How we know Hitler was right wing.

[P@triot]

Since we know that the left believes in unlimited government with maximum power, it's very easy to understand that the further left you go, government continues to get larger and more powerful. As you start to go further left, you reach the socialist. As you continue, you start to hit the radical fringe - the Marxists. Finally, the farthest fringe and the very end is the Communist, Fascist, or Totalitarianism . These groups believes in in total government control. A person has no freedoms or rights - they do as instructed by the government for the "good" of the entire nation.

The radical fringe of the left, believe it or not, is actually more scary and dangerous than the radical fringe of the right. While the radical fringe of the right has murderous tendencies, these are almost always limited to individuals or very small groups. The radical fringe of the left, through out history, are responsible for the murder of HUNDREDS of MILLIONS. The well known, notorious examples below:

• Joseph Stalin - estimates are he was responsible for orchestrating the death of anywhere from 40 to 60 million people
  
• Adolf Hitler - responsible for orchestrating the death of over 11 million people
  
• Vladimir Lenin - estimates are he was responsible for orchestrating the death of nearly 3.5 million people.
  
• Benito Mussolini - estimates are he was responsible for orchestrating the death of many thousands
  
• Saddam Hussein - estimates are he was responsible for orchestrating the death of many thousands

As you can see, the radical left is far more dangerous than the radical right because of the power handed to them by the people. While the fringe right is limited in the havoc they can wreak because they are extremely limited in their resources, the radical left has nearly unlimited resources because of their control over the government, and hence, the people.

 

[Oddball]

The story surrounding OKC is pure crap and McVeigh was the scapegoat.

 

[Political Junky]

https://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/01/26-0

Published on Monday, January 26, 2009 by CommonDreams.org
Two Santa Clauses or How The Republican Party Has Conned America for Thirty Years
by Thom Hartmann

 

[Pogo]

The point is that only socialists need to try to differentiate "left" socialism from "right" socialism.

Fact remains that they are the same authoritarian central planner shit wrapped in different toilet paper.

You want to pick flecks of pepper out of those piles of shit and make big scholarly observations about their minute differences in color and grain, that's your time to waste.

Jesus Christ on a Bicycle, you still don't get it??

My point had nothing whatsoever to do with this list of 25 principles, whatever they are. I didn't even bother to fucking read them (apparently you did, so rotsa ruck with the Klingons*).

My point is about the reasoning-- purporting to pinpoint Adolf Hitler's true political positions using an obvious propaganda piece from Hitler himself s a basis. Holy shit, learn to read already. Given that reasoning, there was no reason to bother reading them.

And by the way we dispensed with that authoritarian as left-right baggage a while back.

This is what I get for stating the obvious... intentional blank stares. Some come here to sit and think, others to sit and use the troll-it paper.

*("Klingons": How is a wad of toilet paper like the USS Enterprise? They're both searching for Klingons - old joke)

By all means learn to read yourself. If you were the normal citizen living in Russia or Germany at that time there WAS NO DIFFERENCE. Do you get that? Lefties claim that Stalin was a lefty and they claim that Hitler was a rightie. Do you understand that there is only collectivism and individualist governmental types? That's it! As Oddball says you guys are arguing about shades of pink....BUT THEY'RE STILL PINK!

Uh -- no we're not.

Again, reading is fun-duh-mental. What I said was that it's ludicrous to attempt to prove "Hitler was a socialist" using his political propaganda as evidence. I made no comment about the 25 principles themselves at all. As I already said, I didn't even bother to read them because given the fallacy there's no point. Duh.

I mean you can go on pretending it was about that but you're only playing with yourselves. I understand some of y'all do a lot of that. Pretending that is.

 

[Pogo]

My point silly person, is wiki has been so completely screwed up in its methodology and controls, that no one who is in higher education allows it to be used as a source. It's not worth wasting time on. If you wish to present some facts then go to the source material and YOU post them here.

Those I will happily look through. Wiki will never see my cursor however.

That's a little better, silly person.
Note that I made no points at all about Ion Antonescu, ergo I need post no facts to support a post I never made. I'm just calling you out for your poison-the-well fallacy. Wiki's "methodology" hasn't changed; it's edited by everybody, which means anyone like yourself, or myself, that takes issue with a point there can challenge the point, or the source, or both. So again, if you have an issue with footnote 468, nobody's stopping you from challenging it. Nobody but your own indolence.

This isn''t supposed to be an easy game where you just declare some source "off the list" because you don't like what it says. He who asserts must also prove, and so must he who denies an assertion that's sitting there with 550 source citations. IOW you're going to have to work at it.

I don't even have an idea what your issue with Antonescu is; I just know that whatever it is, the way to go about it is not simply going . You're going to have to get off your intellectual ass and work at it.

I didn't poison the well. Wiki did. Take up the problem of false information with them. They have instituted no controls to rectify the situation so they are useless in all matters save entertainemnt value only.

That's an odd about-face for a guy who just stormed in insisting that Wiki was worthless because anyone can fix it -- now suddenly no one can. Which is it?

I don't have an issue of false information; as I said before I posted nothing about Ion Antonescu at all. You indicated you have some issue, but failed to note what it is. Now if you can't address that issue, well that's your own cowardice. You can take it on or you can run away, but just pointing fingers and going "scary mosters" doesn't cut it. Quit blaming Wiki for your own failure.

 

[Saigon]

By all means learn to read yourself. If you were the normal citizen living in Russia or Germany at that time there WAS NO DIFFERENCE. Do you get that? Lefties claim that Stalin was a lefty and they claim that Hitler was a rightie. Do you understand that there is only collectivism and individualist governmental types? That's it! As Oddball says you guys are arguing about shades of pink....BUT THEY'RE STILL PINK!

I did actually explain this to you quite clearly on another thread, so why you mention it again here I can imagine.

Were Jews "normal citizens"? Were Azeris? Poles? Communists? Gays?

To discuss that the life of an odinary person was like, we need to know what kind of person we are talking about.

Very clearly, right wing regimes and left wing regimes have entirely different enemies.

 

[Saigon]

I just noticed something, regent, saigon and pogo all joined wihtin a couple of months of each other and post like madmen. saigon alone is posting at the rate of 22 per day (I post at the rate of 11 and am retired). I wonder who they all work for?

And again - I have explained this many, many times, not that it is any of your business.

I am a journalist. I have my own limited company. As such I tend to work odd hours.

This summer I have assignments in the Ukraine, Croatia, Senegal, The Gambia and Guinea Bissau, so won't be here at all for some weeks. At other times I often work from home all day and can basically post when I like.


btw. Having spent a bit of time in Romania writing about Antonescu, I read the Wiki article about him and thought it looked solid. Hence, I posted it. I'd love it if you guys would read books, but we both know the very few posters here who don't get Hitler being right wing don't read books. That's why they don't get it in the first place.

 

[Saigon]

The point is that only socialists need to try to differentiate "left" socialism from "right" socialism.

Fact remains that they are the same authoritarian central planner shit wrapped in different toilet paper.

You want to pick flecks of pepper out of those piles of shit and make big scholarly observations about their minute differences in color and grain, that's your time to waste.

I'm very glad this came up - maybe I should have addressed it in the OP.

I am not a socialist, and couldn't give a shit what socialists think. Actually, I don't much care what anyone who wants to re-write history thinks.

I am fascinated by this topic purely and simply because I love history. Facts are facts.

Anyone who denies that thugs like Stalin, Mao, Lenin, Castro, Ceacescu, Xoxha and Tito were left wing is wrong. It is as simple as that.

The left needs to own it, and teach it.

Anyone who denies that thugs like Antonescu, Franco, Pinochet and Hitler were right right wing is wrong. It is as simple as that.

The right needs to own it, and teach it.

And ask yourself - which side on this board are denying those lists?

 

[westwall]

That's a little better, silly person.
Note that I made no points at all about Ion Antonescu, ergo I need post no facts to support a post I never made. I'm just calling you out for your poison-the-well fallacy. Wiki's "methodology" hasn't changed; it's edited by everybody, which means anyone like yourself, or myself, that takes issue with a point there can challenge the point, or the source, or both. So again, if you have an issue with footnote 468, nobody's stopping you from challenging it. Nobody but your own indolence.

This isn''t supposed to be an easy game where you just declare some source "off the list" because you don't like what it says. He who asserts must also prove, and so must he who denies an assertion that's sitting there with 550 source citations. IOW you're going to have to work at it.

I don't even have an idea what your issue with Antonescu is; I just know that whatever it is, the way to go about it is not simply going . You're going to have to get off your intellectual ass and work at it.

I didn't poison the well. Wiki did. Take up the problem of false information with them. They have instituted no controls to rectify the situation so they are useless in all matters save entertainemnt value only.

That's an odd about-face for a guy who just stormed in insisting that Wiki was worthless because anyone can fix it -- now suddenly no one can. Which is it?

I don't have an issue of false information; as I said before I posted nothing about Ion Antonescu at all. You indicated you have some issue, but failed to note what it is. Now if you can't address that issue, well that's your own cowardice. You can take it on or you can run away, but just pointing fingers and going "scary mosters" doesn't cut it. Quit blaming Wiki for your own failure.

I see your comprehension level is low. My comment was "anybody can alter the data at any time". That means it is useless. I've made it as simple as possible for you.

 

[Pogo]

I didn't poison the well. Wiki did. Take up the problem of false information with them. They have instituted no controls to rectify the situation so they are useless in all matters save entertainemnt value only.

That's an odd about-face for a guy who just stormed in insisting that Wiki was worthless because anyone can fix it -- now suddenly no one can. Which is it?

I don't have an issue of false information; as I said before I posted nothing about Ion Antonescu at all. You indicated you have some issue, but failed to note what it is. Now if you can't address that issue, well that's your own cowardice. You can take it on or you can run away, but just pointing fingers and going "scary mosters" doesn't cut it. Quit blaming Wiki for your own failure.

I see your comprehension level is low. My comment was "anybody can alter the data at any time". That means it is useless. I've made it as simple as possible for you.

No, what that means is you're too intellectually lazy to take on whatever point you have an issue with. It's too much for you so you run away screaming "Wikibeast! Wikibeast! Run!"

 

[westwall]

By all means learn to read yourself. If you were the normal citizen living in Russia or Germany at that time there WAS NO DIFFERENCE. Do you get that? Lefties claim that Stalin was a lefty and they claim that Hitler was a rightie. Do you understand that there is only collectivism and individualist governmental types? That's it! As Oddball says you guys are arguing about shades of pink....BUT THEY'RE STILL PINK!

I did actually explain this to you quite clearly on another thread, so why you mention it again here I can imagine.

Were Jews "normal citizens"? Were Azeris? Poles? Communists? Gays?

To discuss that the life of an odinary person was like, we need to know what kind of person we are talking about.

Very clearly, right wing regimes and left wing regimes have entirely different enemies.

They do? The marginalised populations you are talking about were screwed by both Germans AND Russians. I guess you've never heard of Katyn? And most of Europe was and, in many cases, STILL is anti semitic. I thought you had "studied" the subject?

Hitler and Stalin were equal opportunity murderers, as were Mao, Pol Pot and a whole host of other collectivist dictators. Getting away from the marginalised people, you get to the general populations who all lived in terror of the knock on their door by the Cheka, GPU, NKVD, OGPU, NKGB, MGB, KGB (in order, and that doesn't count the GRU and other military police groups) in the case of the Soviets, or the GESTAPO, or SD, or GFP, or the SiPo in the case of the Germans.

In a collectivist dictatorship it is real easy to end up in the Gulag or concentration camp. Far harder to get out...alive.

 

[Saigon]

Westwall -

I have been to Katyn and yes, I have studied the subject.

I agree that Poles were less than popular in both regimes, but that hardly changes the fact that the regimes were essentially opposite in their view of populations.

At the risk of posting the same thing again and again and again, many racial minorities prospoered under Stalin, who was himself from a racial minority. Under Hitler, no racial minority was safe.

Hitler rewarded academics and business leaders (if they played ball), whereas Stalin purged them.

It's not difficult stuff, this.

What I do agree with that is that "normal" people, perhaps a family living in the suburbs and working in a factory, would have experienced fear. Probably more so under Stalin, where they may have been cast as "wreckers" if they questioned anything.

 

[westwall]

Westwall -

I have been to Katyn and yes, I have studied the subject.

I agree that Poles were less than popular in both regimes, but that hardly changes the fact that the regimes were essentially opposite in their view of populations.

At the risk of posting the same thing again and again and again, many racial minorities prospoered under Stalin, who was himself from a racial minority. Under Hitler, no racial minority was safe.

Hitler rewarded academics and business leaders (if they played ball), whereas Stalin purged them.
It's not difficult stuff, this.

What I do agree with that is that "normal" people, perhaps a family living in the suburbs and working in a factory, would have experienced fear. Probably more so under Stalin, where they may have been cast as "wreckers" if they questioned anything.

I guess you've never heard of Mikoyan and Guryevich, or Yakovlev, or Ilushyn, or Sukhoi, all receivers of Hero of the Soviet Union, the Stalin Prize, The USSR State Prize, Lenins Prize, the Order of Lenin, the Order of Suvarov, the Order of the October Revolution, the Order of the Red Banner and other awards I can't remember anymore.

Stalin rewarded those who served him quite well. For someone who claims to have studied this you really don't know much. I'm a bloody dilettante and know far more than you do.

 

[bripat9643]

If your whole point is that you don't know what you're babbling about, you managed to make it.

If that's what you see, I'm amazed you've been here this long and need this level of explanation. The point is that whoever brought in this list of 25 points as evidence of Hitler's "socialism" is, by that post, asking us to accept the propaganda of a notorious propagandist as if it's gospel, as the evidence that proves his point.

Please tell me I don't have to explain why that basis of reasoning is freaking hilarious.

I love this argument. So we can't believe anything the Nazis said about their beliefs and policies, so there's no actual evidence about what they believed, but somehow the pinko intellectuals know what the Nazis really believed, and it has nothing to do with what they said or did.

Got it.

 

[bripat9643]

Hitler is Hitler. To say he is left wing or right wing soils all of us who are right or left of center.

I won't have it.

Adolf was freaking insane.

Yes, it does soil one side or the other, whichever side he was actually on, but that's not a good reason for avoiding a conclusion on the issue. By "soil" what you really mean is that it incriminates that ideology as something dangerous. That's precisely the reason we need to make the determination.

 

[bripat9643]

Now I have debated in the past only to his affiliations. He used the social wing and then he turned around and used the wealthy as well.

Bottom line he was brilliant. He played both sides against each other.

Does this tactic ring a bell?

"Using the wealthy" is meaningless. Obama uses the wealthy. Is he a right-winger? Being wealthy doesn't make you a right-winger as examples like Soros and Buffet make emphatically clear.

 

[bripat9643]

The point is that only socialists need to try to differentiate "left" socialism from "right" socialism.

Fact remains that they are the same authoritarian central planner shit wrapped in different toilet paper.

You want to pick flecks of pepper out of those piles of shit and make big scholarly observations about their minute differences in color and grain, that's your time to waste.

Jesus Christ on a Bicycle, you still don't get it??

My point had nothing whatsoever to do with this list of 25 principles, whatever they are. I didn't even bother to fucking read them (apparently you did, so rotsa ruck with the Klingons*).

My point is about the reasoning-- purporting to pinpoint Adolf Hitler's true political positions using an obvious propaganda piece from Hitler himself s a basis. Holy shit, learn to read already. Given that reasoning, there was no reason to bother reading them.

And by the way we dispensed with that authoritarian as left-right baggage a while back.

This is what I get for stating the obvious... intentional blank stares. Some come here to sit and think, others to sit and use the troll-it paper.

*("Klingons": How is a wad of toilet paper like the USS Enterprise? They're both searching for Klingons - old joke)

So every time Hitler or the Nazis said something that indicated a positive attitude about socialism, he was lying. Despite any evidence to support your claims, and despite clear statements that they despised capitalism, you and the rest of the pinko intellectuals just know he was a capitalist.

This is the kind of logic that left-wingers have been passing off as respectable and accepted for the last 60 years.

 

[bripat9643]

By all means learn to read yourself. If you were the normal citizen living in Russia or Germany at that time there WAS NO DIFFERENCE. Do you get that? Lefties claim that Stalin was a lefty and they claim that Hitler was a rightie. Do you understand that there is only collectivism and individualist governmental types? That's it! As Oddball says you guys are arguing about shades of pink....BUT THEY'RE STILL PINK!

I beg to differ. There is a difference, but in their zeal to smear the right by labeling Nazis "right-wing," the pinko intellectuals have been doing everything in their power to obscure the difference. If you believe in the institutions of private property, free exchange and limited government, you're a right winger. If you believe government should make all major business decisions, then you are a left-winger. Hitler clearly falls into the later camp.

 

[bripat9643]

Uh -- no we're not.

Again, reading is fun-duh-mental. What I said was that it's ludicrous to attempt to prove "Hitler was a socialist" using his political propaganda as evidence. I made no comment about the 25 principles themselves at all. As I already said, I didn't even bother to read them because given the fallacy there's no point. Duh.

I mean you can go on pretending it was about that but you're only playing with yourselves. I understand some of y'all do a lot of that. Pretending that is.

Yeah, you can't use the actual evidence. The pinko intellectuals used some mysterious magical process to read Hitler's mind and they just know he was a right-winger.

 

[bripat9643]

I did actually explain this to you quite clearly on another thread, so why you mention it again here I can imagine.

Were Jews "normal citizens"? Were Azeris? Poles? Communists? Gays?

To discuss that the life of an odinary person was like, we need to know what kind of person we are talking about.

Very clearly, right wing regimes and left wing regimes have entirely different enemies.

It doesn't matter who they choose to persecute. The fact remains that only powerful left-wing governments that have absolute control over their citizens are in a position to murder millions of them.