How Far to the Left is Too Far?

[occupied]

How did this even become a debate? I'd really like to know who the first person was to try to argue that Hitler was left-wing.

Hippies were left-wing. Can we all agree to that? Peace and love flower children are the leftest of left-wing, agreed? Adolf Hitler was the extreme opposite of inclusive, free-love, anti-war, peaceful hippie flower children, agreed?

If peacenik hippie flower children are the extreme left-wing and Hitler is the extreme opposite of hippie flower children, then Hitler is the extreme right-wing. That's how it works.

Until one of you can prove which one, Stalin or Hitler, was for freedom and liberty, you lose the argument.

There is no argument, you are just spreading the Big Lie in conservative politics and no one is buying it today, maybe tomorrow will be better. No one who watched Dick Cheney at work with the full support of conservatives has any doubt that you people are capable of the worst kind of tyranny.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Democratic Socialists of America

Here are the people that have taken over the traditional Democratic Party. Who do you think they voted for in 2008 and 2012? Think they will back Warren(although they want Sanders) in 2016? You bet... in a heartbeat. Are there any Democrats out there that feel their party is too far to the left? Look at what this group stands for...is that not exactly what the Democratic Party stands for? I know Republican's that think its too far/not far enough to the right. please sound-off cause I want to know. Liberal's are quick to condemn Republican's as far right robots marching in lockstep. Better take a look around Democrats.

The far left, IMO, wants revolutionary change within the meaning of the end justifies the means. The Democratic Party seeks change of those things which are not working for the many - health care reform was a prime example - via the demoratic process.

Health care is a good example of the difference between the D's and the R's. The Democratic Party pushed reform in the Congress, something which has been on the radar for three generations - and the R's responded with dogged resistence.

The D's caved under the full court press of the health care providers and the emotional hysteria of the tea party, a group of malcontents who represent a loud minority, well funded by the power elite who benefit from the status quo. Thus which might have been the horse we needed, we ended up with a camel because, cowardly member of the Republican caucus voted in lock-step to protect their job at the expense of the many.

 

[Seawytch]

Democratic Socialists of America

Here are the people that have taken over the traditional Democratic Party. Who do you think they voted for in 2008 and 2012? Think they will back Warren(although they want Sanders) in 2016? You bet... in a heartbeat. Are there any Democrats out there that feel their party is too far to the left? Look at what this group stands for...is that not exactly what the Democratic Party stands for? I know Republican's that think its too far/not far enough to the right. please sound-off cause I want to know. Liberal's are quick to condemn Republican's as far right robots marching in lockstep. Better take a look around Democrats.

The far left, IMO, wants revolutionary change within the meaning of the end justifies the means. The Democratic Party seeks change of those things which are not working for the many - health care reform was a prime example - via the demoratic process.

Health care is a good example of the difference between the D's and the R's. The Democratic Party pushed reform in the Congress, something which has been on the radar for three generations - and the R's responded with dogged resistence.

The D's caved under the full court press of the health care providers and the emotional hysteria of the tea party, a group of malcontents who represent a loud minority, well funded by the power elite who benefit from the status quo. Thus which might have been the horse we needed, we ended up with a camel because, cowardly member of the Republican caucus voted in lock-step to protect their job at the expense of the many.

The far left wanted Single Payer...the moderate left wanted a public option...we got the Republican's Heritage plan...and still they bitch.

 

[Dems_R_Commies]

Anything farther Left than Right-Of-Center is too far Left............

 

[g5000]

Why, here come some lefties now!

"Vote Obama!"

You're proving yourself to be a fool. Marxist and Nazis are flip sides of the same coin. Nobody claims they agree in ideology, just that they are left wing.

Marxism is left wing, Nazism is right wing, you clueless moron.


"Duhhhhhh...Nazism left wing because socialism..."

 

[Dad2three]

The funny thing is that the far left can not understand that there really is not that much difference between them and their far right counter parts.

Just like the Nazi supporters of the 40's the current far left member can not see the evil within their own ranks and choose to ignore and divert. They like to pretend that there is nothing bad about what they are supporting or can not admit that they are wrong. They would much rather see the world burn than admit they were wrong about anything.

Liberals don't love Obama, liberals are angry at Obama, but we also don't like conservatives blaming everything on Obama when they are obstructing congress and when there is no reason to believe Republican candidates would act any better than Obama. Obama is a conservative, just not nearly as conservative as the Republicans have become in recent years.

Oh yea, forcing people to buy something or else is real conservative..

How the Heritage Foundation, a Conservative Think Tank, Promoted the Individual Mandate

How the Heritage Foundation, a Conservative Think Tank, Promoted the Individual Mandate - Forbes


Original 1989 document where Heritage Foundation created Obamacare’s individual mandate

Original document where Heritage created Obamacare individual mandate


Individual health care insurance mandate has roots two decades long


Individual health care insurance mandate has roots two decades long | Fox News

 

[Dad2three]

Hitler was a Nationalist SOCIALIST.

"B-b-b-b-but it says socialist!"



It always amuses me when idiots think the word "socialist" in Nazi means Hitler was a left winger.

It does not get more historically ignorant than that.

Government control over people is Left wing ideology that is shared by both communists and fascists (Nazis) alike. The farthest right wing ideology is anarchy (total freedom from government control). Do you honestly think Hitler's 1000 Year Reich would have led to total freedom from government control? Hitler and Stalin were opposities, but that was only how the people would be controlled. Both are still left-wing ideology. So suck it up that so-called democrat socialist share the same belief of controlling people.

Get it through your head that liberals want to tell people what to do (and with Obamacare, their dream of telling people what to buy has been fulfilled) too.

Right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) is a personality and ideological variable studied in political, social, and personality psychology. Right-wing authoritarians are people who have a high degree of willingness to submit to authorities they perceive as established and legitimate, who adhere to societal conventions and norms, and who are hostile and punitive in their attitudes towards people who don't adhere to them. They value uniformity and are in favour of using group authority, including coercion, to achieve it


Right-wing authoritarianism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The Authoritarians

This book was written in 2006, halfway through George W. Bush’s second term as president. A great deal was wrong with America then, and I thought the research on authoritarian personalities could explain a lot of it. Since then a new administration has been elected, and although it has had to deal with a very serious economic crisis brought on by others, it is taking steps to correct some of what is wrong.

However, the forces that largely caused the problems have remained on the scene, and are more active today than ever before. As I try to show in the “Comment on the Tea Party Movement” (link to the left), the research findings in this book apply at least as strongly to America today as they did four years ago. Indeed, the events of 2009 and 2010 have confirmed conclusion after conclusion in The Authoritarians.

The Authoritarians

 

[g5000]

As the New Right lost its collective mind after 9/11, they began frothing at the mouth over flag pins, enacting legislation requiring national identity papers, excusing waterboarding and claiming it was not torture, overlooking warrantless wiretapping on American citizens, cheering the creation of a massive police state Cabinet level Department of Homeland Security, acceding to the jailing of US citizens without a writ of habeas corpus, and generally began acting like lovers of authortarian/totalitarian government.

This is why it became important for them to convince themselves that Hitler was left wing. As they became more and more like Hitler in their outlook on life, they needed to believe they were not acting like Nazis.

To convince oneself that Hitler was left wing, one must have an extremely compartmentalized mind and be entirely ignorant of history.

This is the chief reason I have the MacKay quote in my sig.

What is particularly amusing is that when they came out of their comas in January 2009 and saw Obama doing the same exact shit, THEN they saw the similarities to Hitler.

Suddenly the DHS and the Army was going to come for them and lock them up. The same Army that many of them support with yellow ribbon magnetic bumper stickers. We're talking seriously schizophrenic brains here.

 

[RKMBrown]

Fascism is the economic system that the Nazis followed. You are again saying that if a Democrat eats pizza, part of the definition of Democrat is someone who eats pizza. No, eating pizza has nothing to do with Democrat. The fascists of Europe in the 30s were nationalistic, it isn't what fascism means.

The socialism being "peace loving" cracked me up. The Soviets, Red Army, North Korea and Democratic party certainly show that to be the crap that it is.

Yeah typical "peace lover" who FORCES socialism on others. Socialists are no different than nazis with their iron boots on the necks of all that do not follow their demands to bend over and accept anal probing on a daily basis.

Today they are satisfied with stealing your assets and killing your cows. Tomorrow they'll be confiscating weapons, then they'll be putting people in camps. All for our own good.

Unfettered Capitalism is not a good thing


The Republican sham of lower taxes and less regulation doesn't help anyone but the richest Americans and Big Business and kill jobs and opportunity for almost everyone, especially in the middle class and poor.



As Bill Maher has observed, the GOPers are good at pushing a falsehood until it's accepted as conventional wisdom



"I want my freedom back."

RWers love to use ad nauseam words and phrases that have nothing to do with veracity or reality. Phrases to wind up the lowest common denominator.

We don't have unfettered capitalism. LWers love to use ad nauseam words and phrases that have nothing to do with veracity or reality. Phrases to wind up the lowest common denominator.

One of the main jobs of our government, for example, is to break up monopolies and oligopolies. Of course democrats don't want to do that because they are running them.

 

[HenryBHough]

I feel it was a little too far left when the loudest of the liberals lauded 911 as one small step toward bring America down to where it belongs in the world.

But that's just an opinion and a majority, through voting for a candidate with that as a bit part of His platform, suggests it's a minority opinion. Or at least it was. Twice.

 

[Dad2three]

Yeah typical "peace lover" who FORCES socialism on others. Socialists are no different than nazis with their iron boots on the necks of all that do not follow their demands to bend over and accept anal probing on a daily basis.

Today they are satisfied with stealing your assets and killing your cows. Tomorrow they'll be confiscating weapons, then they'll be putting people in camps. All for our own good.

Unfettered Capitalism is not a good thing


The Republican sham of lower taxes and less regulation doesn't help anyone but the richest Americans and Big Business and kill jobs and opportunity for almost everyone, especially in the middle class and poor.



As Bill Maher has observed, the GOPers are good at pushing a falsehood until it's accepted as conventional wisdom



"I want my freedom back."

RWers love to use ad nauseam words and phrases that have nothing to do with veracity or reality. Phrases to wind up the lowest common denominator.

We don't have unfettered capitalism. LWers love to use ad nauseam words and phrases that have nothing to do with veracity or reality. Phrases to wind up the lowest common denominator.

One of the main jobs of our government, for example, is to break up monopolies and oligopolies. Of course democrats don't want to do that because they are running them.

What do you call the current to big to fail? The financialization of the US economy since Reagan?

Yes, Weird how the GOP had Congress for most of the past 15 years, with a GOP Prez for 6 of them, what did they do again?




Conservatives Can't Escape Blame for the Financial Crisis ...

The onset of the recent financial crisis in late 2007 created an intellectual crisis for conservatives, who had been touting for decades the benefits of a hands-off approach to financial market regulation. As the crisis quickly spiraled out of control, it quickly became apparent that the massive credit bubble of the mid-2000s, followed by the inevitable bust that culminated with the financial markets freeze in the fall of 2008, occurred predominantly among those parts of the financial system that were least regulated, or where regulations existed but were largely unenforced.

Predictably, many conservatives sought to blame the bogeymen they always blamed.


Politics Most Blatant | Center for American Progress

 

[Dad2three]

I feel it was a little too far left when the loudest of the liberals lauded 911 as one small step toward bring America down to where it belongs in the world.

But that's just an opinion and a majority, through voting for a candidate with that as a bit part of His platform, suggests it's a minority opinion. Or at least it was. Twice.

False premises, distortions and lies, the ONLY thing right wingers have today....

 

[g4racer]

When gas chambers are involved, you are too far left.

There are leftist trash right here who would have no problem gassing American citizens who they consider a threat to the agenda.

I'm a moderate and I'd worry about right extremists going to that extreme, not the extremists on the left. They would come after me for the 5 gallon cans of gas I have. We've seen what they are willing to do for petroleum. Remember the banners from the 60's and 70's? "Kill a Commie for Christ!" The Tea Party believes that anyone who disagrees with them is either a Commie or a Socialist working on becoming a commie.

 

[g4racer]

Democratic Socialists of America

Here are the people that have taken over the traditional Democratic Party. Who do you think they voted for in 2008 and 2012? Think they will back Warren(although they want Sanders) in 2016? You bet... in a heartbeat. Are there any Democrats out there that feel their party is too far to the left? Look at what this group stands for...is that not exactly what the Democratic Party stands for? I know Republican's that think its too far/not far enough to the right. please sound-off cause I want to know. Liberal's are quick to condemn Republican's as far right robots marching in lockstep. Better take a look around Democrats.

Dear [MENTION=49214]Bush92[/MENTION]
"Too far" is contradicting one's own "Prochoice principles":
* pushing mandates that penalize or regulate "free choice in health care"
while claiming to defend "free choice in reproductive health"
* pushing to BAN or target "reparative therapy" that is freely chosen
when even the Republicans opened up their platform to recognize choice of therapy
and even removed language targeting "homosexuality"

I thought the conflicts could be resolved by working with all people equally, where govt represents the people.

But it looks like with the Democrat Party, the party principles are handed down by top down hierarchy, like a RELIGION. So the changes have to come from the top, and handed down to the followers like marching orders.

I had thought all other Democrats could think for ourselves.
But apparently it is set up like a flock of sheep that doesn't move unless instructed
by higher ups.

The change has to be "endorsed" and implemented from the top.
This is the equivalent of a Political Religion, and the followers do not have free choice.

They have to follow their leaders, and if the leaders do wrong,
they have to forgive it until someone else corrects it, and they can follow that.

They aren't allowed to go against their political leaders or they get silenced by the Party.

The organization you are describing does a good job of defining extremism for both the right and the left. The problem is extremism, the side should have less of an impact.

 

[g4racer]

How did this even become a debate? I'd really like to know who the first person was to try to argue that Hitler was left-wing.

Hippies were left-wing. Can we all agree to that? Peace and love flower children are the leftest of left-wing, agreed? Adolf Hitler was the extreme opposite of inclusive, free-love, anti-war, peaceful hippie flower children, agreed?

If peacenik hippie flower children are the extreme left-wing and Hitler is the extreme opposite of hippie flower children, then Hitler is the extreme right-wing. That's how it works.

Until one of you can prove which one, Stalin or Hitler, was for freedom and liberty, you lose the argument.

When it comes down to reality both were dictators. It doesn't matter what you would like you call them, it has to do with what they were.
When the Tea Party will not even discuss an issue and attempt to shut down the government what does that say about them?

 

[Contumacious]

How did this even become a debate? I'd really like to know who the first person was to try to argue that Hitler was left-wing.

Hippies were left-wing. Can we all agree to that? Peace and love flower children are the leftest of left-wing, agreed? Adolf Hitler was the extreme opposite of inclusive, free-love, anti-war, peaceful hippie flower children, agreed?

If peacenik hippie flower children are the extreme left-wing and Hitler is the extreme opposite of hippie flower children, then Hitler is the extreme right-wing. That's how it works.

Until one of you can prove which one, Stalin or Hitler, was for freedom and liberty, you lose the argument.

When it comes down to reality both were dictators. It doesn't matter what you would like you call them, it has to do with what they were.

When the Tea Party will not even discuss an issue and attempt to shut down the government what does that say about them?

What do you think about those Germans who try to kill Hitler and shut down the nazi government?!?!?

.

 

[g4racer]

If you are going to do something like that you had better succeed. If you don't succeed you can learn an important lesson, things can get worse for you.

 

[kaz]

Well, first of all there is the matter of the destruction of the state into a classless society where everyone exists in harmony.

You're not familiar with the Democrat's wealth redistribution schemes, are you?

I don't have the manifesto with me (I'm on a mobile device) but their are a whole bunch of other differences, such as the views of the proletariat uprising and the upper class.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

LOL, that's a great example of exactly what the Democrats ... do ... with their endless anti-capitalist, anti-wealth rhetoric.

Why Thomas Jefferson Favored Profit Sharing

By David Cay Johnston


The founders, despite decades of rancorous disagreements about almost every other aspect of their grand experiment, agreed that America would survive and thrive only if there was widespread ownership of land and businesses.

George Washington, nine months before his inauguration as the first president, predicted that America "will be the most favorable country of any kind in the world for persons of industry and frugality, possessed of moderate capital, to inhabit." And, he continued, "it will not be less advantageous to the happiness of the lowest class of people, because of the equal distribution of property."


The second president, John Adams, feared "monopolies of land" would destroy the nation and that a business aristocracy born of inequality would manipulate voters, creating "a system of subordination to all... The capricious will of one or a very few" dominating the rest. Unless constrained, Adams wrote, "the rich and the proud" would wield economic and political power that "will destroy all the equality and liberty, with the consent and acclamations of the people themselves."

James Madison, the Constitution's main author, described inequality as an evil, saying government should prevent "an immoderate, and especially unmerited, accumulation of riches." He favored "the silent operation of laws which, without violating the rights of property, reduce extreme wealth towards a state of mediocrity, and raise extreme indigents towards a state of comfort."



Alexander Hamilton, who championed manufacturing and banking as the first Treasury secretary, also argued for widespread ownership of assets, warning in 1782 that, "whenever a discretionary power is lodged in any set of men over the property of their neighbors, they will abuse it."

Late in life, Adams, pessimistic about whether the republic would endure, wrote that the goal of the democratic government was not to help the wealthy and powerful but to achieve "the greatest happiness for the greatest number."

Newsweek

The founders were Marxist? Seriously? So you think they wanted government to maintain all land so individual people couldn't acquire land because government is the people so government owning the land is the people owning the land.

Dude, you're the Marxist, and that isn't what they meant.

 

[kaz]

I never meant to say that the conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative

Read a couple threads on this board and you can dispel that particular prejudice of yours as you'll realize that stupid is highly centralized in the left

 

[PeoplePower]

I never meant to say that the conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative

Read a couple threads on this board and you can dispel that particular prejudice of yours as you'll realize that stupid is highly centralized in the left

Says the person who claims fascism is equivalent with socialism.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com