Fascism

[kaz]

I find it awfully ironic that this article is printed on Rense.com -- a viciously antisemitic conspiracy hate site.

You didn't vote, and you replied with an opinion not affirmed by evidence.

I did not vote because you are promoting an antisemitic hate site.

Perhaps you should ask somebody to explain European fascism to you some day, because they ALSO hated Jews.

....but, hey, if you want to reference a site that has an annual Hitler birthday celebration day, go for it. Just don't try to claim you are somehow AGAINST fascism, here.

I'm a supporter of represented democracy, i.e. a democratic republic. I'd vote Libertarian if I weren't also pragmatic and a supporter of the Social Contract, i.e. the Golden Rule.

But hey Dogshit, if you want to continue to spam the issue go for i;, it's evidence that you lack the intellectual and ethical capacity to be honest.

The golden rule is YOU treat people like you want to be treated. Turning your manhood over to bureaucrats and politicians is in no way the golden rule unless you're saying you don't care if anyone gives a shit about you and you don't give a shit about them.

We are libertarians not because of your strawman we don't want to help anyone. We opened our eyes and see that government does far more bad to everyone than good. Liking dependency doesn't mean it's good for you

 

[danielpalos]

Harding, Coolidge and Hoover all tried, but failed to even offer hope for what they had done.
"Prosperity is just around the corner," didn't do it, but it was the best Republicans could come up with.

just plain, laziness of laissez-fair? socialism requires a work ethic.

Socialism stifles a work ethic. Take a look at every socialist country out there. They universally produce less than a capitalist country of smaller size.

it is not a work ethic, just lousy management.

 

[danielpalos]

Harding, Coolidge and Hoover all tried, but failed to even offer hope for what they had done.
"Prosperity is just around the corner," didn't do it, but it was the best Republicans could come up with.

just plain, laziness of laissez-fair? socialism requires a work ethic.

Socialism stifles a work ethic. Take a look at every socialist country out there. They universally produce less than a capitalist country of smaller size.

Having worked in the Netherlands nine months recently from June, 2015 to March 2016, that's for damned sure. People started coming in at 9am and by 5pm they were standing in my office pointing at their watches that it's time to leave and lock the building. That is if they were still there. Several times at 5 pm I discovered I was alone in a locked building with the alarm set. Someone got called at home to come back and let me out. Seriously.

Not once did we have meetings in the evening or God forbid on a weekend. And I was there because they were losing money and their jobs were at risk from their American parent who hired me. They didn't care. They just assumed if they went under it was their government's job to be sure they got paid one way or another anyway.

They are llaaazzzzyyyy. It's pathetic

You may be missing the point about the difference between socialism and capitalism; under socialism, the best things in life are free. under capitalism you get what you can afford.

 

[danielpalos]

Harding, Coolidge and Hoover all tried, but failed to even offer hope for what they had done.
"Prosperity is just around the corner," didn't do it, but it was the best Republicans could come up with.

just plain, laziness of laissez-fair? socialism requires a work ethic.

Socialism stifles a work ethic. Take a look at every socialist country out there. They universally produce less than a capitalist country of smaller size.

Having worked in the Netherlands nine months recently from June, 2015 to March 2016, that's for damned sure. People started coming in at 9am and by 5pm they were standing in my office pointing at their watches that it's time to leave and lock the building. That is if they were still there.

Not once did we have meetings in the evening or God forbid on a weekend. And I was there because they were losing money and their jobs were at risk from their American parent who hired me. They didn't care. They just assumed if they went under it was their government's job to be sure they got paid one way or another anyway.

They are llaaazzzzyyyy. It's pathetic

Not lazy per se, there is simply no motivation to work. Why put in long hours, when your production is taken away from you and given to the lazy slob who doesn't bother to get his ass off the couch? Socialism rewards inactivity. People aren't stupid. They will do the work they HAVE to do, and nothing more because there is no reward for doing so. That is a lesson that the idealogues seem to never learn.

It sure looked like lazy to me. They completely, totally, honestly didn't give a shit. And I worked with upper management on down. The only one I knew who worked hard was the CFO and he worked really hard. He got fired before I left and was replaced with a guy I personally really liked, but considered the worst of the worst in terms of not giving a shit about his job or the company.

The CFO who was fired could have been paid for years, but he was motivated and found a new job in a few months anyway, he wanted to work. The Dutch admit that they don't like people who work hard because it puts pressure on them to work harder. It's surreal to me. They knew I was hired by their US owners and I was there to increase profits, but they had no problem telling me their views. They just weren't afraid of being fired

Capitalism works; Henry Ford proved it with his "efficiency wage".

 

[danielpalos]

just plain, laziness of laissez-fair? socialism requires a work ethic.

Socialism stifles a work ethic. Take a look at every socialist country out there. They universally produce less than a capitalist country of smaller size.

Having worked in the Netherlands nine months recently from June, 2015 to March 2016, that's for damned sure. People started coming in at 9am and by 5pm they were standing in my office pointing at their watches that it's time to leave and lock the building. That is if they were still there.

Not once did we have meetings in the evening or God forbid on a weekend. And I was there because they were losing money and their jobs were at risk from their American parent who hired me. They didn't care. They just assumed if they went under it was their government's job to be sure they got paid one way or another anyway.

They are llaaazzzzyyyy. It's pathetic

Not lazy per se, there is simply no motivation to work. Why put in long hours, when your production is taken away from you and given to the lazy slob who doesn't bother to get his ass off the couch? Socialism rewards inactivity. People aren't stupid. They will do the work they HAVE to do, and nothing more because there is no reward for doing so. That is a lesson that the idealogues seem to never learn.

It sure looked like lazy to me. They completely, totally, honestly didn't give a shit. And I worked with upper management on down. The only one I knew who worked hard was the CFO and he worked really hard. He got fired before I left and was replaced with a guy I personally really liked, but considered the worst of the worst in terms of not giving a shit about his job or the company

That's what decades of socialism breed. It is a systemic problem. Next time you are there find a flea market and you will find folks who work very hard indeed. They are living on the black market and thus they get to keep what they earn. They are motivated to work.

are they, leisure time poor?

 

[westwall]

Harding, Coolidge and Hoover all tried, but failed to even offer hope for what they had done.
"Prosperity is just around the corner," didn't do it, but it was the best Republicans could come up with.

just plain, laziness of laissez-fair? socialism requires a work ethic.

Socialism stifles a work ethic. Take a look at every socialist country out there. They universally produce less than a capitalist country of smaller size.

Having worked in the Netherlands nine months recently from June, 2015 to March 2016, that's for damned sure. People started coming in at 9am and by 5pm they were standing in my office pointing at their watches that it's time to leave and lock the building. That is if they were still there. Several times at 5 pm I discovered I was alone in a locked building with the alarm set. Someone got called at home to come back and let me out. Seriously.

Not once did we have meetings in the evening or God forbid on a weekend. And I was there because they were losing money and their jobs were at risk from their American parent who hired me. They didn't care. They just assumed if they went under it was their government's job to be sure they got paid one way or another anyway.

They are llaaazzzzyyyy. It's pathetic

You may be missing the point about the difference between socialism and capitalism; under socialism, the best things in life are free. under capitalism you get what you can afford.

Boy are you devoid of reality. Under socialism you get what the government is inclined to give you. If the government is poorly run (as is the case with most socialist countries) there is little wealth to spread around so the elite keep it for themselves. Venezuela is an excellent example of this, when they allowed oil companies to run the oil fields they had wealth. Then chavez nationalized everything and the country collapsed. Now, they don't have even the basics. Food is running out and they will have yet another revolution again. A "socialist paradise" for sure...

 

[westwall]

14 characteristics of fascism Flashcards | Quizlet

fascism | politics

fascism - Common characteristics of fascist movements | politics

I can post much more on the topic of fascism, but the dog wants to play Frisbee and I will wait for a responses from those who can think.

That's so cute.

You place this in the clean debate forum, and then turn around and call me a dog who cannot think.

Priceless.

The goal was to have a clean debate, the first response fucked that up and you, dogshit, did that.

Actually YOU were the first one to violate the CDZ rules nimrod. You lie about everything don't you.. Typical government worker.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I find it awfully ironic that this article is printed on Rense.com -- a viciously antisemitic conspiracy hate site.

You didn't vote, and you replied with an opinion not affirmed by evidence.

I did not vote because you are promoting an antisemitic hate site.

Perhaps you should ask somebody to explain European fascism to you some day, because they ALSO hated Jews.

....but, hey, if you want to reference a site that has an annual Hitler birthday celebration day, go for it. Just don't try to claim you are somehow AGAINST fascism, here.

I'm a supporter of represented democracy, i.e. a democratic republic. I'd vote Libertarian if I weren't also pragmatic and a supporter of the Social Contract, i.e. the Golden Rule.

But hey Dogshit, if you want to continue to spam the issue go for i;, it's evidence that you lack the intellectual and ethical capacity to be honest.

The golden rule is YOU treat people like you want to be treated. Turning your manhood over to bureaucrats and politicians is in no way the golden rule unless you're saying you don't care if anyone gives a shit about you and you don't give a shit about them.

We are libertarians not because of your strawman we don't want to help anyone. We opened our eyes and see that government does far more bad to everyone than good. Liking dependency doesn't mean it's good for you

Well you got the first sentence correct, after that you built a straw man and offered an opinion based on your biases.

 

[kaz]

I find it awfully ironic that this article is printed on Rense.com -- a viciously antisemitic conspiracy hate site.

You didn't vote, and you replied with an opinion not affirmed by evidence.

I did not vote because you are promoting an antisemitic hate site.

Perhaps you should ask somebody to explain European fascism to you some day, because they ALSO hated Jews.

....but, hey, if you want to reference a site that has an annual Hitler birthday celebration day, go for it. Just don't try to claim you are somehow AGAINST fascism, here.

I'm a supporter of represented democracy, i.e. a democratic republic. I'd vote Libertarian if I weren't also pragmatic and a supporter of the Social Contract, i.e. the Golden Rule.

But hey Dogshit, if you want to continue to spam the issue go for i;, it's evidence that you lack the intellectual and ethical capacity to be honest.

The golden rule is YOU treat people like you want to be treated. Turning your manhood over to bureaucrats and politicians is in no way the golden rule unless you're saying you don't care if anyone gives a shit about you and you don't give a shit about them.

We are libertarians not because of your strawman we don't want to help anyone. We opened our eyes and see that government does far more bad to everyone than good. Liking dependency doesn't mean it's good for you

Well you got the first sentence correct, after that you built a straw man and offered an opinion based on your biases.

The strawman was yours as you said helping people = government. In fact we know government is the worst way to help people. It's you that abdicates the responsibility to provide real help, which can only be accomplished with the owner of money spending it. Your solution of people who did not earn the money spending it to supposedly help people is what leads to corrupt politics and institutional poor as we have now.

Also, I was curious reading the CDZ discussion. I didn't know this started there, I joined the discussion when it was in politics. I read far enough to see three posts with direct personal insults, and all three were ... yours ... Your self image is hilarious. Keep talking

 

[Wry Catcher]

14 characteristics of fascism Flashcards | Quizlet

fascism | politics

fascism - Common characteristics of fascist movements | politics

I can post much more on the topic of fascism, but the dog wants to play Frisbee and I will wait for a responses from those who can think.

That's so cute.

You place this in the clean debate forum, and then turn around and call me a dog who cannot think.

Priceless.

The goal was to have a clean debate, the first response fucked that up and you, dogshit, did that.

Actually YOU were the first one to violate the CDZ rules nimrod. You lie about everything don't you.. Typical government worker.

What have I lied about?

"nimrod"? As a mod you don't project as a very good role model. I spent some time as the manager of IA, and I learned very quickly that some people with very little power feel the need to exercise it to the extreme. Of course I was retired before the classic event which best describes such persons, the Zimmerman Syndrome.

 

[kaz]

I did not vote because you are promoting an antisemitic hate site.

Perhaps you should ask somebody to explain European fascism to you some day, because they ALSO hated Jews.

....but, hey, if you want to reference a site that has an annual Hitler birthday celebration day, go for it. Just don't try to claim you are somehow AGAINST fascism, here.

I'm a supporter of represented democracy, i.e. a democratic republic. I'd vote Libertarian if I weren't also pragmatic and a supporter of the Social Contract, i.e. the Golden Rule.

But hey Dogshit, if you want to continue to spam the issue go for i;, it's evidence that you lack the intellectual and ethical capacity to be honest.

The golden rule is YOU treat people like you want to be treated. Turning your manhood over to bureaucrats and politicians is in no way the golden rule unless you're saying you don't care if anyone gives a shit about you and you don't give a shit about them.

We are libertarians not because of your strawman we don't want to help anyone. We opened our eyes and see that government does far more bad to everyone than good. Liking dependency doesn't mean it's good for you

Well you got the first sentence correct, after that you built a straw man and offered an opinion based on your biases.

Oh, pretty pretty please, DO teach people about the golden rule, Wry! You have so much to impart on the subject, and while I can only speak for myself here in terms of the great enthusiasm I have for your gentle tutelage, I can't imagine anybody else could possibly reject the illumination you might provide on the subject considering the considerable effort you have already exerted in leading by example.

Well thank you for paying attention dogshit. There is a corollary to the Golden Rule, do onto others as they have done onto you. Had you paid more attention you would discover I have had civil conversations and debates with civil people; asshole and dogshits get what they give - I'm not a victim and never pretended to be.

You advocate doing nothing for people. You want government to do it for you.

I can do that. I want to help you, my friend. And I'm going to accomplish that task by turning it over to someone else to do it for me. I'm assigning to NOW to help you. What the hell, I'll do a double and assign the NAACP to help you too. You're welcome

 

[Coyote]

So when Hitler killed a socialist who was speaking against him, you actually believe the issue was that he was a socialist, not that he was speaking against him. Go ahead, say it, say that's what you believe. That would be stupid that's funny...

The point being is that Hitler was a fascist, not a socialist. Fascism isn't anymore socialism than North Korea is a Democratic Republic. I'm sorry you cannot seem to comprehend this point.

I've been fascinated over the past few years when the far Right meme that Hitler was a socialist surfaced. Anyone know who said it first? Was it Beck? He's pretty fucked up and it sounds like something he'd say. Rush?

I think it first surfaced with one Goldberg's book - Liberal Fascism. He tried to make a case that fascists and Hitler were all leftwing The idea that it is leftwing is new revisionism. It's kind of like the current attempt to claim Islam is not a religion.

 

[Coyote]

You love to hurl insults but don't expect them back...

Incorrect, but I can see why you want to believe this. How else can you justify constantly posting ad hominems?

Not sure why you are so vested in believing unfettered capitalism never existed, but obviously you won't be dissuaded regardless of facts or links presented.

I think the Nazi party beat them to it. You seem to know their party better than they did.

Nazis have always been seen as RWers until the last decade or so. People over 50 know this to be true. As several have posted on this and similar threads, a more accurate viewpoint is that fascism was highly authoritarian with some elements of socialism, but definitely leaning right. Why the far Right seeks to label fascists as far Lefties is interesting even though it is wrong.

I've always seen Nazi's and Fascists stuck in the extreme rightwing category and Stalinists in the left. But some political theorists consider Hitler and Stalin to be their own category since they employed a mix of left and right ideologies.

 

[kaz]

So when Hitler killed a socialist who was speaking against him, you actually believe the issue was that he was a socialist, not that he was speaking against him. Go ahead, say it, say that's what you believe. That would be stupid that's funny...

The point being is that Hitler was a fascist, not a socialist. Fascism isn't anymore socialism than North Korea is a Democratic Republic. I'm sorry you cannot seem to comprehend this point.

I've been fascinated over the past few years when the far Right meme that Hitler was a socialist surfaced. Anyone know who said it first? Was it Beck? He's pretty fucked up and it sounds like something he'd say. Rush?

I think it first surfaced with one Goldberg's book - Liberal Fascism. He tried to make a case that fascists and Hitler were all leftwing The idea that it is leftwing is new revisionism. It's kind of like the current attempt to claim Islam is not a religion.

That book was published in 2008. Hitler said it in the 1930s, considerably before that.

What you're doing is a logical fallacy called argument ad nauseum. What you can't do is explain:

1) How fascists aren't government controlling the economy like any other socialist government

2) Any real difference between Fascist Nazi Germany and Communist Russia

 

[Coyote]

You love to hurl insults but don't expect them back...

Incorrect, but I can see why you want to believe this. How else can you justify constantly posting ad hominems?

Not sure why you are so vested in believing unfettered capitalism never existed, but obviously you won't be dissuaded regardless of facts or links presented.

I think the Nazi party beat them to it. You seem to know their party better than they did.

Nazis have always been seen as RWers until the last decade or so. People over 50 know this to be true. As several have posted on this and similar threads, a more accurate viewpoint is that fascism was highly authoritarian with some elements of socialism, but definitely leaning right. Why the far Right seeks to label fascists as far Lefties is interesting even though it is wrong.

That chart is wrong........nazism is socialism.....it is left wing. How does libertarianism...and American Conservatism, with the belief in limited government and individual rights even come close to nazism? and you are saying they lie on the same side of the line.........

The left wing will jump through whatever hoops they have to....contort through whatever yoga postures they have to...to hide the fact that the mass murder of 100 million innocent men, women and children starting about 1917....the modern period.....were all done by different styles of socialism........

That is why they have to lie all the time.....

Because it's not a simple linear graph - you have the added dimension of Authoritarian vs Libertarian.

 

[kaz]

You love to hurl insults but don't expect them back...

Incorrect, but I can see why you want to believe this. How else can you justify constantly posting ad hominems?

Not sure why you are so vested in believing unfettered capitalism never existed, but obviously you won't be dissuaded regardless of facts or links presented.

I think the Nazi party beat them to it. You seem to know their party better than they did.

Nazis have always been seen as RWers until the last decade or so. People over 50 know this to be true. As several have posted on this and similar threads, a more accurate viewpoint is that fascism was highly authoritarian with some elements of socialism, but definitely leaning right. Why the far Right seeks to label fascists as far Lefties is interesting even though it is wrong.

I've always seen Nazi's and Fascists stuck in the extreme rightwing category and Stalinists in the left. But some political theorists consider Hitler and Stalin to be their own category since they employed a mix of left and right ideologies.

Begging the question. For like the 20th time, explain the difference between "right wing" fascism and left wing socialism with any MEANINGFUL difference.

Hint, I'm not looking for that business is free in fascism as long as they obey Hitler so he doesn't kill and replace them. That isn't free business

 

[kaz]

You love to hurl insults but don't expect them back...

Incorrect, but I can see why you want to believe this. How else can you justify constantly posting ad hominems?

Not sure why you are so vested in believing unfettered capitalism never existed, but obviously you won't be dissuaded regardless of facts or links presented.

I think the Nazi party beat them to it. You seem to know their party better than they did.

Nazis have always been seen as RWers until the last decade or so. People over 50 know this to be true. As several have posted on this and similar threads, a more accurate viewpoint is that fascism was highly authoritarian with some elements of socialism, but definitely leaning right. Why the far Right seeks to label fascists as far Lefties is interesting even though it is wrong.

That chart is wrong........nazism is socialism.....it is left wing. How does libertarianism...and American Conservatism, with the belief in limited government and individual rights even come close to nazism? and you are saying they lie on the same side of the line.........

The left wing will jump through whatever hoops they have to....contort through whatever yoga postures they have to...to hide the fact that the mass murder of 100 million innocent men, women and children starting about 1917....the modern period.....were all done by different styles of socialism........

That is why they have to lie all the time.....

Because it's not a simple linear graph - you have the added dimension of Authoritarian vs Libertarian.

I agree the chart is flawed. I'm not clear what "Right versus Left" means. Right and left can be fiscal, social or military. The chart doesn't define what they mean by right and left

 

[Coyote]

This article has a pretty good explaination of left/right...

The Left-Right Political Spectrum Explained - Fact / Myth

Despite the ambiguity and complexity involved in creating a political spectrum, the political left and right are properly defined (from a historical perspective that considers the basic government types, the basic political parties, social contract theory, and the origin of left-right), by the following two paradigms (which should both be considered at once):

1. Most importantly, “Liberal (favoring liberty) is left, and conservative (favoring authority) is right” (see a discussion on liberalism vs. conservatism).
2. And, almost equally as important, ideologies that favor the collective are left, and ideologies favoring the individual are right. See individualism vs. collectivism.

Thus in summary: the left-right spectrum can be defined by the “individualism (right) vs. collectivism (left) paradigm” compared to the “authority (right) vs. liberty (left) paradigm”. This means there is not one primary left-right factor, but at least two that must be considered simultaneously!​

and

Basic Liberal Vs. Conservative Political Ideology Spectrum – What is the Difference Between the Left-Wing and the Right-Wing?

As noted above, historically speaking, the simplest way to understand left-right ideology is: liberal is left and conservative is right. Also noted above this relates to the authority and collectivism vs. individualism paradigms. With this information covered, let’s better define the underlying terms so we can be clear on their meaning.

• Liberalism (AKA classic liberalism) typically being a fight for liberty, progress, and democracy and against authority. It supports the individual liberty and individual authority of the people, but at the expense of collective liberty and collective authority of the state. At its worst, it is lawless anarchy or a tyrannical mob.
• Conservatism (AKA traditional conservatism) being a push toward tradition, order, and authority and away from liberalism. It favors collective authority via the state, but at the expense of collective and individual liberty and individual authority. At its worst, it is a tyrannical dictatorship.
• A third concept, Socialism, is a populist movement rooted in late 19th century Marxism, that is typically to the left on most issues. Conservatism stands against this as well, as does classic liberalism. It favors collective authority via the state to ensure collective liberty, but at the expense of individual liberty and individual authority. At its worst it is also a tyrannical dictatorship.

​

Yeah, we've seen how accepting Liberals are.

About as accepting as Conservatives.

If you are attempting to converse in regards to the US economy I suggest you do read some history and discover that both parties, of which Trump is neither, are BOTH fucking up our economy.
And I'm not referring to the Bleeding Heart Liberal or Sociopathic Neo-Conservative version of history.

What does that have to do with being accepting?

You seem to believe that Trump is a Nazi.
I think anyone who financially fucks their fellow American is a Nazi.

No. I don't thiink Trump is a Nazi. Not even close.

I do think he's a thin skinned lying arrogant ass though.

 

[Coyote]

This article has a pretty good explaination of left/right...

The Left-Right Political Spectrum Explained - Fact / Myth

Despite the ambiguity and complexity involved in creating a political spectrum, the political left and right are properly defined (from a historical perspective that considers the basic government types, the basic political parties, social contract theory, and the origin of left-right), by the following two paradigms (which should both be considered at once):

1. Most importantly, “Liberal (favoring liberty) is left, and conservative (favoring authority) is right” (see a discussion on liberalism vs. conservatism).
2. And, almost equally as important, ideologies that favor the collective are left, and ideologies favoring the individual are right. See individualism vs. collectivism.

Thus in summary: the left-right spectrum can be defined by the “individualism (right) vs. collectivism (left) paradigm” compared to the “authority (right) vs. liberty (left) paradigm”. This means there is not one primary left-right factor, but at least two that must be considered simultaneously!​

and

Basic Liberal Vs. Conservative Political Ideology Spectrum – What is the Difference Between the Left-Wing and the Right-Wing?

As noted above, historically speaking, the simplest way to understand left-right ideology is: liberal is left and conservative is right. Also noted above this relates to the authority and collectivism vs. individualism paradigms. With this information covered, let’s better define the underlying terms so we can be clear on their meaning.

• Liberalism (AKA classic liberalism) typically being a fight for liberty, progress, and democracy and against authority. It supports the individual liberty and individual authority of the people, but at the expense of collective liberty and collective authority of the state. At its worst, it is lawless anarchy or a tyrannical mob.
• Conservatism (AKA traditional conservatism) being a push toward tradition, order, and authority and away from liberalism. It favors collective authority via the state, but at the expense of collective and individual liberty and individual authority. At its worst, it is a tyrannical dictatorship.
• A third concept, Socialism, is a populist movement rooted in late 19th century Marxism, that is typically to the left on most issues. Conservatism stands against this as well, as does classic liberalism. It favors collective authority via the state to ensure collective liberty, but at the expense of individual liberty and individual authority. At its worst it is also a tyrannical dictatorship.

​

Sorry.....those don't hold for the U.S.....in the U.S. the left represents increased government control.....the Right is less government control....so your post is invalid......Libetheralism is essentially the Right in the United States....less government control, not more.

You can use left wing definitions all you want.....but socialism advocates government control of the means of production....left wing....the Right....less government interference and more individual liberty.....

It's perfectly valid because there are some common attributes to left and right that cross all countries. The key to validity is to view it on two axis. For example the right is pro-authority (police, military); pro-militerary, nationalistic, pro-traditional cultural norms and pro-traditional religions.

 

[Coyote]

You love to hurl insults but don't expect them back...

Incorrect, but I can see why you want to believe this. How else can you justify constantly posting ad hominems?

Not sure why you are so vested in believing unfettered capitalism never existed, but obviously you won't be dissuaded regardless of facts or links presented.

I think the Nazi party beat them to it. You seem to know their party better than they did.

Nazis have always been seen as RWers until the last decade or so. People over 50 know this to be true. As several have posted on this and similar threads, a more accurate viewpoint is that fascism was highly authoritarian with some elements of socialism, but definitely leaning right. Why the far Right seeks to label fascists as far Lefties is interesting even though it is wrong.

That chart is wrong........nazism is socialism.....it is left wing. How does libertarianism...and American Conservatism, with the belief in limited government and individual rights even come close to nazism? and you are saying they lie on the same side of the line.........

The left wing will jump through whatever hoops they have to....contort through whatever yoga postures they have to...to hide the fact that the mass murder of 100 million innocent men, women and children starting about 1917....the modern period.....were all done by different styles of socialism........

That is why they have to lie all the time.....

Because it's not a simple linear graph - you have the added dimension of Authoritarian vs Libertarian.

I agree the chart is flawed. I'm not clear what "Right versus Left" means. Right and left can be fiscal, social or military. The chart doesn't define what they mean by right and left

I don't think the chart is flawed - though there might be bias in where ideologies are placed. One access is economic the other social.