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.

 

Fascism Is Far Left, Not Far Right on Political Spectrum

page: 10
23
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 08:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: redhorse

The article is talking about degrees of coercion against harmless individuals.

Those would be things to compare between ideologies.

And the story claims the political spectrum is straight line, not circular.

I think it's an interesting concept with many similarities to authoritarianism.



The political spectrum is not a straight line because it is so firmly intertwined with social pressures, which are erratic at worst and flexible at best. The premise of the article is a non sequitur. It drives me bonkers when people try to boil social incentives down to an equation or a series (veritably arbitrary upon any examination) numbers. It's just silly and if it gets some legs under it with the wrong people... dangerous.




posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 08:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Wardaddy454

Okay.

What "PC" is that?

Quote something?

And, just out of curiosity since we're such a curious bunch this evening ... is that the extent of what you consider "PC"?



Uhhh the left PC? duh? Do you need pictures? lol


I guess you hadn't heard yet wardaddy, the left is trying to say that conservatives push forward a type of PC as well, only they call it 'conservative correctness' - example: 'freedom fries'

I guess they are unable to tell when we are mocking them.



posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 08:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
In my opinion all political ideologies are not on a linear "far left" and "far right" projection for the simple fact that those governments (not the individual taxpayer, voter, citizen - but the government) at both extremes share similar ideals - that of total control.

The taxpayer, voter, citizen is in the middle of a big circle - at the leading edge of that circle, and encompassing it's entire perimeter lie all the political persuasions currently available to men such that there is no beginning and no end - they all exist to control us and keep us in the centre of the circle.

Thats fascism imo - disguised as freedom........because you vote for your candidate on the edge of the circle without realising that your boundary is set.

True freedom has the government at the centre of that circle and the citizens on the perimeter.

I call that political persuasion "Freedomism" because the government works for me, and not the other way around.


You are basically right of course, the duopoly of Republicans and Democrats are both about totalitarianism of slightly differing persuasions. In my opinion they are both socialist parties based on the policies enacted by both.

The confusion comes in with the introduction of vague and/or relative terms like liberal and conservative.



The center isn't between Republicans and Democrats, I think the natural center is between statists and libertarians though I would prefer that it be between minarchists and anarcho-capitalists.


I like the chart, but they always seem to overlook Randian Objectivism



posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 08:51 PM
link   
I am having a hard time following in here, so what im getting, tell me plz if i am wrong, is that the left is now fascist and communist at the same time, oh and that the real conservatives are the good guys.



posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 08:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

I like the chart, but they always seem to overlook Randian Objectivism


I still haven't delved into Ayn Rand much.

As I understand it, objectivism requires that there be some normative state in order that the individual rights may be protected.

Some libertarians (such as Rothbard) have a more stateless outlook. So, I guess that puts her in the mid-right as a minarchist.



posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 08:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
I am having a hard time following in here, so what im getting, tell me plz if i am wrong, is that the left is now fascist and communist at the same time, oh and that the real conservatives are the good guys.


Yup, pretty much.



posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 08:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
I am having a hard time following in here, so what im getting, tell me plz if i am wrong, is that the left is now fascist and communist at the same time, oh and that the real conservatives are the good guys.


The article explains it.




posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 08:58 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

You call that an article, i call it someone blog, so your going on someones opinion, enough said.



posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 08:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Wardaddy454

Okay.

What "PC" is that?

Quote something?

And, just out of curiosity since we're such a curious bunch this evening ... is that the extent of what you consider "PC"?



Uhhh the left PC? duh? Do you need pictures? lol


I guess you hadn't heard yet wardaddy, the left is trying to say that conservatives push forward a type of PC as well, only they call it 'conservative correctness' - example: 'freedom fries'

I guess they are unable to tell when we are mocking them.


Or perhaps, you can't detect when it's being pointed out that you are mocking yourselves.

Or perhaps you should review what the definition of "political correctness" is ...

Nah, skip it. You'd have to want to learn something. You like wallowing in your beliefs.



posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 09:01 PM
link   
a reply to: greencmp

Who would have guessed that a site called "Save the Republic" would produce a pure propaganda piece.

The funny part is, you guys are practicing right-wing PC right in front of your own eyes.

Calling Nazis "socialists" ... It's just too funny.

Dopes.



posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 09:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: greencmp

Who would have guessed that a site called "Save the Republic" would produce a pure propaganda piece.

The funny part is, you guys are practicing right-wing PC right in front of your own eyes.

Calling Nazis "socialists" ... It's just too funny.

Dopes.


I really am stumped at this performance.

You got me, what's the rub? Am I on candid camera?

Are you just being obtuse or do you actually believe that the "national socialists" weren't "socialists"?



posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 09:07 PM
link   
Here ... take a gander:




William L. Shirer in THE RISE AND FALL OF THE THIRD REICH noted that there was little or no socialism in "National Socialism".

Thyssen (I PAID HITLER and many others) pointed out that the "marriage" of business and the National Socialist Party, despite Hitler's contempt for aristocracy and business in general, guaranteed high profits for businesses. Ironically, his steel company was seized over what amounted to a personal hassle with the hierarchy, and handed over for administration and profit to Krupp/von Bohlen, rather than being "nationalized" in the pure sense, which is what would've happened in a left wing state.

Albert Speer, the Third Reich's last Armaments Minister, in INSIDE THE THIRD REICH makes clear that he had great difficulty controlling fiefdoms and bailiwicks of various private firms well into 1944, when the war was already going to pieces. He also notes the privatization of all the formerly state-owned arsenals, even the huge ones at Suhl, Spandau, and Amberg (13 in all!).

Public education, of course, had been one of the key features of all organized states since Roman times. And National Public Health in Germany was enacted 1871-83, before Hitler was BORN, by the Bismarck government.

Hitler's state enacted NO new welfare programs, and eliminated many, sending former "loafers" to the death or work camps. Almost none qualified for military service, as the Weimar Republic had always claimed.

Hitler, of course, much like today's conservatives, attacked the Weimar government as "intrusive" and "socialist", and he HATED "Bolshevism" and "social democrats" (socialists), and proclaimed it loudly on almost every page of MEIN KAMPF.


Source



posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 09:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Still can't prove any of the points wrong I see.

Great.

I think the similarities outweigh the small differences.




posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 09:11 PM
link   
a reply to: greencmp

You profess to have read history and you fall for that simplistic nonsense.

I have no way to help you.

Hitler and the Nazis hated the Communists, and the Socialists.

Like someone said earlier, do you think the "Democratic Republic of the Congo" is either "Democratic" or "Republican?"

Do you think "Military Intelligence" refers to smart soldiers?

What a maroon.



posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 09:12 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

I don't have to prove anything wrong, you have to prove them right.

Or correct, before you get too excited.

I know they're BS, you know they're BS, everyone posting here knows.

Keep trying though. You may manage to convince yourself.



posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 09:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
Here's some more fires to put out...

Hitler Was A Socialist, (And Not A Right Wing Conservative)

Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian





Let's see ... two lines in ... made up definition of socialism.

More BS.

Here you go, back to your side of the 'net"

Debunking the "Nazis were Leftists" Lie

Hitler Explains to GOP Why They Are Wrong about National Socialism




On 16 November 1928, in his first speech at the Berlin Sportpalast, Hitler told a crowd of ten thousand plus that, “We have to strip the terms ‘Nationalism’ and ‘Socialism’ of their previous meaning. Only that man is a nationalist who stands by his people, and only that man is a socialist who stands up for the rights of his people both internally and externally.”

But he became more specific yet in response to internal divisions within the NSDAP. It turns out Hitler himself pointed out the flaw in Republican thinking in a May 1930 meeting of the party leadership in Munich. As author Thomas Friedrich wrote, “Hitler…left his listeners in no doubt about what he did not mean by ‘National Socialism.'”

This is what Hitler said National Socialism was not:

It was not, “a universal morality of pity but a master race” – in other words, Hitler did not see his socialism as Republicans today see socialism, but rather as a form of German Exceptionalism (the Nazis called it a “National Community”) which can be equated with the GOP’s version of American Exceptionalism.

National socialism, Hitler said, “did not lie in socialism as a universal panacea nor was it a nationalist variant of that idea.” Republicans, of course, are fond of accusing socialism (and liberalism) as advocating a universal panacea. Indeed, it is all we are hearing leading up to Election Day 2012.


But, y'all keep going. This is better than a comedy club, honestly.
edit on 21Fri, 21 Aug 2015 21:18:44 -050015p092015866 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 09:17 PM
link   
You know somethings wrong with your argument when it's very clear that it's based upon a logical fallacy. Why Even bother posting these things? They're not ideas that deserve merit. Even if we're a left wing trait, the entire proposition has failed to begin witH.
edit on 21-8-2015 by TsukiLunar because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 09:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
I am having a hard time following in here, so what im getting, tell me plz if i am wrong, is that the left is now fascist and communist at the same time, oh and that the real conservatives are the good guys.


The left has always been fascist, they just convinced you otherwise through control of media and education. Just like good little fascists.

Both fascism and communism require a large top-down government to be put in place. The means of their control differ, but they come from the same source.

'Good guy' is an abstract term, because different people have different ideas of what 'good' is. Personally I find the idea of expanded liberty and more money in my pocket to be good, some other people think controlling our decisions and giving government more of our money contributes to a 'greater good.'



posted on Aug, 21 2015 @ 09:25 PM
link   
Just a note to anyone refering to articles saying that Nazis were conservatives, please make sure:

1) The articles draw a distinction between European and America left/right axis. There is a difference.
2) They at least try to hide their bias (example: don't lead in with comments on GOP ignorance in the first sentence.)

Just a tip.



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join