Notice how the democrats always compare conservatives to Nazis?

[Ringel05]

You'll probably discount this and that's fine, if you do it shows your ignorance of detailed history. When Hitler joined the party it was espousing national socialist ideology, by the time he came to power he had made alliances with the German industrialists and the military for his own reasons. After Hitler came to power Rohm and the rest of the SA leaders started demanding Hitler start instituting the national socialist changes which included nationalizing all of Germany's industry, in response Hitler ordered Operation Hummingbird better known as the Night of the Long Knives. Hitler's plan was to suppress worker's rights in favor of the industrialists to put the country on a war footing so he eliminated Rohm and hundreds of others that he saw as a threat to his plans and never instituted the national socialist reforms making the name National Socialist German Workers' Party (NAZI) meaningless. Hitler was a nationalist dictator, not a socialist by any stretch of the imagination, all accepted political definitions label Nationalist Dictatorships as far right constructs. As for the name Nazi, I can call myself a tree but it doesn't make me one..........
As for the left calling the right in this country Nazis, they're just as wrong except in a few obvious examples (Skinheads, etc) that even the vast majority of conservatives rightfully reject.
Those are the facts, accept them or not as you chose.

Those skinheads are called 14488ers.

During his reign, the government controlled all industry, all workers were employed by the government, and they had universal healthcare. Sure, people will tell you that the government didn't own industry, but the businesses only owned themselves in name, the government told them what to do and when to do it. Germany was every bit as Socialist as Russia.

Oh and use rational logic, not rationalized logic. Nazism under Hitler was never pure Nazism, the Soviet Union (especially under Stalin) was never a pure communist state and the US was never a pure democracy. There are no pure forms of sociopolitical constructs anywhere in the world.

Of course the Soviet Union was never Communist, Communism doesn't exist, and nobody has ever practiced it in the history of the world. For Communism to be practiced, there has to be no government, no currency, and no social classes. Calling the Soviet Union Communist was only a tactic by the Socialists to distance themselves from their massive failures, as the Soviet Union is a shining example of the failure of the Socialist ideology. Socialism requires Social control of the means of production whether it's controlled by the people or the government, which the Soviet Union had. It was a centrally planned economy, and everything was controlled by the government. They were PURE Socialism down to every core component required. The great experiment was perfect Socialism.

The US was never a pure Democracy because it was never a Democracy at all, we're a Republic.

Germany WAS pure Nazism as they implemented every policy needed to be Socialist, as described in my other response. Social control of the means of production, everyone was employed by the government, and universal healthcare. Socialist paradise not unlike the Soviet Union.

Like I said, we can agree to disagree because we're back to semantics again.

You say "Semantics" as though the exact meaning and reasoning behind everything isn't incredibly important. One who doesn't concern themselves with being absolutely right will be absolutely wrong.

Agree to disagree? I've made a sound argument backed by history when you came here to correct me, you lost because you didn't understand the topic. I suppose you think this is the best way for you to back off without admitting you were wrong? I'm willing to bet that just like everyone else on this forum, the next time the argument pops up, you're going to say the exact same thing you opened with to the next person, and if they prove you wrong, you're going to close with the exact same statement.

That's the thing about facts, you can disagree with them all you like, but that doesn't prevent them from being facts.

Don't pat yourself on the back so soon........
You've no proof of your assertions hence "agree to disagree" so basically you've proved nothing but how you interpret history, I should have said semantics and definitions. Nazism in Germany was never pure as Nazism was supposed to be Fascism, it fell far short in that area. You cherry pick specific so called socialist programs to rationalize your conclusions but omit the rest. The fact that you want desperatly to see Nazism as left as opposed to right wing is obvious in your approach. My recommendation, don't make up you own definitions use the ones that have been in place for generations.

 

[Ringel05]

You'll probably discount this and that's fine, if you do it shows your ignorance of detailed history. When Hitler joined the party it was espousing national socialist ideology, by the time he came to power he had made alliances with the German industrialists and the military for his own reasons. After Hitler came to power Rohm and the rest of the SA leaders started demanding Hitler start instituting the national socialist changes which included nationalizing all of Germany's industry, in response Hitler ordered Operation Hummingbird better known as the Night of the Long Knives. Hitler's plan was to suppress worker's rights in favor of the industrialists to put the country on a war footing so he eliminated Rohm and hundreds of others that he saw as a threat to his plans and never instituted the national socialist reforms making the name National Socialist German Workers' Party (NAZI) meaningless. Hitler was a nationalist dictator, not a socialist by any stretch of the imagination, all accepted political definitions label Nationalist Dictatorships as far right constructs. As for the name Nazi, I can call myself a tree but it doesn't make me one..........
As for the left calling the right in this country Nazis, they're just as wrong except in a few obvious examples (Skinheads, etc) that even the vast majority of conservatives rightfully reject.
Those are the facts, accept them or not as you chose.

Those skinheads are called 14488ers.

During his reign, the government controlled all industry, all workers were employed by the government, and they had universal healthcare. Sure, people will tell you that the government didn't own industry, but the businesses only owned themselves in name, the government told them what to do and when to do it. Germany was every bit as Socialist as Russia.

Oh and use rational logic, not rationalized logic. Nazism under Hitler was never pure Nazism, the Soviet Union (especially under Stalin) was never a pure communist state and the US was never a pure democracy. There are no pure forms of sociopolitical constructs anywhere in the world.

Of course the Soviet Union was never Communist, Communism doesn't exist, and nobody has ever practiced it in the history of the world. For Communism to be practiced, there has to be no government, no currency, and no social classes. Calling the Soviet Union Communist was only a tactic by the Socialists to distance themselves from their massive failures, as the Soviet Union is a shining example of the failure of the Socialist ideology. Socialism requires Social control of the means of production whether it's controlled by the people or the government, which the Soviet Union had. It was a centrally planned economy, and everything was controlled by the government. They were PURE Socialism down to every core component required. The great experiment was perfect Socialism.

The US was never a pure Democracy because it was never a Democracy at all, we're a Republic.

Germany WAS pure Nazism as they implemented every policy needed to be Socialist, as described in my other response. Social control of the means of production, everyone was employed by the government, and universal healthcare. Socialist paradise not unlike the Soviet Union.

Like I said, we can agree to disagree because we're back to semantics again.

You say "Semantics" as though the exact meaning and reasoning behind everything isn't incredibly important. One who doesn't concern themselves with being absolutely right will be absolutely wrong.

Agree to disagree? I've made a sound argument backed by history when you came here to correct me, you lost because you didn't understand the topic. I suppose you think this is the best way for you to back off without admitting you were wrong? I'm willing to bet that just like everyone else on this forum, the next time the argument pops up, you're going to say the exact same thing you opened with to the next person, and if they prove you wrong, you're going to close with the exact same statement.

That's the thing about facts, you can disagree with them all you like, but that doesn't prevent them from being facts.

I will admit that, after going back and reading my post that I did make a mistake and stated no socialist programs were installed but the installation of a limited number of the programs doesn't detract from the reality of what Hitler was doing and that he transformed Nazism from what Rohm and others wanted into a nationalist dictatorship.

In Germany, Nazi leader Adolf Hitler orders a bloody purge of his own political party, assassinating hundreds of Nazis whom he believed had the potential to become political enemies in the future. The leadership of the Nazi Storm Troopers (SA), whose four million members had helped bring Hitler to power in the early 1930s, was especially targeted. Hitler feared that some of his followers had taken his early “National Socialism” propaganda too seriously and thus might compromise his plan to suppress workers’ rights in exchange for German industry making the country war-ready.

Night of the Long Knives - Jun 30, 1934 - HISTORY.com

 

[Dan Stubbs]

Yet, ever since this murderous scum democrat tried to kill members of congress yesterday, hardly a post goes by without the democrats here accusing conservatives of wanting the murder politicians, which is the EXACT tactic the Germans used in WW2. democrats playing their little games, trying their very best to start a war and blame the other side, just like the the Nazis did.

View attachment 133284

Same game, another name:

1. Hitler started with a General over throw of the Government. It Failed.

2. Hitler started voters propaganda news. It worked.
3. Hitler formed a tight knit group to form a type of town hall
meetings. It worked.
4. Hitler formed Soup Kitchens and fed the people who were out of work. It worked.

5.Hitler saw that the depression was going to get worst, he expounded the fact that the outside world was the reason, Paris surrender.
6. His speeches on the condition of Germany and the people who were the cause of it needed to be thrown out of office. It worked

7. Hitler and his larger party ran for election and from the inside over threw the Government. After killing off some of the people who helped him get elected he took control..

Just a very short list of stuff he did is a indication of what is happening here. The threat is the Progressives and their goals.

 

[Ringel05]

Yet, ever since this murderous scum democrat tried to kill members of congress yesterday, hardly a post goes by without the democrats here accusing conservatives of wanting the murder politicians, which is the EXACT tactic the Germans used in WW2. democrats playing their little games, trying their very best to start a war and blame the other side, just like the the Nazis did.

View attachment 133284

The most ironic part is that the Nazis were leftists. I'm reminded of that every time they refer to the right as Nazis.

You'll probably discount this and that's fine, if you do it shows your ignorance of detailed history. When Hitler joined the party it was espousing national socialist ideology, by the time he came to power he had made alliances with the German industrialists and the military for his own reasons. After Hitler came to power Rohm and the rest of the SA leaders started demanding Hitler start instituting the national socialist changes which included nationalizing all of Germany's industry, in response Hitler ordered Operation Hummingbird better known as the Night of the Long Knives. Hitler's plan was to suppress worker's rights in favor of the industrialists to put the country on a war footing so he eliminated Rohm and hundreds of others that he saw as a threat to his plans and never instituted the national socialist reforms making the name National Socialist German Workers' Party (NAZI) meaningless. Hitler was a nationalist dictator, not a socialist by any stretch of the imagination, all accepted political definitions label Nationalist Dictatorships as far right constructs. As for the name Nazi, I can call myself a tree but it doesn't make me one..........
As for the left calling the right in this country Nazis, they're just as wrong except in a few obvious examples (Skinheads, etc) that even the vast majority of conservatives rightfully reject.
Those are the facts, accept them or not as you chose.

Those skinheads are called 14488ers.

During his reign, the government controlled all industry, all workers were employed by the government, and they had universal healthcare. Sure, people will tell you that the government didn't own industry, but the businesses only owned themselves in name, the government told them what to do and when to do it. Germany was every bit as Socialist as Russia.

Oh and use rational logic, not rationalized logic. Nazism under Hitler was never pure Nazism, the Soviet Union (especially under Stalin) was never a pure communist state and the US was never a pure democracy. There are no pure forms of sociopolitical constructs anywhere in the world.

Of course the Soviet Union was never Communist, Communism doesn't exist, and nobody has ever practiced it in the history of the world. For Communism to be practiced, there has to be no government, no currency, and no social classes. Calling the Soviet Union Communist was only a tactic by the Socialists to distance themselves from their massive failures, as the Soviet Union is a shining example of the failure of the Socialist ideology. Socialism requires Social control of the means of production whether it's controlled by the people or the government, which the Soviet Union had. It was a centrally planned economy, and everything was controlled by the government. They were PURE Socialism down to every core component required. The great experiment was perfect Socialism.

The US was never a pure Democracy because it was never a Democracy at all, we're a Republic.

Germany WAS pure Nazism as they implemented every policy needed to be Socialist, as described in my other response. Social control of the means of production, everyone was employed by the government, and universal healthcare. Socialist paradise not unlike the Soviet Union.

Oh and as for your claim that we are only a Republic......... we are a Representative Democratic Republic, the Soviet Union was a Representative non-democratic Republic. There are multiple forms of Republic just as there are multiple forms of every political construct out there.

 

[bripat9643]

For the tards who need to enroll in the 5th grade again, here's some graphs that show you where the nazis end up on the political spectrum.

The upper right quandrant is the authoritarian right. The further north you are, the more authoritarian you are on the social scale. The further right, the more conservative on the economic scale.

Hitler wasn't even remotely liberal, or "left" by any stretch of the imagination. He was super, ultra authoritarian with slight right of center leanings on the economic scale. Nazi's were about pure authoritarianism. Hitler wasn't an extreme right winger on the economic scale, he was more Keynesian.

Today's left typically land somewhere down where Gandhi is.

You can take the test yourself to see where you end up here: The Political Compass

You can't read a simple chart, moron. The further right you go on your chart, the less authoritarian economically you are, and the Nazis where far to the left economically. Which means they are leftwing, period.

 

[Political Junky]

For the tards who need to enroll in the 5th grade again, here's some graphs that show you where the nazis end up on the political spectrum.

The upper right quandrant is the authoritarian right. The further north you are, the more authoritarian you are on the social scale. The further right, the more conservative on the economic scale.

Hitler wasn't even remotely liberal, or "left" by any stretch of the imagination. He was super, ultra authoritarian with slight right of center leanings on the economic scale. Nazi's were about pure authoritarianism. Hitler wasn't an extreme right winger on the economic scale, he was more Keynesian.

Today's left typically land somewhere down where Gandhi is.

You can take the test yourself to see where you end up here: The Political Compass

You can't read a simple chart, moron. The further right you go on your chart, the less authoritarian economically you are, and the Nazis where far to the left economically. Which means they are leftwing, period.

Do you ever tire of spouting that crap?

 

[SYTFE]

For the tards who need to enroll in the 5th grade again, here's some graphs that show you where the nazis end up on the political spectrum.

The upper right quandrant is the authoritarian right. The further north you are, the more authoritarian you are on the social scale. The further right, the more conservative on the economic scale.

Hitler wasn't even remotely liberal, or "left" by any stretch of the imagination. He was super, ultra authoritarian with slight right of center leanings on the economic scale. Nazi's were about pure authoritarianism. Hitler wasn't an extreme right winger on the economic scale, he was more Keynesian.

Today's left typically land somewhere down where Gandhi is.

You can take the test yourself to see where you end up here: The Political Compass

You can't read a simple chart, moron. The further right you go on your chart, the less authoritarian economically you are, and the Nazis where far to the left economically. Which means they are leftwing, period.

You are literally too fucking stupid to even debate with. Being to the right or left on the economic scale has NOTHING to do with how authoritarian you are you simple minded twat. God damn you're a fucking moron. Learn how to read that chart you goddamn imbecile.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

Those skinheads are called 14488ers.

During his reign, the government controlled all industry, all workers were employed by the government, and they had universal healthcare. Sure, people will tell you that the government didn't own industry, but the businesses only owned themselves in name, the government told them what to do and when to do it. Germany was every bit as Socialist as Russia.

Oh and use rational logic, not rationalized logic. Nazism under Hitler was never pure Nazism, the Soviet Union (especially under Stalin) was never a pure communist state and the US was never a pure democracy. There are no pure forms of sociopolitical constructs anywhere in the world.

Of course the Soviet Union was never Communist, Communism doesn't exist, and nobody has ever practiced it in the history of the world. For Communism to be practiced, there has to be no government, no currency, and no social classes. Calling the Soviet Union Communist was only a tactic by the Socialists to distance themselves from their massive failures, as the Soviet Union is a shining example of the failure of the Socialist ideology. Socialism requires Social control of the means of production whether it's controlled by the people or the government, which the Soviet Union had. It was a centrally planned economy, and everything was controlled by the government. They were PURE Socialism down to every core component required. The great experiment was perfect Socialism.

The US was never a pure Democracy because it was never a Democracy at all, we're a Republic.

Germany WAS pure Nazism as they implemented every policy needed to be Socialist, as described in my other response. Social control of the means of production, everyone was employed by the government, and universal healthcare. Socialist paradise not unlike the Soviet Union.

Like I said, we can agree to disagree because we're back to semantics again.

You say "Semantics" as though the exact meaning and reasoning behind everything isn't incredibly important. One who doesn't concern themselves with being absolutely right will be absolutely wrong.

Agree to disagree? I've made a sound argument backed by history when you came here to correct me, you lost because you didn't understand the topic. I suppose you think this is the best way for you to back off without admitting you were wrong? I'm willing to bet that just like everyone else on this forum, the next time the argument pops up, you're going to say the exact same thing you opened with to the next person, and if they prove you wrong, you're going to close with the exact same statement.

That's the thing about facts, you can disagree with them all you like, but that doesn't prevent them from being facts.

Don't pat yourself on the back so soon........
You've no proof of your assertions hence "agree to disagree" so basically you've proved nothing but how you interpret history, I should have said semantics and definitions. Nazism in Germany was never pure as Nazism was supposed to be Fascism, it fell far short in that area. You cherry pick specific so called socialist programs to rationalize your conclusions but omit the rest. The fact that you want desperatly to see Nazism as left as opposed to right wing is obvious in your approach. My recommendation, don't make up you own definitions use the ones that have been in place for generations.

I made up nothing, the 'cherry-picked' facts are enough to make it Socialism. Both Russia and Germany were factually fascist, they didn't fall short at all. I'm not desperate at all, big government is inherently left wing, so even if Germany wasn't Socialist, they'd easily be left wing on that merit alone. You're just like Divine.Wind.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

Those skinheads are called 14488ers.

During his reign, the government controlled all industry, all workers were employed by the government, and they had universal healthcare. Sure, people will tell you that the government didn't own industry, but the businesses only owned themselves in name, the government told them what to do and when to do it. Germany was every bit as Socialist as Russia.

Oh and use rational logic, not rationalized logic. Nazism under Hitler was never pure Nazism, the Soviet Union (especially under Stalin) was never a pure communist state and the US was never a pure democracy. There are no pure forms of sociopolitical constructs anywhere in the world.

Of course the Soviet Union was never Communist, Communism doesn't exist, and nobody has ever practiced it in the history of the world. For Communism to be practiced, there has to be no government, no currency, and no social classes. Calling the Soviet Union Communist was only a tactic by the Socialists to distance themselves from their massive failures, as the Soviet Union is a shining example of the failure of the Socialist ideology. Socialism requires Social control of the means of production whether it's controlled by the people or the government, which the Soviet Union had. It was a centrally planned economy, and everything was controlled by the government. They were PURE Socialism down to every core component required. The great experiment was perfect Socialism.

The US was never a pure Democracy because it was never a Democracy at all, we're a Republic.

Germany WAS pure Nazism as they implemented every policy needed to be Socialist, as described in my other response. Social control of the means of production, everyone was employed by the government, and universal healthcare. Socialist paradise not unlike the Soviet Union.

Like I said, we can agree to disagree because we're back to semantics again.

You say "Semantics" as though the exact meaning and reasoning behind everything isn't incredibly important. One who doesn't concern themselves with being absolutely right will be absolutely wrong.

Agree to disagree? I've made a sound argument backed by history when you came here to correct me, you lost because you didn't understand the topic. I suppose you think this is the best way for you to back off without admitting you were wrong? I'm willing to bet that just like everyone else on this forum, the next time the argument pops up, you're going to say the exact same thing you opened with to the next person, and if they prove you wrong, you're going to close with the exact same statement.

That's the thing about facts, you can disagree with them all you like, but that doesn't prevent them from being facts.

I will admit that, after going back and reading my post that I did make a mistake and stated no socialist programs were installed but the installation of a limited number of the programs doesn't detract from the reality of what Hitler was doing and that he transformed Nazism from what Rohm and others wanted into a nationalist dictatorship.

In Germany, Nazi leader Adolf Hitler orders a bloody purge of his own political party, assassinating hundreds of Nazis whom he believed had the potential to become political enemies in the future. The leadership of the Nazi Storm Troopers (SA), whose four million members had helped bring Hitler to power in the early 1930s, was especially targeted. Hitler feared that some of his followers had taken his early “National Socialism” propaganda too seriously and thus might compromise his plan to suppress workers’ rights in exchange for German industry making the country war-ready.

Night of the Long Knives - Jun 30, 1934 - HISTORY.com

Government takeover of the means of production, universal healthcare, and government employment of every citizen is enough to make them Socialist. That's not 'limited number', that's total Socialism.

 

[Ringel05]

Oh and use rational logic, not rationalized logic. Nazism under Hitler was never pure Nazism, the Soviet Union (especially under Stalin) was never a pure communist state and the US was never a pure democracy. There are no pure forms of sociopolitical constructs anywhere in the world.

Of course the Soviet Union was never Communist, Communism doesn't exist, and nobody has ever practiced it in the history of the world. For Communism to be practiced, there has to be no government, no currency, and no social classes. Calling the Soviet Union Communist was only a tactic by the Socialists to distance themselves from their massive failures, as the Soviet Union is a shining example of the failure of the Socialist ideology. Socialism requires Social control of the means of production whether it's controlled by the people or the government, which the Soviet Union had. It was a centrally planned economy, and everything was controlled by the government. They were PURE Socialism down to every core component required. The great experiment was perfect Socialism.

The US was never a pure Democracy because it was never a Democracy at all, we're a Republic.

Germany WAS pure Nazism as they implemented every policy needed to be Socialist, as described in my other response. Social control of the means of production, everyone was employed by the government, and universal healthcare. Socialist paradise not unlike the Soviet Union.

Like I said, we can agree to disagree because we're back to semantics again.

You say "Semantics" as though the exact meaning and reasoning behind everything isn't incredibly important. One who doesn't concern themselves with being absolutely right will be absolutely wrong.

Agree to disagree? I've made a sound argument backed by history when you came here to correct me, you lost because you didn't understand the topic. I suppose you think this is the best way for you to back off without admitting you were wrong? I'm willing to bet that just like everyone else on this forum, the next time the argument pops up, you're going to say the exact same thing you opened with to the next person, and if they prove you wrong, you're going to close with the exact same statement.

That's the thing about facts, you can disagree with them all you like, but that doesn't prevent them from being facts.

I will admit that, after going back and reading my post that I did make a mistake and stated no socialist programs were installed but the installation of a limited number of the programs doesn't detract from the reality of what Hitler was doing and that he transformed Nazism from what Rohm and others wanted into a nationalist dictatorship.

In Germany, Nazi leader Adolf Hitler orders a bloody purge of his own political party, assassinating hundreds of Nazis whom he believed had the potential to become political enemies in the future. The leadership of the Nazi Storm Troopers (SA), whose four million members had helped bring Hitler to power in the early 1930s, was especially targeted. Hitler feared that some of his followers had taken his early “National Socialism” propaganda too seriously and thus might compromise his plan to suppress workers’ rights in exchange for German industry making the country war-ready.

Night of the Long Knives - Jun 30, 1934 - HISTORY.com

Government takeover of the means of production, universal healthcare, and government employment of every citizen is enough to make them Socialist. That's not 'limited number', that's total Socialism.

Here, this is for you......... It's highly appropriate.

How People’s Political Passions Distort Their Sense of Reality

 

[Ringel05]

Oh and use rational logic, not rationalized logic. Nazism under Hitler was never pure Nazism, the Soviet Union (especially under Stalin) was never a pure communist state and the US was never a pure democracy. There are no pure forms of sociopolitical constructs anywhere in the world.

Of course the Soviet Union was never Communist, Communism doesn't exist, and nobody has ever practiced it in the history of the world. For Communism to be practiced, there has to be no government, no currency, and no social classes. Calling the Soviet Union Communist was only a tactic by the Socialists to distance themselves from their massive failures, as the Soviet Union is a shining example of the failure of the Socialist ideology. Socialism requires Social control of the means of production whether it's controlled by the people or the government, which the Soviet Union had. It was a centrally planned economy, and everything was controlled by the government. They were PURE Socialism down to every core component required. The great experiment was perfect Socialism.

The US was never a pure Democracy because it was never a Democracy at all, we're a Republic.

Germany WAS pure Nazism as they implemented every policy needed to be Socialist, as described in my other response. Social control of the means of production, everyone was employed by the government, and universal healthcare. Socialist paradise not unlike the Soviet Union.

Like I said, we can agree to disagree because we're back to semantics again.

You say "Semantics" as though the exact meaning and reasoning behind everything isn't incredibly important. One who doesn't concern themselves with being absolutely right will be absolutely wrong.

Agree to disagree? I've made a sound argument backed by history when you came here to correct me, you lost because you didn't understand the topic. I suppose you think this is the best way for you to back off without admitting you were wrong? I'm willing to bet that just like everyone else on this forum, the next time the argument pops up, you're going to say the exact same thing you opened with to the next person, and if they prove you wrong, you're going to close with the exact same statement.

That's the thing about facts, you can disagree with them all you like, but that doesn't prevent them from being facts.

Don't pat yourself on the back so soon........
You've no proof of your assertions hence "agree to disagree" so basically you've proved nothing but how you interpret history, I should have said semantics and definitions. Nazism in Germany was never pure as Nazism was supposed to be Fascism, it fell far short in that area. You cherry pick specific so called socialist programs to rationalize your conclusions but omit the rest. The fact that you want desperatly to see Nazism as left as opposed to right wing is obvious in your approach. My recommendation, don't make up you own definitions use the ones that have been in place for generations.

I made up nothing, the 'cherry-picked' facts are enough to make it Socialism. Both Russia and Germany were factually fascist, they didn't fall short at all. I'm not desperate at all, big government is inherently left wing, so even if Germany wasn't Socialist, they'd easily be left wing on that merit alone. You're just like Divine.Wind.

You sound just like Joseph McCarthy.

 

[Ringel05]

Of course the Soviet Union was never Communist, Communism doesn't exist, and nobody has ever practiced it in the history of the world. For Communism to be practiced, there has to be no government, no currency, and no social classes. Calling the Soviet Union Communist was only a tactic by the Socialists to distance themselves from their massive failures, as the Soviet Union is a shining example of the failure of the Socialist ideology. Socialism requires Social control of the means of production whether it's controlled by the people or the government, which the Soviet Union had. It was a centrally planned economy, and everything was controlled by the government. They were PURE Socialism down to every core component required. The great experiment was perfect Socialism.

The US was never a pure Democracy because it was never a Democracy at all, we're a Republic.

Germany WAS pure Nazism as they implemented every policy needed to be Socialist, as described in my other response. Social control of the means of production, everyone was employed by the government, and universal healthcare. Socialist paradise not unlike the Soviet Union.

Like I said, we can agree to disagree because we're back to semantics again.

You say "Semantics" as though the exact meaning and reasoning behind everything isn't incredibly important. One who doesn't concern themselves with being absolutely right will be absolutely wrong.

Agree to disagree? I've made a sound argument backed by history when you came here to correct me, you lost because you didn't understand the topic. I suppose you think this is the best way for you to back off without admitting you were wrong? I'm willing to bet that just like everyone else on this forum, the next time the argument pops up, you're going to say the exact same thing you opened with to the next person, and if they prove you wrong, you're going to close with the exact same statement.

That's the thing about facts, you can disagree with them all you like, but that doesn't prevent them from being facts.

I will admit that, after going back and reading my post that I did make a mistake and stated no socialist programs were installed but the installation of a limited number of the programs doesn't detract from the reality of what Hitler was doing and that he transformed Nazism from what Rohm and others wanted into a nationalist dictatorship.

In Germany, Nazi leader Adolf Hitler orders a bloody purge of his own political party, assassinating hundreds of Nazis whom he believed had the potential to become political enemies in the future. The leadership of the Nazi Storm Troopers (SA), whose four million members had helped bring Hitler to power in the early 1930s, was especially targeted. Hitler feared that some of his followers had taken his early “National Socialism” propaganda too seriously and thus might compromise his plan to suppress workers’ rights in exchange for German industry making the country war-ready.

Night of the Long Knives - Jun 30, 1934 - HISTORY.com

Government takeover of the means of production, universal healthcare, and government employment of every citizen is enough to make them Socialist. That's not 'limited number', that's total Socialism.

Here, this is for you......... It's highly appropriate.

How People’s Political Passions Distort Their Sense of Reality

You cherry picked because you only selected those aspects that fit your paradigm and called it a whole, I'm looking at the whole and calling it what it was.

 

[bripat9643]

For the tards who need to enroll in the 5th grade again, here's some graphs that show you where the nazis end up on the political spectrum.

The upper right quandrant is the authoritarian right. The further north you are, the more authoritarian you are on the social scale. The further right, the more conservative on the economic scale.

Hitler wasn't even remotely liberal, or "left" by any stretch of the imagination. He was super, ultra authoritarian with slight right of center leanings on the economic scale. Nazi's were about pure authoritarianism. Hitler wasn't an extreme right winger on the economic scale, he was more Keynesian.

Today's left typically land somewhere down where Gandhi is.

You can take the test yourself to see where you end up here: The Political Compass

You can't read a simple chart, moron. The further right you go on your chart, the less authoritarian economically you are, and the Nazis where far to the left economically. Which means they are leftwing, period.

Do you ever tire of spouting that crap?

I never tire of spouting the truth.

 

[bripat9643]

Of course the Soviet Union was never Communist, Communism doesn't exist, and nobody has ever practiced it in the history of the world. For Communism to be practiced, there has to be no government, no currency, and no social classes. Calling the Soviet Union Communist was only a tactic by the Socialists to distance themselves from their massive failures, as the Soviet Union is a shining example of the failure of the Socialist ideology. Socialism requires Social control of the means of production whether it's controlled by the people or the government, which the Soviet Union had. It was a centrally planned economy, and everything was controlled by the government. They were PURE Socialism down to every core component required. The great experiment was perfect Socialism.

The US was never a pure Democracy because it was never a Democracy at all, we're a Republic.

Germany WAS pure Nazism as they implemented every policy needed to be Socialist, as described in my other response. Social control of the means of production, everyone was employed by the government, and universal healthcare. Socialist paradise not unlike the Soviet Union.

Like I said, we can agree to disagree because we're back to semantics again.

You say "Semantics" as though the exact meaning and reasoning behind everything isn't incredibly important. One who doesn't concern themselves with being absolutely right will be absolutely wrong.

Agree to disagree? I've made a sound argument backed by history when you came here to correct me, you lost because you didn't understand the topic. I suppose you think this is the best way for you to back off without admitting you were wrong? I'm willing to bet that just like everyone else on this forum, the next time the argument pops up, you're going to say the exact same thing you opened with to the next person, and if they prove you wrong, you're going to close with the exact same statement.

That's the thing about facts, you can disagree with them all you like, but that doesn't prevent them from being facts.

Don't pat yourself on the back so soon........
You've no proof of your assertions hence "agree to disagree" so basically you've proved nothing but how you interpret history, I should have said semantics and definitions. Nazism in Germany was never pure as Nazism was supposed to be Fascism, it fell far short in that area. You cherry pick specific so called socialist programs to rationalize your conclusions but omit the rest. The fact that you want desperatly to see Nazism as left as opposed to right wing is obvious in your approach. My recommendation, don't make up you own definitions use the ones that have been in place for generations.

I made up nothing, the 'cherry-picked' facts are enough to make it Socialism. Both Russia and Germany were factually fascist, they didn't fall short at all. I'm not desperate at all, big government is inherently left wing, so even if Germany wasn't Socialist, they'd easily be left wing on that merit alone. You're just like Divine.Wind.

You sound just like Joseph McCarthy.

How so?

 

[bripat9643]

Of course the Soviet Union was never Communist, Communism doesn't exist, and nobody has ever practiced it in the history of the world. For Communism to be practiced, there has to be no government, no currency, and no social classes. Calling the Soviet Union Communist was only a tactic by the Socialists to distance themselves from their massive failures, as the Soviet Union is a shining example of the failure of the Socialist ideology. Socialism requires Social control of the means of production whether it's controlled by the people or the government, which the Soviet Union had. It was a centrally planned economy, and everything was controlled by the government. They were PURE Socialism down to every core component required. The great experiment was perfect Socialism.

The US was never a pure Democracy because it was never a Democracy at all, we're a Republic.

Germany WAS pure Nazism as they implemented every policy needed to be Socialist, as described in my other response. Social control of the means of production, everyone was employed by the government, and universal healthcare. Socialist paradise not unlike the Soviet Union.

Like I said, we can agree to disagree because we're back to semantics again.

You say "Semantics" as though the exact meaning and reasoning behind everything isn't incredibly important. One who doesn't concern themselves with being absolutely right will be absolutely wrong.

Agree to disagree? I've made a sound argument backed by history when you came here to correct me, you lost because you didn't understand the topic. I suppose you think this is the best way for you to back off without admitting you were wrong? I'm willing to bet that just like everyone else on this forum, the next time the argument pops up, you're going to say the exact same thing you opened with to the next person, and if they prove you wrong, you're going to close with the exact same statement.

That's the thing about facts, you can disagree with them all you like, but that doesn't prevent them from being facts.

I will admit that, after going back and reading my post that I did make a mistake and stated no socialist programs were installed but the installation of a limited number of the programs doesn't detract from the reality of what Hitler was doing and that he transformed Nazism from what Rohm and others wanted into a nationalist dictatorship.

In Germany, Nazi leader Adolf Hitler orders a bloody purge of his own political party, assassinating hundreds of Nazis whom he believed had the potential to become political enemies in the future. The leadership of the Nazi Storm Troopers (SA), whose four million members had helped bring Hitler to power in the early 1930s, was especially targeted. Hitler feared that some of his followers had taken his early “National Socialism” propaganda too seriously and thus might compromise his plan to suppress workers’ rights in exchange for German industry making the country war-ready.

Night of the Long Knives - Jun 30, 1934 - HISTORY.com

Government takeover of the means of production, universal healthcare, and government employment of every citizen is enough to make them Socialist. That's not 'limited number', that's total Socialism.

Here, this is for you......... It's highly appropriate.

How People’s Political Passions Distort Their Sense of Reality

That sounds like the perfect description of a snowflake.

 

[bripat9643]

Like I said, we can agree to disagree because we're back to semantics again.

You say "Semantics" as though the exact meaning and reasoning behind everything isn't incredibly important. One who doesn't concern themselves with being absolutely right will be absolutely wrong.

Agree to disagree? I've made a sound argument backed by history when you came here to correct me, you lost because you didn't understand the topic. I suppose you think this is the best way for you to back off without admitting you were wrong? I'm willing to bet that just like everyone else on this forum, the next time the argument pops up, you're going to say the exact same thing you opened with to the next person, and if they prove you wrong, you're going to close with the exact same statement.

That's the thing about facts, you can disagree with them all you like, but that doesn't prevent them from being facts.

I will admit that, after going back and reading my post that I did make a mistake and stated no socialist programs were installed but the installation of a limited number of the programs doesn't detract from the reality of what Hitler was doing and that he transformed Nazism from what Rohm and others wanted into a nationalist dictatorship.

In Germany, Nazi leader Adolf Hitler orders a bloody purge of his own political party, assassinating hundreds of Nazis whom he believed had the potential to become political enemies in the future. The leadership of the Nazi Storm Troopers (SA), whose four million members had helped bring Hitler to power in the early 1930s, was especially targeted. Hitler feared that some of his followers had taken his early “National Socialism” propaganda too seriously and thus might compromise his plan to suppress workers’ rights in exchange for German industry making the country war-ready.

Night of the Long Knives - Jun 30, 1934 - HISTORY.com

Government takeover of the means of production, universal healthcare, and government employment of every citizen is enough to make them Socialist. That's not 'limited number', that's total Socialism.

Here, this is for you......... It's highly appropriate.

How People’s Political Passions Distort Their Sense of Reality

You cherry picked because you only selected those aspects that fit your paradigm and called it a whole, I'm looking at the whole and calling it what it was.

She cherry picked nothing. You're totally ignorant of what Nazi Germany was.

 

[bripat9643]

For the tards who need to enroll in the 5th grade again, here's some graphs that show you where the nazis end up on the political spectrum.

The upper right quandrant is the authoritarian right. The further north you are, the more authoritarian you are on the social scale. The further right, the more conservative on the economic scale.

Hitler wasn't even remotely liberal, or "left" by any stretch of the imagination. He was super, ultra authoritarian with slight right of center leanings on the economic scale. Nazi's were about pure authoritarianism. Hitler wasn't an extreme right winger on the economic scale, he was more Keynesian.

Today's left typically land somewhere down where Gandhi is.

You can take the test yourself to see where you end up here: The Political Compass

You can't read a simple chart, moron. The further right you go on your chart, the less authoritarian economically you are, and the Nazis where far to the left economically. Which means they are leftwing, period.

You are literally too fucking stupid to even debate with. Being to the right or left on the economic scale has NOTHING to do with how authoritarian you are you simple minded twat. God damn you're a fucking moron. Learn how to read that chart you goddamn imbecile.

Of course it does. Just as property owners in Venezuela who had their property expropriated by the government, or forced to sell their goods at a government mandated price. Ask farmers in the USA who have been fined millions of dollars by the EPA simply for plowing their fields. Ask kids who tried to setup a lemonade stand and were told the couldn't do it without a license that costs $100.

 

[miketx]

Of course the Soviet Union was never Communist, Communism doesn't exist, and nobody has ever practiced it in the history of the world. For Communism to be practiced, there has to be no government, no currency, and no social classes. Calling the Soviet Union Communist was only a tactic by the Socialists to distance themselves from their massive failures, as the Soviet Union is a shining example of the failure of the Socialist ideology. Socialism requires Social control of the means of production whether it's controlled by the people or the government, which the Soviet Union had. It was a centrally planned economy, and everything was controlled by the government. They were PURE Socialism down to every core component required. The great experiment was perfect Socialism.

The US was never a pure Democracy because it was never a Democracy at all, we're a Republic.

Germany WAS pure Nazism as they implemented every policy needed to be Socialist, as described in my other response. Social control of the means of production, everyone was employed by the government, and universal healthcare. Socialist paradise not unlike the Soviet Union.

Like I said, we can agree to disagree because we're back to semantics again.

You say "Semantics" as though the exact meaning and reasoning behind everything isn't incredibly important. One who doesn't concern themselves with being absolutely right will be absolutely wrong.

Agree to disagree? I've made a sound argument backed by history when you came here to correct me, you lost because you didn't understand the topic. I suppose you think this is the best way for you to back off without admitting you were wrong? I'm willing to bet that just like everyone else on this forum, the next time the argument pops up, you're going to say the exact same thing you opened with to the next person, and if they prove you wrong, you're going to close with the exact same statement.

That's the thing about facts, you can disagree with them all you like, but that doesn't prevent them from being facts.

Don't pat yourself on the back so soon........
You've no proof of your assertions hence "agree to disagree" so basically you've proved nothing but how you interpret history, I should have said semantics and definitions. Nazism in Germany was never pure as Nazism was supposed to be Fascism, it fell far short in that area. You cherry pick specific so called socialist programs to rationalize your conclusions but omit the rest. The fact that you want desperatly to see Nazism as left as opposed to right wing is obvious in your approach. My recommendation, don't make up you own definitions use the ones that have been in place for generations.

I made up nothing, the 'cherry-picked' facts are enough to make it Socialism. Both Russia and Germany were factually fascist, they didn't fall short at all. I'm not desperate at all, big government is inherently left wing, so even if Germany wasn't Socialist, they'd easily be left wing on that merit alone. You're just like Divine.Wind.

You sound just like Joseph McCarthy.

You sound like a commie supporter.

 

[bripat9643]

Like I said, we can agree to disagree because we're back to semantics again.

You say "Semantics" as though the exact meaning and reasoning behind everything isn't incredibly important. One who doesn't concern themselves with being absolutely right will be absolutely wrong.

Agree to disagree? I've made a sound argument backed by history when you came here to correct me, you lost because you didn't understand the topic. I suppose you think this is the best way for you to back off without admitting you were wrong? I'm willing to bet that just like everyone else on this forum, the next time the argument pops up, you're going to say the exact same thing you opened with to the next person, and if they prove you wrong, you're going to close with the exact same statement.

That's the thing about facts, you can disagree with them all you like, but that doesn't prevent them from being facts.

Don't pat yourself on the back so soon........
You've no proof of your assertions hence "agree to disagree" so basically you've proved nothing but how you interpret history, I should have said semantics and definitions. Nazism in Germany was never pure as Nazism was supposed to be Fascism, it fell far short in that area. You cherry pick specific so called socialist programs to rationalize your conclusions but omit the rest. The fact that you want desperatly to see Nazism as left as opposed to right wing is obvious in your approach. My recommendation, don't make up you own definitions use the ones that have been in place for generations.

I made up nothing, the 'cherry-picked' facts are enough to make it Socialism. Both Russia and Germany were factually fascist, they didn't fall short at all. I'm not desperate at all, big government is inherently left wing, so even if Germany wasn't Socialist, they'd easily be left wing on that merit alone. You're just like Divine.Wind.

You sound just like Joseph McCarthy.

You sound like a commie supporter.

BINGO!

 

[Wyatt earp]

Like I said, we can agree to disagree because we're back to semantics again.

You say "Semantics" as though the exact meaning and reasoning behind everything isn't incredibly important. One who doesn't concern themselves with being absolutely right will be absolutely wrong.

Agree to disagree? I've made a sound argument backed by history when you came here to correct me, you lost because you didn't understand the topic. I suppose you think this is the best way for you to back off without admitting you were wrong? I'm willing to bet that just like everyone else on this forum, the next time the argument pops up, you're going to say the exact same thing you opened with to the next person, and if they prove you wrong, you're going to close with the exact same statement.

That's the thing about facts, you can disagree with them all you like, but that doesn't prevent them from being facts.

I will admit that, after going back and reading my post that I did make a mistake and stated no socialist programs were installed but the installation of a limited number of the programs doesn't detract from the reality of what Hitler was doing and that he transformed Nazism from what Rohm and others wanted into a nationalist dictatorship.

In Germany, Nazi leader Adolf Hitler orders a bloody purge of his own political party, assassinating hundreds of Nazis whom he believed had the potential to become political enemies in the future. The leadership of the Nazi Storm Troopers (SA), whose four million members had helped bring Hitler to power in the early 1930s, was especially targeted. Hitler feared that some of his followers had taken his early “National Socialism” propaganda too seriously and thus might compromise his plan to suppress workers’ rights in exchange for German industry making the country war-ready.

Night of the Long Knives - Jun 30, 1934 - HISTORY.com

Government takeover of the means of production, universal healthcare, and government employment of every citizen is enough to make them Socialist. That's not 'limited number', that's total Socialism.

Here, this is for you......... It's highly appropriate.

How People’s Political Passions Distort Their Sense of Reality

You cherry picked because you only selected those aspects that fit your paradigm and called it a whole, I'm looking at the whole and calling it what it was.

Your not looking at the whole.



.