Hitler, Fascism and the right wing

[LordBrownTrout]

Mussolini was actually the guy that came up with the idea of Fascism. It has been pretty well established that he and his paper were for a time funded by a British "intelligence" agency.

Hitler was a deceptive politician who said whatever it took to gain power. He took money from wealthy industrialists and some claim US banks. Many have tied a Bush family ancestor's business to money funding Hitler. The Nazis were known to have fought street battles against the Communists of Germany.

There are also documents from the woodrow wilson era, eugenics, in which the nazis were studying.

 

[Kosh]

....

Good luck trying to get anyone to bother listening. Most people are simply not willing to recognize that true political identification requires a multi axis mapping.

Most people want something simple.

Al-Qaeda was simple. People knew what it stood for, knew it was bad and could easily get their head around it. Same with Communism.

Problem with far right is that there are connotations they wish to avoid. This is gerrymandering with a dictionary.

And now you see how far to the left this poster is..

Anyone believing that Obama is a moderate is very far left..

And the far left drones show that they will believe anything that their rich white far left masters tell them..

 

[Iceweasel]

I should probably have put in my OP that my emphasis in small government is really about the economic side of government (i.e. deregulation) rather than on limits to the overall power or influence of government, which I would agree are central to the US's founding.

But deregulation of the economy only really developed in the 1970's and with Reagan, Thatcher and later the IMF, and it is this element of economic policy that cannot be applied in hindsight to the Nazi economy.

So now it's only about economics? OK, show us where the founders set up the management of the economy before Reagan came along and destroyed their dream.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Or you can't understand the issues at hand. I'm a conservative due to life long experiences and observations. Maybe you need a bit of objectivity?

Of the two of us, I am absolutely certain that one is 60 years old and actually studied political science at a major University.

Of the other, I am quite doubtful.

 

[Kosh]

Mussolini was actually the guy that came up with the idea of Fascism. It has been pretty well established that he and his paper were for a time funded by a British "intelligence" agency.

Hitler was a deceptive politician who said whatever it took to gain power. He took money from wealthy industrialists and some claim US banks. Many have tied a Bush family ancestor's business to money funding Hitler. The Nazis were known to have fought street battles against the Communists of Germany.

Indeed, and those are good points.

Mussolini is definitely the 'founding father' of fascism (even the word fascist comes from Italian) and it is his adminsitration where I think one can argue a stronger left wing influence - hence my leaving him out of my list of right-wing examples of dictaorship. Mussolini did move further to the right as time passed, but back in the 1930's he was perhaps more populist than anything else.

And you see this far left poster agrees with any other far left poster.

At the time the Kennedy's and the Rothschild's were big admirers of Hitler and Stalin, yet the far left will ignore their own people and who they admire.

Just goes to show how blind the far left truly is.

The far left does not want labels applied to them, just everyone else.

 

[Saigon]

Iceweasel -

It's in the Nazi economy that we see the hallmarks of right wing government - very strong use of investment and dividends from the private sector, and a close relationship with the aristocracy as a result. This is crucial in understanding both the emphasis on class as well.

Thus, it is in this context that I also talk about small government as being a modern concept, unknown to the architects of the Nazi economy.

I'd be happy to recommend books on this if you are interested - particularly this one by the always excellent Richard Overy:

http://www.amazon.com/Economic-Reco...r=1-5&keywords=the+nazi+economy&tag=ff0d01-20

I really have little interest in the US context here - it just isn't relevant to fascism.

 

[Wry Catcher]

The Crazy Right Wing of today thrives on the BIG LIE, no amount of evidence will ever convince a true convert to stop parroting/promoting the BIG LIES.

The one commonality between Fism and Cism is both are Authoritarian, that is, a form of government characterized by absolute or blind obedience to authority, against individual freedom and related to the expectation of unquestioning obedience.

The D's and R's are not Authoritarian if one believes this definition is correct. Of course obedience can be coerced by Gulags and mass murders or by simply taking away campaign donations and supporting candidates who will follow the 'company line".

D's and R's are both authoritarian. Even the simplest, smallest governance exudes authoritarianism.

Thank you for your opinion, though I wonder if the average Libertarian agrees. Your comment suggests that laws and regulations are a form of repression. Do you feel subjugated when 'forced' to obey a speed limit or stop for a red light?

 

[Kosh]

Iceweasel -

It's in the Nazi economy that we see the hallmarks of right wing government - very strong use of investment and dividends from the private sector, and a close relationship with the aristocracy as a result. This is crucial in understanding both the emphasis on class as well.

Thus, it is in this context that I also talk about small government as being a modern concept, unknown to the architects of the Nazi economy.

I'd be happy to recommend books on this if you are interested - particularly this one by the always excellent Richard Overy:

http://www.amazon.com/Economic-Recovery-1932-1938-Studies-History/dp/0521557674/ref=sr_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1416671455&sr=1-5&keywords=the nazi economy

I really have little interest in the US context here - it just isn't relevant to fascism.

Socialism is not right wing government..

See how the far left does not understand beyond their limited programming.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Iceweasel -

It's in the Nazi economy that we see the hallmarks of right wing government - very strong use of investment and dividends from the private sector, and a close relationship with the aristocracy as a result. This is crucial in understanding both the emphasis on class as well.

Thus, it is in this context that I also talk about small government as being a modern concept, unknown to the architects of the Nazi economy.

I'd be happy to recommend books on this if you are interested - particularly this one by the always excellent Richard Overy:

http://www.amazon.com/Economic-Recovery-1932-1938-Studies-History/dp/0521557674/ref=sr_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1416671455&sr=1-5&keywords=the nazi economy

I really have little interest in the US context here - it just isn't relevant to fascism.

Socialism is not right wing government..

See how the far left does not understand beyond their limited programming.

Socialism can be authoritarian or democratic. Your ignorance never ceases to amaze.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Socialism is not right wing government..

See how the far left does not understand beyond their limited programming.

And the NSDAP got rid of their socialist left wing element on the night of the long knives.

Night of the Long Knives - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

That was 1934, long before they were making war.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Actually any elected leader can accumulate to much power. By executive order, or by a congress that allows it to happen. If he doesn't go when it's his time to go you take him out with a gun.

Taking democratically-elected leaders out with guns is an act of terrorism - nothing more.

Well, the exception being where the violent removal of Democratically Elected Leaders, who were 'elected' through Deceit, FRAUD and Ignorance.

The forced assumption is that the "Democratically Elected Leader" was so elected, after they truthfully represented themselves, their agenda and that the elections through which they were elected was executed absent FRAUDULENT means.

Socialism, resting in Relativism, cannot exist absent Deceit, thus there is no Democratically elected Socialists, therefore it is the duty of all free people to destroy all socialists.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Iceweasel -

It's in the Nazi economy that we see the hallmarks of right wing government - very strong use of investment and dividends from the private sector, and a close relationship with the aristocracy as a result. This is crucial in understanding both the emphasis on class as well.

Thus, it is in this context that I also talk about small government as being a modern concept, unknown to the architects of the Nazi economy.

I'd be happy to recommend books on this if you are interested - particularly this one by the always excellent Richard Overy:

http://www.amazon.com/Economic-Recovery-1932-1938-Studies-History/dp/0521557674/ref=sr_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1416671455&sr=1-5&keywords=the nazi economy

I really have little interest in the US context here - it just isn't relevant to fascism.

Socialism is not right wing government..

See how the far left does not understand beyond their limited programming.

Socialism can be authoritarian or democratic. Your ignorance never ceases to amaze.

All Socialism is authoritarian, as democratic socialism rests entirely in Deceit... its execution being exclusively Fraudulent and all of such resting in the Ignorance of the culture which succumbs to both.

You see scamp, absent Deceit, Fraud and Ignorance, socialism cannot exist.

 

[Papageorgio]

This shit again!

Gets old doesn't it.

Hitler was a mental case, case closed.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Socialism is not right wing government..

See how the far left does not understand beyond their limited programming.

And the NSDAP got rid of their socialist left wing element on the night of the long knives.

Night of the Long Knives - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

That was 1934, long before they were making war.

LOL! Yes... that is a wonderful myth. "The Good Guys were murdered by the Bad Guys in the Night of Long Knives, and that's why the National Socialist German Worker's Party was not Socialists."

The only problem with that is that "The Good Guys" were mouthy, malcontent murderous thugs who, once power was acquired; which, for the benefit of the socialists reading this, means that they weren't "good" ... they were simply 'socialists whose usefulness had played out'.

Socialists are inherently such, because they expect that when 'The Party' is seated, they will all be "PLAYUHS!". This means that in all socialist coups, most of the Playuhs need to be 'dealt with'. Although, it is fair to say that not all are killed, most are merely made aware of those that were killed and, having a keen sense of survival, they simply return to the life of the addled drone and spend their time on the internet regurgitating the vomit intrinsic to "The Party" line.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

This shit again!

Gets old doesn't it.

Hitler was a mental case, case closed.

Yes... Socialism is a perversion of human reasoning. The more that its applied, the more perverse the reasoning must become to sustain it, with the progression being 'he's a little quirk', to inevitably: "He's a monster".

In truth, Quirky is Monstrous, just without the power.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

The Crazy Right Wing of today thrives on the BIG LIE, no amount of evidence will ever convince a true convert to stop parroting/promoting the BIG LIES.

The one commonality between Fism and Cism is both are Authoritarian, that is, a form of government characterized by absolute or blind obedience to authority, against individual freedom and related to the expectation of unquestioning obedience.

The D's and R's are not Authoritarian if one believes this definition is correct. Of course obedience can be coerced by Gulags and mass murders or by simply taking away campaign donations and supporting candidates who will follow the 'company line".

D's and R's are both authoritarian. Even the simplest, smallest governance exudes authoritarianism.

Thank you for your opinion, though I wonder if the average Libertarian agrees. Your comment suggests that laws and regulations are a form of repression. Do you feel subjugated when 'forced' to obey a speed limit or stop for a red light?

Id say that you were correct in assigning repression to a law that subjects citizens to abide. However, there has to be a small amount of law to keep anarchy at bay.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

I should probably have put in my OP that my emphasis in small government is really about the economic side of government (i.e. deregulation) rather than on limits to the overall power or influence of government, which I would agree are central to the US's founding.

But deregulation of the economy only really developed in the 1970's and with Reagan, Thatcher and later the IMF, and it is this element of economic policy that cannot be applied in hindsight to the Nazi economy.

So now it's only about economics? OK, show us where the founders set up the management of the economy before Reagan came along and destroyed their dream.

ROFLMNAO! Man that was beautiful.

Imagine a set of ideas SO bereft of reason that to believe it, requires that PAGES AND PAGES AND PAGES of point by point refutation simply NEVER HAPPENED!

Nicely done, for an Iceweasel.

 

[Londoner]

Hitler was the modern embodiment of "Borders Language Culture". Just listen to his speeches. His primary goal was to protect the motherland from external forces. He spoke endlessly of how Jews were destroying the real Germany, it's religion and traditions. Compare this to a Talk Radio rant on what Mexicans are doing to say California and the primacy of the English language.

Hitler was vocally opposed to the liberal modernism that came out of the Enlightenment and French Revolution, both of which were leveling German culture and turning Europe into a soulless cosmopolitan state where each nation's sacred traditions were seen as pre-modern anachronisms. In short, Hitler was deeply proud of the Real Germany and was committed to purging anything or anyone who might corrupt it. This explains his eugenics program of cleansing the race by getting rid of all but the healthiest German blood.

Hitler's biggest enemy was liberal tolerance, which had assimilated Jews into German culture, allowing them to infiltrate positions of power in finance, commerce and entertainment. Compare this with the Rightwing fear that anti-American liberals have secretly infiltrated media, government and Hollywood. In short, it is very easy to see similarities across Rightwing movements.

Next time you hear Sean Hannity speak of real Americans, or you spy upon the contempt certain political parties have for Mexicans and African Americans, you should pause and think of what this stuff resembles.

Much of the pathological and almost violent nationalism that came out of 9/11 - with its use of the word Homeland and its obsession with displaying national symbols - is straight out of Germany in the 30s. If we get one more big attack on the U.S .Homeland, the Rightwing will get everything they need to turn the U.S. into a police state with loyalty oaths.

God help us.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The Crazy Right Wing of today thrives on the BIG LIE, no amount of evidence will ever convince a true convert to stop parroting/promoting the BIG LIES.

The one commonality between Fism and Cism is both are Authoritarian, that is, a form of government characterized by absolute obedience to authority, and against individual freedom of expression.

D's and R's are not Authoritarian if one believes this definition is correct. Of course obedience can be coerced by Gulags and mass murders or by simply taking away campaign donations and supporting candidates who will follow the 'company line".

Golly... one would think that where one finds the emphatic "DECLARATION!" that their entire argument stands upon the foundational discovery of "THE BIG LIES", that somewhere would be SOME discussion which included a citation or two, defining THE BIG LIE.

.

.

.

Now... some people would conclude that the omission of such a citation would require that the DECLARATION is therefore, A BIG LIE!

But, because I am ALL ABOUT "THE FAIRNESS"... I'll invite the purveyor of THE BIG LIE to prove their veracity by citing "THE BIG LIE" which demonstrate that "THE BIG LIE" declaration, is a BIG LIE!

What about it scamp? What IS THE BIG LIE?

 

[Iceweasel]

Or you can't understand the issues at hand. I'm a conservative due to life long experiences and observations. Maybe you need a bit of objectivity?

Of the two of us, I am absolutely certain that one is 60 years old and actually studied political science at a major University.

Of the other, I am quite doubtful.

LOL. Mighty weak shit there professor. Your poly-sci bullshit classes don't mean anything to me. Chances are you are programed by socialists and are far from being objective.