It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Socialism is Not a 4 Letter Word

page: 26
37
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 08:59 PM
link   
a reply to: The Vagabond

Well, since you asked, the reports come from your firearm.





posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 09:05 PM
link   
a reply to: greencmp

Volkswagen was created in the 1930's and the reason Hitler became involved in the "People's car project" was because the German car industry was almost completely comprised of luxury manufacturers. Therefore few German people owned cars. Volkswagen was supposed to buck that trend by creating cars that the the average German could afford.

Sounds to me like Hitler was like Henry Ford.....Wait......he was. Ford recieved the German Grand Cross of the German Eagle in 1938.

Hitler was a fan of his car production model and focused on emulating the idea that regular people should have cars.
edit on 9-8-2015 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 09:07 PM
link   
a reply to: BrianFlanders



That is debatable


Then debate it.

It was stated in both Goebbels diary and in the book in which the quote was taken that this speech was propaganda.

I didn't make it up. It's out there for all to see.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 09:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: greencmp

Volkswagen was created in the 1930's and the reason Hitler became involved in the "People's care project" was because the German car industry was almost completely comprised of luxury manufacturers. Therefore few German people owned cars. Volkswagen was supposed to buck that trend by creating cars that the the average German could afford.

Sounds to me like Hitler was like Henry Ford.....Wait......he was. Ford recieved the German Grand Cross of the German Eagle in 1938.

Hitler was a fan of his car production model and focused on emulating the idea that regular people should have cars.


I was actually talking about volksgemeinschaft, the wiki seems to support my memory.



Volksgemeinschaft is a German-language expression meaning "people's community". This expression originally became popular during World War I as Germans rallied in support of the war, and it appealed to the idea of breaking down elitism and uniting people across class divides to achieve a national purpose. At first it was used in both democratic and populist politics in Germany, but later it was adopted by the Nazis and became associated solely with them



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 09:12 PM
link   
a reply to: greencmp

Exactly. The Nazis used whatever tactics they could to envelope the most people they could in to the Nazi fold. They appealed to many different groups through their propaganda. That would include socialists and even the highly-religious.

Ultra-nationalism, which can even been seen in modern American politics, was also an important part.
edit on 9-8-2015 by introvert because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-8-2015 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 09:13 PM
link   
a reply to: greencmp

I give you an A for wordplay and a B+ for readiness to shoot it out with the mafia (which is my polite way of saying there's probably room for improvement)



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 09:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: The Vagabond
a reply to: greencmp

I give you an A for wordplay and a B+ for readiness to shoot it out with the mafia (which is my polite way of saying there's probably room for improvement)


Fair play




posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 09:14 PM
link   
I just want to add that I find it funny that the idea Henry Ford had with his car production is touted as being as American and capitalist as Apple pie, yet Hitler does it and it's socialism.

Does anyone notice the hypocrisy here?



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 09:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: beezzer
Conservatives today are practical.

I'm not talking about conservitives today, I meant that in those days those wanting to keep things as they were, the general definition of conservative,were the loyalists.

The rest of your post is irrelevant.


Actually, the American Revolution was arguably a very "conservative" revolution inasmuch as the revolutionaries were fighting for the status quo. Initially, there was no revolution, merely protest that things *weren't* being kept the way they were; i.e. that local and state governments were being overshadowed by the central English government.

When it became clear that change was inevitable, the revolutionaries kicked out the foreign soldiers and threw off the overseas government, preserving the local governments that they were used to. Even the more radical postwar Constitution changed little for the great masses of Americans, who were used to local and state governance, local and state governance that did not change dramatically before or after the American Revolution.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 09:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
I just want to add that I find it funny that the idea Henry Ford had with his car production is touted as being as American and capitalist as Apple pie, yet Hitler does it and it's socialism.

Does anyone notice the hypocrisy here?


I don't think so, it actually fits with the general process of capitalists creating new systems and socialists attempting to institutionalize them.

Henry Ford made cars that sold and he used the proceeds to expand his business. Ford made a point of making sure that the cars his workers made would be affordable (relative word) to said workers. Hardly charity, it was good sense for all interested parties.

Hitler took the idea of the assembly line to new heights but, without concern for the economic viability of the enterprise. It was total war that he was enabling, not consumerism.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 09:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: BrianFlanders



That is debatable


Then debate it.


I have. More times than I can count. Which is why I'm not going to do it again. I was once ambivalent about things like socialism. I can't say I exactly liked it but I was more open minded about it. Not so long ago, I would have called myself a liberal. I have learned the hard way this is one ideology you can't give an inch. My mistake was in being more open minded than the left likes their flock to be.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 09:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
I just want to add that I find it funny that the idea Henry Ford had with his car production is touted as being as American and capitalist as Apple pie, yet Hitler does it and it's socialism.

Does anyone notice the hypocrisy here?


A better comparison would be how Chevy/GMC and Chrysler were treated after the bailout of the US auto industry.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 10:06 PM
link   
As said, none of the systems works without socialism which means socializing(people talking). Those who are anti-socialism are anti everything, this includes democracy. Basically, anti civilization. Socialism will never die, it is part of everything. You either have the Governments to do the talk or the people. Capitalism wouldn't even exist without socializing. It will just be "warring states" based on the new ideal of corporations without the gov talking. Just like Imperialism divided into little warlord states fighting for control. This is not what you called Capitalism. Your just better off calling other states Imperialist, dictatorships or even another country.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 10:07 PM
link   
a reply to: makemap

They have no idea what they are saying.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 10:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: makemap

They have no idea what they are saying.


As is evidenced by our voluminous and comprehensive debate.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 10:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: makemap
As said, none of the systems works without socialism which means socializing(people talking). Those who are anti-socialism are anti everything, this includes democracy. Basically, anti civilization. Socialism will never die, it is part of everything. You either have the Governments to do the talk or the people. Capitalism wouldn't even exist without socializing. It will just be "warring states" based on the new ideal of corporations without the gov talking. Just like Imperialism divided into little warlord states fighting for control. This is not what you called Capitalism. Your just better off calling other states Imperialist, dictatorships or even another country.


You keep using this word 'socialism'... I do not think it means what you think it means.

Seriously. Please read a book. There is a reason '-ism' and '-izing' are not synonymous suffixes. Do you think a socialite and socialist are the same?



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 10:25 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

No, a better comparison would be the US and Hummer. Hummers surely are not socialist rides, are they? Damn.....they are.

Damn the American military.
edit on 9-8-2015 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 10:26 PM
link   
a reply to: greencmp



I don't think so, it actually fits with the general process of capitalists creating new systems and socialists attempting to institutionalize them.



Can you provide evidence of such a "process"?

Methinks you be talking out of your backside.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 10:32 PM
link   
a reply to: BrianFlanders



I have. More times than I can count.


You've debated nothing and provided no reasonable assertions or evidence.

I have backed-up my claims with verifiable sources that can be easily found.
edit on 9-8-2015 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 10:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: greencmp



I don't think so, it actually fits with the general process of capitalists creating new systems and socialists attempting to institutionalize them.



Can you provide evidence of such a "process"?

Methinks you be talking out of your backside.


Well, there are examples in this thread itself.

For instance, "the internet will make socialism possible", etc. The idea being that if we take the internet (a thing that capitalists developed despite claims that arpanet was the web as we know it) and institutionalize and make it available to everyone for free, our organizational shortcomings will be washed away and the world soul can flourish.

Nearly every new development has the potential to be adopted as a necessary staple or human right to be provided by the state.



new topics

top topics



 
37
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join