Party members that matter and can change things

The Democratic Party wants to end all private ownership of business?

You're stupid if you believe that.

 

[Natural Citizen]

That's because you're an idiot.

Really. Well, show us your wisdom. I like to learn. I should be a real pushover for someone as smart as you. What's the difference between what you refer to as liberalism and nazism? Tell us, please. Thanks!

 

[PoliticalChic]

10. Anyone want to argue that Pol Pot's slaughter of some 25% of his own citizens doesn't prove that he and his political perspective are evil????

Now.....watch as the dots are connected: which political party aided Pol Pot's plans, one aspect of their pro-communism stance?

C'mon.....you know which party.



"While Pol Pot murdered and prospered in Cambodia, certain Leftist ideologues in the West defended his regime against criticism that they said was 'anticommunist propaganda.'

Their ideology had suffocated their better human instincts- a pattern that, in fact, came to define America from the sixties on, a pattern of politics overruling common sense in the new battles of identity politics and culture war."
Lance Morrow, "Evil: An Investigation," p. 85




11. The Sixties radicals –impatient, destructive, nihilistic- were the adolescent version. Modern liberalism is the mature stage. The campus radicals didn’t ‘grow up,’ or disappear: they simply became invisible until they reached positions of power and influence in the very institutions they stormed and seized in the sixties.


One member gave this prescription:

“four-square against anti-Communism,

eight-square against American-culture,

twelve-square against sell-out unions,

one hundred and twenty against an interpretation of the Cold War that saw it as a Soviet plot and identified American policy fondly.”
Todd Gitlin, “The Sixties: Years of Hope, Days of Rage,” p. 109-110




Hard to argue that communists and communism aren't evil.

What, then, is the conclusion about their allies in the spin-off of communism called Liberalism?

 

[Tax Man]

The aims and designs for society of the Communist Party and the Democrat Party are nearly identical.

The Democrat Party or some members of the Democrat Party?

ALL the Democrat Party members that matter and can change things

Really? How about Hillary Clinton, how do her aims and designs for society match those of the Communist Party?

Let's check.

How about you take a look at the aims of the Communist Party, USA, and the aims of the modern Democrat Party.


Watch, and note the consubstantial basis of both the aims of the Communist Party and the Democrat Party:

......it is ...extraordinary.....the correspondence between the aims of the communist party and the aims of the Democrats.....

1. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.

2. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces.

3. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.

4. . Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.


5. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions.

6. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.

7. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.

8. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."

9. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."

10. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.


11. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."

12. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.

13. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce



Now....wouldn't an honest appraisal agree that all or almost all are clearly the aims and direction of Democrats/Liberals/Progressive leaders?

I got 'em from a website of declared communist goals...

The Communist Takeover Of America - 45 Declared Goals
The Communist Takeover Of America - 45 Declared Goals



You might take a look at this one, too.
10 planks of Communist manifesto
Communist Manifesto 10 Planks

1. Abolition of private property and the application of all rents of land to public purposes.

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.



"Obama Set To Propose Taxes On Capital Gains, Inheritance, And Wall Street"
Obama Set To Propose Taxes On Capital Gains, Inheritance, And Wall Street - Shadowproof

And this:

"Government control of private sector activity...is aptly described as Bolshevik- or Marxist, socialist, collectivist, statist, or, for that matter, fascist, too.Indeed, nationalized health care was one of the first programs enacted by the Bolsheviks after they seized power in 1917(Banks, insurance companies and means of communications were also taken over by Soviet authorities immediately."
Dziewanowski, "A History of Soviet Russia," p. 107.


They didn't call it ObamaCare....




....we are now free of that inordinate fear of communism.... Jimmy Carter Jimmy Carter: UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME - Address at Commencement Exercises at the University


President Barack Obama downplayed the differences between capitalism and communism, claiming that they are just “intellectual arguments.” He urged those at a town hall eventin Buenos Aires, Argentina on Wednesday to “just choose from what works.”
Obama Downplays Difference Between Capitalism, Communism [VIDEO]




"Obama Said Hillary will Continue His Legacy and Indeed She Will!"
Obama Said Hillary will Continue His Legacy and Indeed She Will!


QED....
Democrats-> Liberals-> Communists

Sounds just like what the rethuglians ARE doing!

 

[Tax Man]

That's because you're an idiot.

Really. Well, show us your wisdom. I like to learn. I should be a real pushover for someone as smart as you. What's the difference between what you refer to as liberalism and nazism? Tell us, please. Thanks!

To be a Nazi is to have social network that is business and that all people work to make war machines. To be a lib is to see and read what is wrong with the world and try to help those who are underdogs and downtrodden. A conservative is to have social network that is business and that all people work to make war machines.

 

[Tax Man]

Let's not reach for the low-hanging fruit, and claim that the two are synonyms. The fence-sitters notwithstanding, they aren't.


pol·i·tics
noun
1. the activities associated with the governance of a country or other area, especially the debate or conflict among individuals or parties having or hoping to achieve power.
Google


2. Central to the term 'politics' and the defining characteristic as far as 'evil' in involved, is how the aim of governance is achieved. Is it based on informed decisions of the governed, or by force and coercion?
Is governance aimed to improve the life of the individual, or of the collective, as represented by government itself.
For context:

a. America was founded on these principles: individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.

b. In Thoreau’s On the duty of Civil Disobedience, he states:
“ There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all of its own power and authority are derived.”

c. In the Leftist sort of governance, it flexes its muscle by shackling the individual via regulations and taxation. While some level of these are necessary, at some point they become onerous....and evil.

Under Leftist plans, there seem to be only two ironclad rules of government:
Rule no.1: Always try to expand;
Rule no. 2: see Rule no. 1.
Beck, Balfe, “Broke,” p. 115




3.Here....the birth of Leftist governance: As set forth during the French Revolution, once government decides on 'truth,' or 'the general will,' any individual who doesn't come on board should be put to death, or punished in a severe way. This is the Leftist view writ large.

It is the premise of all Leftist schemes: Communism, Nazism, Socialism, Liberalism, Fascism, and Progressivism.

"If the French revolution was the end of monarchy and aristocratic privilege and the emergence of the common man and democratic rights, it was also the beginnings of modern totalitarian government and large-scale executions of "enemies of the People" by impersonal government entities (Robespierre's "Committee of Public Safety").

This legacy would not reach its fullest bloom until the tragic arrival of the German Nazis and Soviet and Chinese communists of the 20th century."
French Revolution - Robespierre, and the Legacy of the Reign of Terror




4. "Liberals claim the center by placing socialism on the left and national socialism on the right, even though Lenin/Stalin and Hitler/other Nazis had much in common as they centralized power and preached hatred. A more accurate spectrum would place totalitarians of many stripes on the left and defenders of religious, political, and economic freedom on the right. "http://www.worldmag.com/articles/16873


When evil is associated with politics,.....it is from the Left.

You truly are a great fiction writer! So much bovine excrement matter pours from your hands, mouth.

You forgot to include any aspect of my posts that is not 100% true, accurate and correct.

Hence, inadvertently, you have verified all.

Excellent.

Only a dunce would take that position. All of your posts and fake information is bovine.

 

[PoliticalChic]

That's because you're an idiot.

Really. Well, show us your wisdom. I like to learn. I should be a real pushover for someone as smart as you. What's the difference between what you refer to as liberalism and nazism? Tell us, please. Thanks!

To be a Nazi is to have social network that is business and that all people work to make war machines. To be a lib is to see and read what is wrong with the world and try to help those who are underdogs and downtrodden. A conservative is to have social network that is business and that all people work to make war machines.

Let's check:

1. Which stem from the works of Karl Marx?
2. Which is a form of command and control big government?
3. Which has no problem with genocide, actual or figurative, as an accepted procedure on its political enemies?
4. Which is based on the collective over the individual?
5. Which oppresses and/or slaughters its own citizens as pro forma (including depriving them of a living)....?
6. Which represents totalitarian governance?
7. Which believes that mandating/dictating every aspect of their citizen's lives is their prerogative?
8. Which aims for an all-encompassing state that centralizes power to perfect human nature by controlling every aspect of life

9. Which restricts free speech and thought?

10. Which can be summed up in Hegel's “The state says … you must obey …. The state has rights against the individual; its members have obligations, among them that of obeying without protest”



Wow!

All 10 correspond to both Nazism and Liberalism.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Let's not reach for the low-hanging fruit, and claim that the two are synonyms. The fence-sitters notwithstanding, they aren't.


pol·i·tics
noun
1. the activities associated with the governance of a country or other area, especially the debate or conflict among individuals or parties having or hoping to achieve power.
Google


2. Central to the term 'politics' and the defining characteristic as far as 'evil' in involved, is how the aim of governance is achieved. Is it based on informed decisions of the governed, or by force and coercion?
Is governance aimed to improve the life of the individual, or of the collective, as represented by government itself.
For context:

a. America was founded on these principles: individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.

b. In Thoreau’s On the duty of Civil Disobedience, he states:
“ There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all of its own power and authority are derived.”

c. In the Leftist sort of governance, it flexes its muscle by shackling the individual via regulations and taxation. While some level of these are necessary, at some point they become onerous....and evil.

Under Leftist plans, there seem to be only two ironclad rules of government:
Rule no.1: Always try to expand;
Rule no. 2: see Rule no. 1.
Beck, Balfe, “Broke,” p. 115




3.Here....the birth of Leftist governance: As set forth during the French Revolution, once government decides on 'truth,' or 'the general will,' any individual who doesn't come on board should be put to death, or punished in a severe way. This is the Leftist view writ large.

It is the premise of all Leftist schemes: Communism, Nazism, Socialism, Liberalism, Fascism, and Progressivism.

"If the French revolution was the end of monarchy and aristocratic privilege and the emergence of the common man and democratic rights, it was also the beginnings of modern totalitarian government and large-scale executions of "enemies of the People" by impersonal government entities (Robespierre's "Committee of Public Safety").

This legacy would not reach its fullest bloom until the tragic arrival of the German Nazis and Soviet and Chinese communists of the 20th century."
French Revolution - Robespierre, and the Legacy of the Reign of Terror




4. "Liberals claim the center by placing socialism on the left and national socialism on the right, even though Lenin/Stalin and Hitler/other Nazis had much in common as they centralized power and preached hatred. A more accurate spectrum would place totalitarians of many stripes on the left and defenders of religious, political, and economic freedom on the right. "http://www.worldmag.com/articles/16873


When evil is associated with politics,.....it is from the Left.

You truly are a great fiction writer! So much bovine excrement matter pours from your hands, mouth.

You forgot to include any aspect of my posts that is not 100% true, accurate and correct.

Hence, inadvertently, you have verified all.

Excellent.

Only a dunce would take that position. All of your posts and fake information is bovine.

Gee....I schooled you earlier, pointing out that you were unable to find a single thing in my posts that you could refute.....

...and you've gone and done it again!

How to label you that wouldn't be an insult to the bottom of the barrel???

 

[Natural Citizen]

To be a Nazi is to have social network that is business and that all people work to make war machines. To be a lib is to see and read what is wrong with the world and try to help those who are underdogs and downtrodden. A conservative is to have social network that is business and that all people work to make war machines.

Hehe. Well, I appreciate your humor. But the fact of the matter is that most people who identify as conservative in America aren't conservative at all. Most are radical statists. They just don't know that they are. The only real conservatives left in America are classical liberals. As far as so called modern liberals, they're cultural Marxists, for the most part. Also radical statists. Both are trustees in a welfare state. Both rely on economic interventionism by the federal government. Both print money out of thin air by a central bank to support their brand of social welfare or warfare, thus destroying the poor, middle class, and seniors through inflation while also destroying the value of our currency (down 98% since WWII). Both are trusteees in the same failed Keynesian (socialist) controlled monetary policy that has us 21 trillion dollars in debt and at the brink of economic collapse and all either want to talk about is who is diddling whom on the idiot box.

Now. Fascism. Fascism is statism. Which is brought to us by both the modern left and right through corporatism. Though, nazism is irrelevant. Nazism is a weasel word. And racism is simply collectivism. Collectivism, of course, being the utility of the statist.

Here. Fascism correctly explained...then we go full circle back to where I started.

 

[initforme]

Both the extreme right and extreme left are not to be trusted. Easy call. Next.

 

[Tax Man]

Let's not reach for the low-hanging fruit, and claim that the two are synonyms. The fence-sitters notwithstanding, they aren't.


pol·i·tics
noun
1. the activities associated with the governance of a country or other area, especially the debate or conflict among individuals or parties having or hoping to achieve power.
Google


2. Central to the term 'politics' and the defining characteristic as far as 'evil' in involved, is how the aim of governance is achieved. Is it based on informed decisions of the governed, or by force and coercion?
Is governance aimed to improve the life of the individual, or of the collective, as represented by government itself.
For context:

a. America was founded on these principles: individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.

b. In Thoreau’s On the duty of Civil Disobedience, he states:
“ There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all of its own power and authority are derived.”

c. In the Leftist sort of governance, it flexes its muscle by shackling the individual via regulations and taxation. While some level of these are necessary, at some point they become onerous....and evil.

Under Leftist plans, there seem to be only two ironclad rules of government:
Rule no.1: Always try to expand;
Rule no. 2: see Rule no. 1.
Beck, Balfe, “Broke,” p. 115




3.Here....the birth of Leftist governance: As set forth during the French Revolution, once government decides on 'truth,' or 'the general will,' any individual who doesn't come on board should be put to death, or punished in a severe way. This is the Leftist view writ large.

It is the premise of all Leftist schemes: Communism, Nazism, Socialism, Liberalism, Fascism, and Progressivism.

"If the French revolution was the end of monarchy and aristocratic privilege and the emergence of the common man and democratic rights, it was also the beginnings of modern totalitarian government and large-scale executions of "enemies of the People" by impersonal government entities (Robespierre's "Committee of Public Safety").

This legacy would not reach its fullest bloom until the tragic arrival of the German Nazis and Soviet and Chinese communists of the 20th century."
French Revolution - Robespierre, and the Legacy of the Reign of Terror




4. "Liberals claim the center by placing socialism on the left and national socialism on the right, even though Lenin/Stalin and Hitler/other Nazis had much in common as they centralized power and preached hatred. A more accurate spectrum would place totalitarians of many stripes on the left and defenders of religious, political, and economic freedom on the right. "http://www.worldmag.com/articles/16873


When evil is associated with politics,.....it is from the Left.

You truly are a great fiction writer! So much bovine excrement matter pours from your hands, mouth.

You forgot to include any aspect of my posts that is not 100% true, accurate and correct.

Hence, inadvertently, you have verified all.

Excellent.

Only a dunce would take that position. All of your posts and fake information is bovine.

Gee....I schooled you earlier, pointing out that you were unable to find a single thing in my posts that you could refute.....

...and you've gone and done it again!

How to label you that wouldn't be an insult to the bottom of the barrel???

To be real scum call me political chic. Don't get much lower than that!!!!

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Let's hear no more nonsense about Nazism being Rightwing.

Rewriting history yet again. One would think that if your case was strong you'd not have to twist the truth quite so much.

The majority of scholars identify Nazism, in practice, as a bizarre form of right-wing extremism.[7] Many Nazis were advocates of third positionism when it came to economics. This meant that they were opposed to both socialism (especially communism) and capitalism, despite many being advocates of the right to own private property. Where they differ from capitalists and conservatives (when it comes to economics) is that they openly advocated a kind of symbiosis between the state and big business, where the state would favor certain companies (German-owned, of course) in return for them doing favors to the state. Basically, the Nazis openly endorsed crony corporatism, whereas most modern-day conservatives and right-wingers oppose it, at least in theory.

Notable Americans try to push Nazism to the other side of the political spectrum, or deny that Nazism was truly right-wing. While it's obvious that Nazism is completely different from the politics of their own party (in that Nazism is much further to the right with its advocacy of anti-Semitism, genocide, misogyny, etc.) that does not mean it wasn't right-wing. Its form of right-wing politics, however, is removed from the vast majority of today's mainstream conservatism (neoconservatism should tell you that quite blatantly).

The Nazi sympathizers in Charlottesville were certainly not liberals.

The majority of scholars identify Nazism, in practice, as a bizarre form of right-wing extremism

What idiots like you don't know is that there are 3 side of Socialism.
Middle Socialism - Supposedly everyone is treated equally, where everyone is equally poor and equally miserable, as no body wants to work thus nothing is created.
Far Left Socialism - Communism - see middle socialism but with a tyranny of the majority where people are FORCED to work at the point of the gun and no one is allowed to excel except the liberal elites think they are smarter than the serfs under them.
Far Right Socialism-Fascism - Government control where some people are allowed to have personal property as long as it conforms with the government mandates. Government regulates all workers, wages and companies.
Classical Liberalism -Conservatism - Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness, with limited government where people can own property and be self sufficient without a overbearing government.

The Road to Serfdom - Wikipedia

German: Der Weg zur Knechtschaft) is a book written between 1940 and 1943 by Austrian British economist and philosopher Friedrich von Hayek, in which the author "[warns] of the danger of tyranny that inevitably results from government control of economic decision-making through central planning."[1] He further argues that the abandonment of individualism and classical liberalism inevitably leads to a loss of freedom, the creation of an oppressive society, the tyranny of a dictator, and the serfdom of the individual. Hayek challenged the general view among British academics that fascism (including National Socialism) was a capitalist reaction against socialism. He argued that fascism, National Socialism and socialism had common roots in central economic planning and empowering the state over the individual.

 

[alang1216]

Let's hear no more nonsense about Nazism being Rightwing.

Rewriting history yet again. One would think that if your case was strong you'd not have to twist the truth quite so much.

The majority of scholars identify Nazism, in practice, as a bizarre form of right-wing extremism.[7] Many Nazis were advocates of third positionism when it came to economics. This meant that they were opposed to both socialism (especially communism) and capitalism, despite many being advocates of the right to own private property. Where they differ from capitalists and conservatives (when it comes to economics) is that they openly advocated a kind of symbiosis between the state and big business, where the state would favor certain companies (German-owned, of course) in return for them doing favors to the state. Basically, the Nazis openly endorsed crony corporatism, whereas most modern-day conservatives and right-wingers oppose it, at least in theory.

Notable Americans try to push Nazism to the other side of the political spectrum, or deny that Nazism was truly right-wing. While it's obvious that Nazism is completely different from the politics of their own party (in that Nazism is much further to the right with its advocacy of anti-Semitism, genocide, misogyny, etc.) that does not mean it wasn't right-wing. Its form of right-wing politics, however, is removed from the vast majority of today's mainstream conservatism (neoconservatism should tell you that quite blatantly).

The Nazi sympathizers in Charlottesville were certainly not liberals.

The majority of scholars identify Nazism, in practice, as a bizarre form of right-wing extremism

What idiots like you don't know is that there are 3 side of Socialism.
Middle Socialism - Supposedly everyone is treated equally, where everyone is equally poor and equally miserable, as no body wants to work thus nothing is created.
Far Left Socialism - Communism - see middle socialism but with a tyranny of the majority where people are FORCED to work at the point of the gun and no one is allowed to excel except the liberal elites think they are smarter than the serfs under them.
Far Right Socialism-Fascism - Government control where some people are allowed to have personal property as long as it conforms with the government mandates. Government regulates all workers, wages and companies.
Classical Liberalism -Conservatism - Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness, with limited government where people can own property and be self sufficient without a overbearing government.

The Road to Serfdom - Wikipedia

German: Der Weg zur Knechtschaft) is a book written between 1940 and 1943 by Austrian British economist and philosopher Friedrich von Hayek, in which the author "[warns] of the danger of tyranny that inevitably results from government control of economic decision-making through central planning."[1] He further argues that the abandonment of individualism and classical liberalism inevitably leads to a loss of freedom, the creation of an oppressive society, the tyranny of a dictator, and the serfdom of the individual. Hayek challenged the general view among British academics that fascism (including National Socialism) was a capitalist reaction against socialism. He argued that fascism, National Socialism and socialism had common roots in central economic planning and empowering the state over the individual.

Sounds like a bunch of strawmen to me. What do you propose as an alternative?

I admit I like the quote: "In no system that could be rationally defended would the state just do nothing."[31]

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Let's hear no more nonsense about Nazism being Rightwing.

Rewriting history yet again. One would think that if your case was strong you'd not have to twist the truth quite so much.

The majority of scholars identify Nazism, in practice, as a bizarre form of right-wing extremism.[7] Many Nazis were advocates of third positionism when it came to economics. This meant that they were opposed to both socialism (especially communism) and capitalism, despite many being advocates of the right to own private property. Where they differ from capitalists and conservatives (when it comes to economics) is that they openly advocated a kind of symbiosis between the state and big business, where the state would favor certain companies (German-owned, of course) in return for them doing favors to the state. Basically, the Nazis openly endorsed crony corporatism, whereas most modern-day conservatives and right-wingers oppose it, at least in theory.

Notable Americans try to push Nazism to the other side of the political spectrum, or deny that Nazism was truly right-wing. While it's obvious that Nazism is completely different from the politics of their own party (in that Nazism is much further to the right with its advocacy of anti-Semitism, genocide, misogyny, etc.) that does not mean it wasn't right-wing. Its form of right-wing politics, however, is removed from the vast majority of today's mainstream conservatism (neoconservatism should tell you that quite blatantly).

The Nazi sympathizers in Charlottesville were certainly not liberals.

The majority of scholars identify Nazism, in practice, as a bizarre form of right-wing extremism

What idiots like you don't know is that there are 3 side of Socialism.
Middle Socialism - Supposedly everyone is treated equally, where everyone is equally poor and equally miserable, as no body wants to work thus nothing is created.
Far Left Socialism - Communism - see middle socialism but with a tyranny of the majority where people are FORCED to work at the point of the gun and no one is allowed to excel except the liberal elites think they are smarter than the serfs under them.
Far Right Socialism-Fascism - Government control where some people are allowed to have personal property as long as it conforms with the government mandates. Government regulates all workers, wages and companies.
Classical Liberalism -Conservatism - Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness, with limited government where people can own property and be self sufficient without a overbearing government.

The Road to Serfdom - Wikipedia

German: Der Weg zur Knechtschaft) is a book written between 1940 and 1943 by Austrian British economist and philosopher Friedrich von Hayek, in which the author "[warns] of the danger of tyranny that inevitably results from government control of economic decision-making through central planning."[1] He further argues that the abandonment of individualism and classical liberalism inevitably leads to a loss of freedom, the creation of an oppressive society, the tyranny of a dictator, and the serfdom of the individual. Hayek challenged the general view among British academics that fascism (including National Socialism) was a capitalist reaction against socialism. He argued that fascism, National Socialism and socialism had common roots in central economic planning and empowering the state over the individual.

Sounds like a bunch of strawmen to me. What do you propose as an alternative?

I admit I like the quote: "In no system that could be rationally defended would the state just do nothing."[31]

Go back to the limited government where each person was responsible for each persons actions. That the rational that everyone in the United States is too stupid to take care of themselves, then Uncle Sugar should be there to give them what they need has been nothing but a failure of epic proportions. Stop the government from being a nanny state and make people have to rely on their own God given gifts to succeed. That would not only make America a powerhouse in the industrial sector but put more people out of poverty which was supposed to be what the War on Poverty was all about.

War on poverty cost

In January 1964, Johnson declared “unconditional war on poverty in America.” Since then, the taxpayers have spent $22 trillion on Johnson’s war. Adjusted for inflation, that’s three times the cost of all military wars since the American Revolution.
RECTOR: The War on Poverty: 50 years of failure ...
www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/sep/19/rector-the-war-on-poverty-50-years-of-failure/

National debt is 20 Trillion dollars. Stop the war on poverty, take the trillion dollars saved each year and put it to the debt and in 21 years the national debt would be gone.
U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time