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: 29
23
<< 26  27  28    30  31  32 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 10:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: greencmp

/sigh

And you read that to state that Mussolini was a Socialist too I bet?


For instance, the frequently posted call to arms for the proletariat is, "workers of the world unite!"

This is clearly international marxism otherwise known as communism.

The national socialists would say, "workers of the nation unite!"

What seems to be the clarion call from the neo-socialists of today is, "workers of the community unite!"

I don't see a big difference, do you?
edit on 23-8-2015 by greencmp because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 10:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Teikiatsu

He was a Christian as well ... at least, according to him. Glad to see Hitler suddenly being believed in every word he said.



Yes he did. Socialists like to claim Jesus was a socialist. Like this guy.



I seem to remember something about millions of Jewish people being exterminated ... I wonder what they thought of the Nazis?


They probably thought 'I don't want to die.'

As for me, it's more proof that Socialism kills.



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 10:34 PM
link   
Government force is a left-wingers wet dream, so of course fascism, communism, socialism, they're all collectivist nightmares, aka the democratic party.



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 11:01 PM
link   
More things in common that have major direct impacts on populations are:

1) Laws and Enforcement policies.

2) Regulations and Enforcement policies delegated to massive bureaucracies.

Less government intervention = More Freedoms for individuals.




posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 11:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66






National Socialism was far more "nationalist" than "socialist" in any meaningful definition of the word.


There was a rift between nationalists and the International Socialists.... take the words of a socialist...

One of the consequences of imperialism is nationalism. As capitalism spreads around the globe, it also gives rise to powerful movements of resistance. Initially, the revolt of workers and peasants in countries oppressed by imperialism almost invariably takes the form of nationalism. That is why it is crucial for socialists to understand how to approach nationalism and how to assess the various struggles for national liberation today.
isreview.org...
And although this entry claims that fascism is right wing nationalism, obviously nationalism is not indicative of something being necessarily right wing. There really was nothing right wing at all about the fascist movements of either Hitler or Mussolini. In fact, truth be told, the Progressives of the early part of the 1900's embraced the same things Hitler embraced, that is eugenics and population control. Margaret Sanger was a Propressive, you know the founder of Planned Parenthood, and today who supports PP? Why it's the Progressives.Progressives of today refuse to accept the roots of their own party, instead trying to pin it all on conservatives.

However, certain interpretations of the works of Karl Marx have claimed that although he rejected nationalism as a final outcome of international class struggle, he tacitly supported proletarian nationalism as a stage to achieve proletarian rule over a nation, then allowing succeeding stages of international proletarian revolution.[7]

Hope that explains it to you finally. It doesn't make national socialism not socialist.... en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 11:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Danke
a reply to: Sremmos80

It isn't Fascism in the typical sense. Fascism has a lot of different definitions/variations and has changed over time. However, the overall fascist mentality does represent the current far left very well.

Just look at our universities as an example. Ever heard of Vindictive Protectiveness? Read this article if you get a chance.

The Coddling of the American Mind



I agree. Fascism is chopped and changed to suit the needs of ones in charge. Hitler and Mussolini had differing types of fascism existing at the same time, but the basics remained roughly the same. Complete domination of the people for the furthering of the country. Both still died, though...



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 12:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

oh yeah???? why did they act like the secular Russian communists who hated the Church then????


Then, the Nazis started to close Catholic churches. Many monasteries were shut down and the Catholic Youth Organisation was abolished (remember that the Nazis had created the Hitler Youth Movement).


www.bbc.co.uk...

then there' the occult connection. There was a documentary which related the occultic preoccupations of Hitler as he invaded countries in his quest for religious relics...ie the spear of destiny... in any case he was into occultism, astrology, vegetarianism, and animal rights....

There can be no doubt that Eckart - who had been alerted to Hitler by other Thulists - trained Hitler in techniques of self confidence, self projection, persuasive oratory, body language and discursive sophistry. With these tools, in a short period of time he was able to move the obscure workers party from the club and beer hall atmosphere to a mass movement. The emotion charged lay speaker became an expert orator, capable of mesmerizing a vast audience. One should not underestimate occultism's influence on Hitler. His subsequent rejection of Free Masons and esoteric movements, of Theosophy, of Anthrosophy, does not necessarily mean otherwise. Occult circles have long been known as covers for espionage and influence peddling.

www.crystalinks.com...
It is well known that Masons and Christians had antipathy for one another.


One of the early German Workers party members was [publisher Dietrich] Eckart, often referred to as the spiritual founder of National Socialism. Eckart saw in Hitler the malleable leader he had been seeking and was soon introducing the new member to the right social circles in Munich and his intellectual friends in the Thule [pronounced too-lee] Society.


'The inner core within the Thule Group were all Satanists who practiced Black Magic', wrote Trevor Ravenscroft. 'That is to say, they were solely concerned with raising their consciousness by means of rituals to an awareness of evil and non-human intelligences in the Universe and with achieving a means of communication with the Intelligences. And the Master-Adept of this circle was Dietrich Eckart. It is well-known that in Munich during those turbulent postwar years, there were several hundred unsolved 'political' murders and kidnappings. 'And it was from among these missing persons, most of whom were either Jews or Communists, that we must look to find the 'sacrificial victims' who were murdered in the rites of 'Astrological Magic' caried out by Dietrich Eckart and the innermost circle of the Thule Gesellschaft' charged Ravenscroft, who claimed it was a 'well-known fact' that the Thulists were a 'Society of Assassins'. --Jim Marrs, Rule By Secrecy, 155
www.theforbiddenknowledge.com...
edit on 24-8-2015 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 12:26 AM
link   
a reply to: greencmp

Well each of your fabricated examples has the word "worker" in it.

That's the sole logic you used to claim that Nazis were socialists:

And since you're conflating any phrase with the word worker as communist socialist fascist Nazis ...

Here's your next list of likely suspects:

Worker bees
The Catholic Worker Movement
Sex workers

Because, hey, they all have the word "worker" in common and that's all you need.


edit on 0Mon, 24 Aug 2015 00:28:39 -050015p122015866 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 12:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Teikiatsu

But according to you whatever Hitler claimed to be, he was! So he was a Christian warrior striking against the Jews who killed Christ.

So Hitler was an Atheist Christian Socialist Fascist as were each and every Nazi because ... well why not?

While we're making stuff up, let's make him a secret Muslim as well!

Makes auch sense as any of the rest of this garbage.



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 12:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

cmon grhyphie its common knowledge that the slogan "workers of the world unite" is both communist and socialist. One can easily find communist and socialist publications featuring the word "workers", you know like the Workers World Party.



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 12:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: greencmp

Well each of your fabricated examples has the word "worker" in it.

That's the sole logic you used to claim that Nazis were socialists:

And since you're conflating any phrase with the word worker as communist socialist fascist Nazis ...

Here's your next list of likely suspects:

Worker bees
The Catholic Worker Movement
Sex workers

Because, hey, they all have the word "worker" in common and that's all you need.



Granted, I postulated the last one but, I think reasonably, and the originating example, "workers of the world unite!", is an accepted standard for communism.

Are you saying that those words do not represent the spirit of modern socialism?
edit on 24-8-2015 by greencmp because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 12:45 AM
link   
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Getting rid of the catholics but keeping the protestants is not getting rid of religion.



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 12:45 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

So, that's FASCINATING, all laws are socialist-fascist-communist-Marxist-Trappist-Ventriloquist too?

Wow, I mean, they do all end in -ist, so they must be the same thing, right???

Here's a fun one: what's the opposite of fascist? Republican?

LOL. Go ahead, I dare you. You know you want to.

Here I can help, I've learned the unique kind of logic that you guys use ... let's see ...

Thomas Jefferson was a Republican (Jeffersonian Republicans), and Thomas Edison invented the incandescent light bulb, and Adolf Hitler used light bulbs ... So Hitler ... was a Republican too!

I've got it now! Amazing!

That explains so much.



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 12:49 AM
link   
a reply to: greencmp

I'm saying you conflated your whole theory there on the word "worker" which has different meanings in different contexts as do most words.

Like the word "socialist" ... but don't let that stop you. Conflate away!

Hitler was a National Socialist and John Dillinger once robbed a National Bank so obviously Hitler was also a Bank Robber.

It's perfectly clear now how you guys arrive at your beliefs now. I feel enlightened.
edit on 0Mon, 24 Aug 2015 00:50:20 -050015p122015866 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 03:40 AM
link   
Socialism in its barest, stripped down description requires that the working classes own the means of production.

Nothing like this happened in Germany during the Nazi period.

Hitler took no steps to turn control of the economy over to the German Workers.

Yes, socialism was popular in Europe at the time of the rise of the Nazi party.

Yes, Hitler is recorded as calling himself and the Nazis socialists.

(It is after all right there in the name of the party, duh!)

Duh, indeed.

Did Hitler or the Nazis enact socialist ideals, i.e., did they seize the means of production and turn ownership over to the working classes?

It's not a hard question; let's allow Herr Hitler to tive us the answer the day he declared the death of the Wiemar Republic:


Adolf Hitler, Speech to the Reichstag aka The Enabling Act, March 1933



"The government will not protect the economic interests of the German people by the circuitous method of an economic bureaucracy to be organised by the state, but by the utmost furtherance of private initiative and by the recognition of the rights of property."




The fight against Communism in Germany is an internal affair, in which we will never tolerate outside interference.




The disintegration of the nation into irreconcilably opposite Weltanschauungen which was systematically brought about by the false doctrines of Marxism means the destruction of the basis for any possible community life.

The dissolution permeates all of the basic principles of social order. The completely opposite approaches of the individuals to the concepts of state, society, religion, morality, family, and economy rips open differences which will lead to a war of all against all. Starting with the liberalism of the past century, this development will end, as the laws of nature dictate, in Communist chaos.




In particular, we perceive in the millions of German workers who pay homage to these ideas of madness and self destruction only the results of an unforgivable weakness on the part of former governments who failed to put a stop to the dissemination of these ideas, the practical implementation of which they were forced to punish. The Government will not allow itself to be shaken by anyone in its decision to solve this problem. Now it is the responsibility of the Reichstag to adopt a clear standpoint for its part. This will change nothing as to the fate of Communism and the other organizations fraternizing with it. In its measures, the National Government is guided by no other factor than preserving the German Volk, and in particular the mass of millions making up its working populace, from unutterable misery.




Only by means of its immediate action was the Government able to ward off a development which would have shaken all of Europe had it proceeded to its disastrous end. Several of those who fraternize with the interests of Communism both within and outside of Germany, motivated by hatred for the national uprising, would themselves have become victims of such a development.

It will be the utmost goal of the National Government to stamp out and eliminate every trace of this phenomenon, not only in the interest of Germany, but in the interest of the rest of Europe.

edit on 4Mon, 24 Aug 2015 04:14:37 -050015p042015866 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 06:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Teikiatsu

But according to you whatever Hitler claimed to be, he was! So he was a Christian warrior striking against the Jews who killed Christ.


No, I said socialists claim Jesus was a socialist. You said Hitler claimed to be a Christian. Stay on target.


So Hitler was an Atheist Christian Socialist Fascist as were each and every Nazi because ... well why not?


No, I said Hitler said he was a socialist, in his own words. Stay on target.


While we're making stuff up, let's make him a secret Muslim as well!


So you admit you are making stuff up. Honesty is the best policy.


Makes auch sense as any of the rest of this garbage.


If you don't like the argument, why do you persist here? It doesn't appear you want to discuss the actual topic, ie 'facism is far-left.' You seem more interested in defending Hitler and Nazis...
edit on 24-8-2015 by Teikiatsu because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 06:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: avgguy
a reply to: Krazysh0t

My point is a nobody talk show host says something on irrevelant talk show and everyone loses their minds, but our Vice President says something just as ignorant if not more so and everyone blows it off. The reason why people have compared this type of liberalism to fascism is because the people in the party can do no wrong, whilst the opposition is evicerated if they even think about having a different opinion. The media spins the view of the opposition as uneducated racists. While people in the presidents cabinet pull the same # without a blip on the radar.


But you are comparing two different things. Again, Biden was just fearmongering. The right does that all the time for every thing else. Granted Biden's words may have been a little insensitive, but he was talking about the right, not his own party. It's just standard political trash talk. This is on a COMPLETELY different level. He is ACTUALLY calling for slavery like its no big deal.
edit on 24-8-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 06:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Teikiatsu

I've been hitting the target; you, as usual, keep desperately trying to move it ...

And when you can't move it, you keep trying to lie about it ...

I don't like bad arguments. Like the ones you and others here keep making.

I don't want to discuss "the topic?" You mean whether the Nazis were socialists?

Remember, the one you ham-handedly tried to talk about? LOL.

Stay on topic? Says the guy who just accused me of "defending Nazis" ...

Either learn to read or stop lying ...

I see you don't want to talk about what Mr. Hitler actually SAID now do you?

Typical. Can't lie about the facts, try to shift the focus.

Stop whining about me and make a point.
edit on 6Mon, 24 Aug 2015 06:46:16 -050015p062015866 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 06:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Danke
What are you talking about racist? What have I said that was racist?


You haven't. I was just being hypothetical.


It isn't the classic definition of the term fascist, I already said that at the start. There isn't one specific definition of fascism.


You can't redefine words to suit your needs. A fascist is a fascist. If the description of what is going on doesn't describe being fascist then it isn't. There is absolutely ZERO government control being exercised with political correctness. Heck if you want to actually be COMPLETELY honest about political correctness, people on the right do it too. In fact, everyone does it. Everyone has certain things that offend them, and our culture has evolved to the point that they can express this displeasure in a massively public setting when they are said. But again NO government control is involved here. Therefore there is zero fascism occurring. You. are. wrong.


If you think you have freedom of speech you need to think again. You are only free to say what is currently politically correct. This has nothing to do with racism, sexism, or anything like that. This has to do with IDEAS, it has to do with people being bullied for speaking the truth.


You still don't know what freedom of speech is... You need to go read that thread I posted in my previous post.


If you read that article I posted it talks about how even liberal professors are scared of their liberal students. There is a movement going on where the people with the most free time to spam on social media are being rewarded and given the most attention. It shouldn't be that way. People are rushing to conclusions and thinking with emotion rather than logic and reason.


Yea so? Sometimes there are consequences for your words. It's part of life. The government STILL isn't involved with it.


You need to get over yourself. Stop using your leftist lens on everybody. I have told you many times I am an independent. Just because I am going against the left you are calling me racist? Where did I say anything racist? You are doing the exact things I was trying to warn people about.


Assumptions much? First I haven't made any assumptions about your political leanings and YOU are making assumptions about mine. I'm not a leftist buddy.

And now you are learning how the first amendment works. You got angry at me for calling you a racist and said something about it. Congratulations now you know how this whole process works (yes, I was baiting you by calling you a racist). So stop pretending like I should care that other people care about what you may or may not be saying. That's your own problem. Not mine or anyone else's. If you can't take the social pressure for using certain words. Don't say them, but pretending like your rights are being violated is just flat our dishonest.
edit on 24-8-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 06:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: ketsuko

Wow we have gryphons and dragons and harpies ... It's like a D&D game in here.

*I* went Godwin's??! Did you notice we're actually talking about the Nazis?

I see you have no problem with Hitler's statement that he was a Christian then? As opposed to every other time when you've told us how well known he was for lying when he needed to?

But he claims to be a Socialist (in 1920) and suddenly he's the most reliable primary source ever!

Enjoy your theatre of the absurd.


1. It's a little hard to discuss fascism without mentioning Germany and Italy - really the only openly fascist countries of modern times. However, nowhere previous had we gone full Holocaust. YOU went full Holocaust which is where the Godwin's Law starts.



2. Hitler didn't claim to be a socialist in that source. That was the Nazi Party platform. It was the political group he aligned himself with. That party was socialist.

Provide proof the platform was altered or those remained the aims of the party after he took control.




top topics



 
23
<< 26  27  28    30  31  32 >>

log in

join