Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Nicely sourced opinion.the nazi party persecuted and killed the members of the left-wing parties, within and outside of the nazi party. and cooperated and fused with the right-wing parties.
goebbels started as poetry writerand journalist with socialist tendencies, he was a follower of g. strasser and criticized hitler in the beginning for hitlers anti-socialist rhetoric. hitler, however won the fight, not goebbels or strasser. strasser did not get the hint. goebbels did. that is why goebbels lost his socialist tendencies, and strasser his life.
which part do you want to have sourced? btw, i posted this several times and with sources on this board. i will do it again, if you tell me which part.
LK et al. Sorry no luck gentlemen. I was studing Asian and African history when you cowns were in knee pants.
.
Redefining terms in a way that no one else uses.
.
What you need to do Prima dona which has been done by the other camp, is post the Nazi policies that reflect todays conservative policies.[
Fitnah -
You keep using models , not examples of how the policies are "right wing"
True. This is because if people are not listening, there is little point talking.
It would take me 20 mins to write a solid and verifiable definition of why Nazism is right wing - do you really think Gary or yourself are going to bother to read it?
Why should I waste my time?
LK et al. Sorry no luck gentlemen. I was studing Asian and African history when you cowns were in knee pants.
What I am detailing here is a systematic historical method of looking at the political line up as it ascends through ever more centralized control. I will not accept a political line in which various leftist nits pull things out of sequence and stuff them in where they want almost seemingly at random for no good reason beyond personal preference. and the desire to make some one else look bad.
Nicely sourced opinion.
which part do you want to have sourced? btw, i posted this several times and with sources on this board. i will do it again, if you tell me which part.
wasn't it in Shirer's rise and fall of the third reich? I know i've read what you are saying somewhere.
He's a journalist ,Sodafin likes to pontificate his ideas from his Ivory Tower down to us common people.![]()
It is quite clear that many on the left choose for reasons of their own to except a modeled that is unacceptably flawed and in fact quite illogical. But if it's the only way you can live with your political choices well whatever floats your boat I guess. Get ouside that political straight jacket in which you've chosen to incarcerate your self read and think logically about something other than self justification which is the only reason to assume that Hiler was in any significant way different than Joe Stalin on any issue.
As i said I am quite familiar with the model you profess. And I find it illogical, and utterly unecessay and outside any pretense at historical fact. It is in fact little more than picking at nits.
garyd...the extremely flawed and illogical political straight jacket you live in is American parochialism. You are framing the world strictly from an American perspective based on American ideals and American beliefs.
Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot etc. were NOT born and raised in Kansas by Auntie Em
![]()
What's truly ironic about this whole war is that the conservatives in our country do not seem to realize that the Taliban is simply an extreme version of the same primal impulse that drives them.
In every population there is a distribution of conservative to progressive, aggressive to peaceful, etc. The famous classical game theoretic model, the Hawk-Dove contest, shows that the evolutionarily stable population in that model is not all hawks or all doves, but rather a certain degree of each; in that model, 58% "doves" and 42% "hawks". It stands to reason that it is expected that you will have both types of personality in your population. Similarly, I believe a stable distribution of political sensibility is probably one with both progressive and conservative elements.
Of course, it's funny how the same personality type seems to latch on to radically different ideas depending on the society. "Conservatives" here profess a belief in capitalism and extol the virtues of the good old days of the 1950's, a half century ago; "conservatives" in Russia pine for the bygone days of the stability of the old Soviet empire. I believe that the propensity in conservatives is not towards ideologies per se, but rather towards status quo versus change. I'd bet you'd find much more psychologically (and perhaps genetically?) similar between conservatives here and in Russia, despite the fact that they profess supposedly opposite nostalgias.
But of course a typical conservative doesn't look at the conservatism of their enemy and learn to moderate themselves; they see the enemy as an "other", as confirmation of their own rigid views, despite the evident similarity between the two stances.
M Hadeishi
What you need to do Prima dona which has been done by the other camp, is post the Nazi policies that reflect todays conservative policies.
It has been shown that the Old liberal early 20 th century progressive, todays progressives and the Nazis had the same kind of mindset and policies .
I dont care about your models, they mean nothing .
It the policies that shed the light, not contrived bunk.
Sodafin said:No, the definitions I am using are the only ones that are used.
Sodafin said:Any poster here can check those models, and find I'm correct.
L.K.Eder said:your a true scoler! but, can you knit?
You cannot put revisionist history and terms and apply them to the 21st century.
Only a small number of US uber conservatives don't think Hitler was right-wing
because they themselves are and they somehow feel vicariously tainted by the same brush.
99 percent of the rest of the world, and normal Americans consider him from the right due to the reasons Sodafin has mentioned.
You can't go around redefining a universal meaning just to suit your narrow view point.
Shall I start redefining The Chimp as a Nazi to justify how I feel about him, and does that make me right?
We will place at one end - which end matters not for the purposes of this exercise Anarchism. At the other we will place totalitarianism. ( If you can't figure out that totalitarianism are polar opposites you have no place in this debate in the first place.)
r.
is post the Nazi policies that reflect todays conservative policies.
We will place at one end - which end matters not for the purposes of this exercise Anarchism. At the other we will place totalitarianism. ( If you can't figure out that totalitarianism are polar opposites you have no place in this debate in the first place.)
r.
I don't think it is fair to say that you should not be in this debate in the first place, Gary, but it is astonishing that you can't wrap your head around the idea that totalitarianism can - and does - appear at both ends of the two dimensional spectrum, but in different manifestations.
Anarchism and left wing totalitarianism share a lot of ideological elements - such as both being traditionally claiming to be voices of the 'people'
Democracy also appears in more than place, i.e. the variation between SDP/Labour and Conservatism, does it not?