Remembering Barbarossa

[PoliticalChic]

In MAGA world Nazis were socialists.

Take notes so you make less of a fool of yourself in the future:


"Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian
Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian | George Reisman


".... Nazi Germany was a socialist state, not a capitalist one. And ... socialism, understood as an economic system based on government ownership of the means of production, positively requires a totalitarian dictatorship.

... the word "Nazi" was an abbreviation for "der Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiters Partei — in English translation: the National Socialist German Workers' Party ... what should one expect the economic system of a country ruled by a party with "socialist" in its name to be but socialism?


It is far more common to believe that it represented a form of capitalism, which is what the Communists and all other Marxists have claimed. The basis of the claim that Nazi Germany was capitalist was the fact that most industries in Nazi Germany appeared to be left in private hands.


What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existed in name only under the Nazis …The position of the alleged private owners, Mises showed, was reduced essentially to that of government pensioners."

 

[PoliticalChic]

You're really ignorant. Fascist is hard right conservative...

Conservatives champion free speech. You Fascists/Demores hate free speech.


Remember when Democrats put Fascist/Democrat Kagan on the Supreme Court?


. “… Elena Kagan authored a brief to the Supreme Court arguing that “whether a given category of speech enjoys First Amendment protection depends upon a categorical balancing of the value of the speech against its societal costs.” This is the kind of instrumentalism that Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. was famous for and of which Sunstein would be proud. You might even call it Ivy League “empathy.”

The Supreme Court rejected Kagan’s argument, but, as Mark Tapscott has said, “had the justices accepted her assertion, it would have effectively repealed the First Amendment’s protection of speech and replaced it by granting government the authority to decide what speech should be permitted.” Kagan on Free Speech | National Review



This Democrat beliefs writ large: it is the same view that Nazis, Bolsheviks, Maoists, etc. have of free speech.

It is surely not American.
But this is the sort of Justice the Democrats demand on the Court.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

"torn," you imbecile, not "tore."

I bet most have noticed that Democrat/Bolshevik supporters are uneducated.

If that is your reply, Eva, you have lost a long time ago.

Your fascism will never succeed here, and that ilk will have to return to their heritage countries.

You are a fascist and would cancel your enemies' free speech.

 

[Robert W]

1. Every day, and in so very many ways, government school lies to its captive audience, often by omission.
They may or may not tell of significant historic events......but even when they do, they leave out context and pertinent details.


This day, June 22, or 1941, two Leftist, Socialist regimes fought.......and should have been encouraged to fight to the death......both of their deaths.


2. Operation Barbarossa was the code name for the Axis invasion of the Soviet Union, which started on Sunday, 22 June 1941, during World War II. The operation put into action Nazi Germany's ideological goal of conquering the western Soviet Union so as to repopulate it with Germans. Wikipedia


3.
View attachment 353480

The two were allies until this date, with Stalin providing the materials Germany lacked, for Hitler's Blitzkrieg.
Common parade of German Wehrmacht and Soviet Red Army on September 23, 1939 in Brest, Eastern Poland at the end of the Poland Campaign. In the center is Major General Heinz Guderian; and on the right is Brigadier General Semyon Krivoshein.


4. Franklin Roosevelt faced a difficult decision.....he didn't know which of his 'pals' to support.

It came down to this:
" Fascism did not acquire an evil name in Washington
until Hitler became a menace to·the Soviet Union."
Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," p. 48


FDR made a terrible mistake: he turned over American foreign policy to Stalin.


5. Hanson Baldwin, military critic of the New York Times, declares in his book, "Great Mistakes of the War:" 'There is no doubt whatsoever that it would have been to the interest of Britain, the United States, and the world to have allowed and indeed to have encouraged-the world's two great dictatorships to fight each other to a frazzle.'
Baldwin writes that the United States put itself "in the role-at times a disgraceful role-of fearful suppliant and propitiating ally, anxious at nearly any cost to keep Russia fighting. In retrospect, how stupid!"

She was hammered by Rightwinger so you know she is totally correct.

 

[Robert W]

If that is your reply, Eva, you have lost a long time ago.

Your fascism will never succeed here, and that ilk will have to return to their heritage countries.

You are a fascist and would cancel your enemies' free speech.

You can't debate her so you lash out with name calling. She is not a fascist.

I can tell you the book you must read if you truly want to understand fascism.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

You can't debate her so you lash out with name calling. She is not a fascist.

I can tell you the book you must read if you truly want to understand fascism.

The truth is never name calling. Yes, she is a fascist, and you are just confused.

 

[Robert W]

Some of the facts are that Prescott Bush bankrolled the Nazis.

Not him, but a company he was a director of. Directors do not make day to day decisions.
This is a half baked story primarily spread by Democrats.

Rumours of a link between the US first family and the Nazi war machine have circulated for decades. Now the Guardian can reveal how repercussions of events that culminated in action under the Trading with the Enemy Act are still being felt by today's president

Ben Aris in Berlin and Duncan Campbell in Washington
Sat 25 Sep 2004 18.59 EDT
Share


George Bush's grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany.
The Guardian has obtained confirmation from newly discovered files in the US National Archives that a firm of which Prescott Bush was a director was involved with the financial architects of Nazism.

His business dealings, which continued until his company's assets were seized in 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act, has led more than 60 years later to a civil action for damages being brought in Germany against the Bush family by two former slave labourers at Auschwitz and to a hum of pre-election controversy.
The evidence has also prompted one former US Nazi war crimes prosecutor to argue that the late senator's action should have been grounds for prosecution for giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

The debate over Prescott Bush's behaviour has been bubbling under the surface for some time. There has been a steady internet chatter about the "Bush/Nazi" connection, much of it inaccurate and unfair. But the new documents, many of which were only declassified last year, show that even after America had entered the war and when there was already significant information about the Nazis' plans and policies, he worked for and profited from companies closely involved with the very German businesses that financed Hitler's rise to power. It has also been suggested that the money he made from these dealings helped to establish the Bush family fortune and set up its political dynasty.
Remarkably, little of Bush's dealings with Germany has received public scrutiny, partly because of the secret status of the documentation involving him. But now the multibillion dollar legal action for damages by two Holocaust survivors against the Bush family, and the imminent publication of three books on the subject are threatening to make Prescott Bush's business history an uncomfortable issue for his grandson, George W, as he seeks re-election.
While there is no suggestion that Prescott Bush was sympathetic to the Nazi cause, the documents reveal that the firm he worked for, Brown Brothers Harriman (BBH), acted as a US base for the German industrialist, Fritz Thyssen, who helped finance Hitler in the 1930s before falling out with him at the end of the decade.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ked to Burisma and it's so called corruption.

 

[Robert W]

Actually, it was conservatives and their allies the Nazi Bund that supported the Nazis up until Pearl Harbor brought us to war with them

Conservatives were not in power when Hitler and the Nazis were in power.

 

[Robert W]

The truth is never name calling. Yes, she is a fascist, and you are just confused.

She is not. That is the truth.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Conservatives were not in power when Hitler and the Nazis were in power.

In foreign policy, FDR was using conservatives because the nation was isolationistic for his first eight years.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

She is not. That is the truth.

Yeah, she is. Ask her.

 

[Stryder50]

You're really ignorant. Fascist is hard right conservative...

In Marxist/Leftist dictionaries that might be.
"Fascist" is still authoritarian and state dominate/control and this is what a majority of Leftists~socialists~communists really implement if given power.

 

[Stryder50]

Not him, but a company he was a director of. Directors do not make day to day decisions.
This is a half baked story primarily spread by Democrats.

Rumours of a link between the US first family and the Nazi war machine have circulated for decades. Now the Guardian can reveal how repercussions of events that culminated in action under the Trading with the Enemy Act are still being felt by today's president

Ben Aris in Berlin and Duncan Campbell in Washington
Sat 25 Sep 2004 18.59 EDT
Share


George Bush's grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany.
The Guardian has obtained confirmation from newly discovered files in the US National Archives that a firm of which Prescott Bush was a director was involved with the financial architects of Nazism.

His business dealings, which continued until his company's assets were seized in 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act, has led more than 60 years later to a civil action for damages being brought in Germany against the Bush family by two former slave labourers at Auschwitz and to a hum of pre-election controversy.
The evidence has also prompted one former US Nazi war crimes prosecutor to argue that the late senator's action should have been grounds for prosecution for giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

The debate over Prescott Bush's behaviour has been bubbling under the surface for some time. There has been a steady internet chatter about the "Bush/Nazi" connection, much of it inaccurate and unfair. But the new documents, many of which were only declassified last year, show that even after America had entered the war and when there was already significant information about the Nazis' plans and policies, he worked for and profited from companies closely involved with the very German businesses that financed Hitler's rise to power. It has also been suggested that the money he made from these dealings helped to establish the Bush family fortune and set up its political dynasty.
Remarkably, little of Bush's dealings with Germany has received public scrutiny, partly because of the secret status of the documentation involving him. But now the multibillion dollar legal action for damages by two Holocaust survivors against the Bush family, and the imminent publication of three books on the subject are threatening to make Prescott Bush's business history an uncomfortable issue for his grandson, George W, as he seeks re-election.
While there is no suggestion that Prescott Bush was sympathetic to the Nazi cause, the documents reveal that the firm he worked for, Brown Brothers Harriman (BBH), acted as a US base for the German industrialist, Fritz Thyssen, who helped finance Hitler in the 1930s before falling out with him at the end of the decade.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ked to Burisma and it's so called corruption.

And on a related note, John F. Kennedy's father was US ambassador to the UK when Hitler started WWII and he was strongly opposed to giving aid to the Brits.
If that's not a classic of Democrat supporting fascism/Nazism then we must be in the Twilight Zone.

 

[Stryder50]

Taxes are the price we pay to live in a civilized society

Libertarians believe in every man for themselves and dismiss the value of living in a society.

I got mine, screw everyone else

Taxes don't need to be exorbitant.
Usually it's the parasite Leftist living off of taxes that defend high taxes.
Libertarians believe that everyone should provide for themselves and not expect to have a claim or right to the produce of others. They dismiss the use of the state to be the thief that supports the non-productive, especially the lazy and incompetent.
I earned mine, you earn yours.

 

[rightwinger]

Taxes don't need to be exorbitant.
Usually it's the parasite Leftist living off of taxes that defend high taxes.
Libertarians believe that everyone should provide for themselves and not expect to have a claim or right to the produce of others. They dismiss the use of the state to be the thief that supports the non-productive, especially the lazy and incompetent.
I earned mine, you earn yours.

Once again you demonstrate the callousness and indifference of Libertarians

A reason why Libertarians rarely get elected to higher office

 

[Stryder50]

Once again you demonstrate the callousness and indifference of Libertarians

A reason why Libertarians rarely get elected to higher office

Has to do with historical trends and numbers, not ideology.
The majority of voters still play with the two long standing major parties; Dems and Reps.
If you had a brain, a clue, and some honest integrity you would know this and admit as much.
Since you have none of the above, you remain a clueless minion of your masters, babbling nonsense.

 

[Stryder50]

Once again you demonstrate the callousness and indifference of Libertarians

A reason why Libertarians rarely get elected to higher office

I'd wager, if you are honest with yourself, that on the "Economic Issues Score" you'd get 50 or less.
On the Personal Issues Score, anywhere between 0 to 100. But more likely again at 50 or less.
You'd peg at "Authoritarian" to "Progressive" (solid in the fascist ranking);

Here's the test. Hopefully not too simple for you to grasp or do ....

The World’s Smallest Political Quiz

Discover your REAL political views with The World’s Smallest Political Quiz.

www.theadvocates.org

 

[rightwinger]

I'd wager, if you are honest with yourself, that on the "Economic Issues Score" you'd get 50 or less.
On the Personal Issues Score, anywhere between 0 to 100. But more likely again at 50 or less.
You'd peg at "Authoritarian" to "Progressive" (solid in the fascist ranking);

Here's the test. Hopefully not too simple for you to grasp or do ....

The World’s Smallest Political Quiz

Discover your REAL political views with The World’s Smallest Political Quiz.

www.theadvocates.org

progressive

 

[Zincwarrior]

Take notes so you make less of a fool of yourself in the future:


"Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian
Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian | George Reisman


".... Nazi Germany was a socialist state, not a capitalist one. And ... socialism, understood as an economic system based on government ownership of the means of production, positively requires a totalitarian dictatorship.

... the word "Nazi" was an abbreviation for "der Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiters Partei — in English translation: the National Socialist German Workers' Party ... what should one expect the economic system of a country ruled by a party with "socialist" in its name to be but socialism?


It is far more common to believe that it represented a form of capitalism, which is what the Communists and all other Marxists have claimed. The basis of the claim that Nazi Germany was capitalist was the fact that most industries in Nazi Germany appeared to be left in private hands.


What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existed in name only under the Nazis …The position of the alleged private owners, Mises showed, was reduced essentially to that of government pensioners."

I follow what they actually DID, NOT WHAT SOME RANDO SAYS.

 

[rightwinger]

Nazi Germany was a socialist state, not a capitalist one. And ... socialism, understood as an economic system based on government ownership of the means of production, positively requires a totalitarian dictatorship.

German industry competed for contracts and resources. They made huge profits

Actually, the US was Socialist in WWII with the government telling companies what they could produce, what resources they could have, who they could hire, what they paid and what they charged for their goods