Hitler, Fascism and the right wing

[bripat9643]

Try reading "Socialism" by Ludwig von Mises or "The Road to Serfdom" by Frederic Hayek.

Why?

So you'll learn why fascism is just another form of socialism. Both men are renowned economists, by the way. Hayek received a Nobel prise.

But this is a debate. If you have something to say, SAY IT. Don't tell me to read things and expect this to happen. Use your source if you will, if you won't, then what's the point?

Your Komrade Saigon keeps giving me a list of historians and telling me to read their books. That's his conception of evidence. Go tell it to him.

We know how the Right despises "book learning". It's unclear from what source you think wisdom comes.

Those are the kind of remarks that left-wing assholes always make.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

Yeah, we know commies lie. What's your point?

They called themselves a Republic, so they must be one!

You're such a dishonest fucking hack

Yes, we know. The Nazi's were "right-wing" because they espoused individual liberty, personal freedom and limited government

Fucking hack

RW totalitarianism means capitalist PERIOD, as opposed to communism, shytteheads. The company had a portfolio of 1,800 units valued at just over $100 million in April 2013. Currently, the portfolio is nearly 5,000 units valued at $200 million. Within two months, Roco will have about 7,000 units, said David Colman. The additional 2,000 units are in Michigan, Mississippi and Texas. t can be anything BUT totalitarian, brainwashed functional moron. Including social democracy or SOCIALISM. SEE WESTERN EUROPE, OZ, ETC.

Moron, idiot, duppe, sucka, duh.

Right wing IS personal freedom and limited government. You lefties, Obama, Hitler, FDR, Mao and Stalin are the totalitarians

Really? The RW is all about personal freedom? First, define the RW in America today (do you admit you're a member?) then explain the RW's position on voting, abortion, marriage, MJ legalization, public education, the environment, collective bargaining and unions, green and renewable energy and government on all levels, local, special districts, state and federal.

 

[francoHFW]

Try reading "Socialism" by Ludwig von Mises or "The Road to Serfdom" by Frederic Hayek.

Why?

So you'll learn why fascism is just another form of socialism. Both men are renowned economists, by the way. Hayek received a Nobel prise.

But this is a debate. If you have something to say, SAY IT. Don't tell me to read things and expect this to happen. Use your source if you will, if you won't, then what's the point?

Your Komrade Saigon keeps giving me a list of historians and telling me to read their books. That's his conception of evidence. Go tell it to him.

We know how the Right despises "book learning". It's unclear from what source you think wisdom comes.

Rush, Beck, Heritage, Levin, etc, ridiculous books from RW bought off authors, and the out of context quotes from Nobel prize winners...

 

[Discombobulated]

One thing von Kuehnelt made clear, Nazism and Fascism rose from democracies.

Correct.

Nazism (/ˈnɑːtsɪz(ə)m/; alternatively spelled Naziism),[1] or National Socialism in full (German: Nationalsozialismus) . However , Hitler understood that socialism sucks ---that central planning is useless so he decided that fascism was better.


Fascism allows the government to use (force) private entrepreneurs into assisting the bureaucracy in perpetrating its dastardly deeds.

And there's one fundamental difference between left wing totalitarians and right wing totalitarians. Private entrepreneurs make lots of money with right wing totalitarians.

Really?


Have you asked Soros and Buffett?


.

Yes......really.

Soros and Buffett? No......have you?

 

[Discombobulated]

Hey libs, found another book for ya...

Thanks for presenting this book cover. It's a good example of superficial political/ideological dialectics completely devoid of any real historical perspective. This author is nothing like an actual historian. But thanks any way.

Aw somebody didn't like the source. Only libs can say who's to be believed. Proving again and again that arrogance is all they have to sell.

Thanks anyway.

Time for another lesson. I hope you're paying attention, you want to be prepared for the quiz.

 

[Contumacious]

One thing von Kuehnelt made clear, Nazism and Fascism rose from democracies.

Correct.

Nazism (/ˈnɑːtsɪz(ə)m/; alternatively spelled Naziism),[1] or National Socialism in full (German: Nationalsozialismus) . However , Hitler understood that socialism sucks ---that central planning is useless so he decided that fascism was better.


Fascism allows the government to use (force) private entrepreneurs into assisting the bureaucracy in perpetrating its dastardly deeds.

And there's one fundamental difference between left wing totalitarians and right wing totalitarians. Private entrepreneurs make lots of money with right wing totalitarians.

Really?


Have you asked Soros and Buffett?


.

Yes......really.

Soros and Buffett? No......have you?

Again, the point is irrelevant.

What difference does it make whether you are being tyrannize in the name of god or the fatherland?

Imagine you are a deer

 

[dcraelin]

Ive found Orwell to be a pretty sharp observer from other stuff I've read. He, I think, called himself a socialist but was critical of the communists. The way he put it, "crushed", doesnt show, I dont think, that they just wanted their own union to help members. Your idea of socialism doesnt fit what most people would consider socialism either I dont think. Most people would think that workers would have more of a say in a socialistic system.

But they did. It helped to gain them power. The workers had panels the owners had to answer to. Pay was set, holidays, etc. Call it what you will, that isn't free enterprise or right wing.

So your saying that under the Nazis owners had to answer to panels of workers. I've never heard that before. Where did you get that?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Really? The RW is all about personal freedom?

Yep...

... then explain the RW's position on voting.

We're for it, as long as the individual voting is a legitimate citizen, proves they are who they claim to be.

abortion

It's murder and we do not tolerate those who usurp the rights of others.

marriage

Its the joinin of one man and one woman. For it...

MJ legalization

It's already legal in practice... we recognize the foolishness of abusing it and getting 'caught' with it.

public education

We're for it... which is why we're driving to remove the left from the process of providing it.

the environment

Big Fans.

collective bargaining and unions

It's counter productive to Freedom.

green

We think of that as code for "Stupid".

renewable energy

No such thing. We prefer cheap and plentiful energy. But if you can find energy that can be renewed, we'd be interested in considering what ya have.

government

We recognize it as a necessary evil and only accept such where the power provided to such is starkly limited. But that is only because government power is the greatest threat to freedom and we're all about the FREEDOM.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Yeah, we know commies lie. What's your point?

They called themselves a Republic, so they must be one!

You're such a dishonest fucking hack

Yes, we know. The Nazi's were "right-wing" because they espoused individual liberty, personal freedom and limited government

Fucking hack

RW totalitarianism means capitalist PERIOD, as opposed to communism, shytteheads. The company had a portfolio of 1,800 units valued at just over $100 million in April 2013. Currently, the portfolio is nearly 5,000 units valued at $200 million. Within two months, Roco will have about 7,000 units, said David Colman. The additional 2,000 units are in Michigan, Mississippi and Texas. t can be anything BUT totalitarian, brainwashed functional moron. Including social democracy or SOCIALISM. SEE WESTERN EUROPE, OZ, ETC.

Moron, idiot, duppe, sucka, duh.

Right wing IS personal freedom and limited government. You lefties, Obama, Hitler, FDR, Mao and Stalin are the totalitarians

Really? The RW is all about personal freedom? First, define the RW in America today (do you admit you're a member?) then explain the RW's position on voting, abortion, marriage, MJ legalization, public education, the environment, collective bargaining and unions, green and renewable energy and government on all levels, local, special districts, state and federal.

RW are Conservatives, Libertarians and the Tea Party and I'm a proud member

Voting -- Photo ID, ideally have some computer driven, LifeLock like system, One person, one vote, only allowable absentee ballots are US military personnel serving overseas

Abortion - Not a fan, but its a state rights issue

Marriage -- Not the governments business, eliminate tax benefits for marriage

MJ Legalization -- decriminalize all drugs.

Public education -- eliminate federal dept of Public education, voucherize and privatize the entire system

the environment -- private property rights are the best way to maintain a clean environment

collective bargaining and unions -- Unions outlives their usefulness ages ago

green and renewable energy -- let the market figure out energy. In any event, hyrdocarbons are apparently renewable

government on all levels -- as little as possible.

 

[Saigon]

We know how the Right despises "book learning". It's unclear from what source you think wisdom comes.

This is a very big issue on this thread - shockingly so, I think.

We've seen two or three posters outright refuse to read history.

In most cases I think that it is because they realise that reading books will undermine an ignorance they work hard to protect. It's more fun to flail away with nonsense than it is to actually have to address reality.

I have to say - I am genuinely shocked at the lack of basic, general knowledge shown on this thread, particularly by Weasel, Billc and BriPat. It's not politics, it's not opinion - it's simple general knowledge. The kind of thing I would expect any high school student to know.

 

[Saigon]

Ive found Orwell to be a pretty sharp observer from other stuff I've read. He, I think, called himself a socialist but was critical of the communists. The way he put it, "crushed", doesnt show, I dont think, that they just wanted their own union to help members. Your idea of socialism doesnt fit what most people would consider socialism either I dont think. Most people would think that workers would have more of a say in a socialistic system.

But they did. It helped to gain them power. The workers had panels the owners had to answer to. Pay was set, holidays, etc. Call it what you will, that isn't free enterprise or right wing.

Do you really not think you might be better to post on topics you know something - anything - about?

90% of your posting on this thread is complete nonsense . you've lied continuously, you refuse to answer any questions, you fly into tantrums when your idiocy is exposed, and then rush off to Wikipedia to find something - anything - to post.

What do you think you prove by simply never addressing any point with anything of substance?

Why not leave the topic to people who read?

 

[Saigon]

BillC -

If you look at Europe...when they talk about the "far right" if you look at the policies of the "far right" it usually connotes some sort of racism or nationalism.....but these "far right" parties want even more government control, not less, they want group rights, not individual rights....so really, they are simply extreme lefties....which scares the social democrats who want the government to control the economy...but to be nice to everyone....

You post this utter drivel, and then you go on to complain about 'progressive education'?

Do you seriously think anyone with any kind of decent education would post garbage like that?

You're simply anti-intellectual, dude. You just want to avoid books and facts so that you can invent a chldren's fantasy world of the extreme right really be left-wing.

And no - skinheads, Forth Reichers and Nazis are not from the far left, genius.

 

[Saigon]

Your Komrade Saigon keeps giving me a list of historians and telling me to read their books. That's his conception of evidence. Go tell it to him.

Yes, I do.

Yesterday I cited books by 2 Nazi Party members, and 4 by right-wing German historians.

They all confirm - obviously - that Hitler ws right wing.

You simply do not have a case here, and if you read, you will find out why. And that is why you won't read.

 

[Saigon]

Guys...this is how dumb the "intellectuals" are as they try to lie about "fascism." Notice how they all say they can't really define it

And back to lying.

Fascism is defined in detail in the OP. And questions you have about that definition - ask.

I have cited around 20 books and authors during the thread. You could also read them, but then you are anti-books, right? Because books are socialist, right?

My god man....is this really the best you can do?

 

[Saigon]

Attacking the source is typical left-wing strategy. The only valid sources are left-wing sources. Anyone who disagrees with a liberal must be a kook.

Says the person who refuses to read books, and who once described dictionaries as being 'socialist'.

You're not exactly a very self-aware person, are you BriPat?

 

[Saigon]

And the whole misdirection with the term Fascism.....it just means socialism....stalin used the word to separate his enemies from his brand of socialism....mussolini used the term to separate his brand of socialism from the communists who kicked him out of their gang....

Really?

So the fact that fascism was capitalist and communism does not use capital makes no difference?

The fact that fascism is of and for the upper class and communism smashed the upper class makes no difference?

The fact that fascism attacked minorities and communism supported minorities makes no difference?

And why do you think Hitler sent socialists to Auschwitz?

All of this is in the OP, which you obviously did not read, but my god man - any 11 year old at high school knows this stuff. How can you not know this??!!

 

[2aguy]

The fact that fascism attacked minorities and communism supported minorities makes no difference?

Well, you could ask the Kulaks...but the socialists in the soviet union murdered them....and of course they didn't like jews either...

And why do you think Hitler sent socialists to Auschwitz?

The same reason one drug cartel kills the members of other drug cartels...they are threats to their power and competition for their followers....


Fascism was not capitalist....when the government can tell you what to make and what to do with what you make...that ain't capitalism...genius.....

The fact that fascism is of and for the upper class and communism smashed the upper class makes no difference?

No...genius....just ask the party leadership if there was an upper class in the Soviet Union...you dumb twit....

 

[2aguy]

Nazism is Socialism

on the nazis and capitalism...

But the dominant feature is a fierce hatred of anything capitalistic-individualistic profit seeking, large scale enterprise, banks, joint-stock companies, department stores, "international finance and loan capital," the system of "interest slavery" in general; the abolition of these is described as the "basis of the programme, around which everything else turns." It was to this programme that the masses of the German people, who were already completely under the influence of collectivist ideas, responded so enthusiastically.

That this violent anti-capitalistic attack is genuine, and not a mere piece of propaganda, becomes as clear from the personal history of the intellectual leaders of the movement as from the general milieu from which it springs. It is not even denied that many of the young men who today play a prominent part in it have previously been communists or socialists.

And to any observer of the literary tendencies which made the Germans intelligentsia ready to join the ranks of the new party, it must be clear that the common characteristic of all the politically influential writers — in many cases free from definite party affiliations, was their anti-liberal and anti-capitalist trend. Groups like that formed around the review "Die Tat" have made the phrase "the end of capitalism" an accepted dogma to most young Germans.

You stupid twit....

 

[Saigon]

BillC -

Firstly, Kulaks are not a people - they were a class. Communism smashed classes.

Fascism was a class-based system, designed to enrich the upper classes and share holders.

Share holders and the market funded the massive industrial expansion. This expansion paid millions in dividends. This is called capitalism.

EVERY major history book written on this topic in the past 60 years explains this.

Jesus wept, man....with all due respect, I feel like I am explaining this to someone about ten-years old.

A man you claim was socialist actually banned socialism - and you compare that to drug cartels??!! Would the Tea Party ban coservatives, do you think??!!

 

[2aguy]

HITLER WAS A SOCIALIST

And this policy manifesto:9. All citizens of the State shall be equal as regards rights and duties.

10. The first duty of every citizen must be to work mentally or physically. The activities of the individual may not clash with the interests of the whole, but must proceed within the frame of the community and be for the general good.

Therefore we demand:

11. That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.

12. Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in life and property, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as a crime against the people. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits whether in assets or material.

13. We demand the nationalization of businesses which have been organized into cartels.

14. We demand that all the profits from wholesale trade shall be shared out.

15. We demand extensive development of provision for old age.

16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a healthy middle-class, the immediate communalization of department stores which will be rented cheaply to small businessmen, and that preference shall be given to small businessmen for provision of supplies needed by the State, the provinces and municipalities.

17. We demand a land reform in accordance with our national requirements, and the enactment of a law to confiscate from the owners without compensation any land needed for the common purpose. The abolition of ground rents, and the prohibition of all speculation in land.