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: 35
23
<< 32  33  34    36  37  38 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 10:19 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Okay.

Answer your question. Be specific.




posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 10:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: greencmp

Sweet jumping Beezus.

centrist



"Having moderate political views or policies. A person who holds moderate political views."


centralized



"concentrate (control of an activity or organization) under a single authority. "a vast superstructure of centralized control""


If you're going to use non-standard definitions of common words, can you provide your own special definitions if you would.

Government can and does insure more freedom for more people when it is correctly structured.

Nothing in politics is linear as we keep stating over and over and over ...


As you can see those are two separate definitions for two separate words that are not compatible, why did you post that?



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 10:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
The question is how "Authoritarian" laws and enforcements affect the majority of the population.

If you want to compare governments wouldn't the question be, how "Authoritarian" are the laws and enforcements in effect?



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 10:36 PM
link   
a reply to: greencmp

Very good.

Now, review your comment in which you were trying to "correct" me.



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 10:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Deaf Alien

Every "source" is from biased writings.

None generally accepted as fact.

Strictly opinion.

wikipedia brackets link to the sources at the bottom in small print, like the [1], [2], etc. etc.




posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 10:45 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen



None generally accepted as fact.


We will throw out the dictionaries and history then?



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 10:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

The best way to deal with government is to have the threat of exit to a different government.

Competition for citizens among governments keeps governments user friendly.

Many smaller states is better than one inescapable state.

The possibility of exit is the best insurance for individual rights.

Hence centralizers are always totalitarian.



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 10:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Semicollegiate



The best way to deal with government is to have the threat of exit to a different government.


Isn't that what the leftists are doing? Somehow I think you do agree more with us than you think.

The rest of your post? That's the left.



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 11:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Conservatives favor adherence to established power structures, traditional morals and nationalist fervor, and in the absence of same, will create them based on either the "king" or the "church" or the "council" models (or all three.)


Proof please, to paraphrase Gryphon66

Sounds familiar, but that familiarity could be from propaganda, actually. Jingoism from Yellow Journalism come to mind. But that might not have been a majority of conservatives.

Especially including the conservatives who stopped voting after 1896.





The US was growing economically when the rich were paying their taxes and the middle class had money to spend (1920-1970). The rich stopped paying taxes, bought the government, raped and pillaged the industrial and manufacturing sectors, took higher profits than have been seen ever before in history, control the media (both "sides") to distract the People from what's going on.


The rich (also known as the smart) have always influenced the power grubbers. Even in the 1770's.

The economy was growing faster before the Progressives got ahold of it. Before 1920.

The rich were able to rape and pillage because centralized government has given them a single handle on everything.

If centralized government didn't happen, the rich would have invented it.





"Progressives" is a meaningless term without reference to specific individuals.



As in the Progressive Era, culminating their first success, the nationalization of the entire economy and society in order to "Make the World Safe for Democracy".



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 11:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Semicollegiate

Who exactly is the "political class" ... and where do I get a copy of The Political Lexicon?

Totalitarian Nazis is redundant for all meaningful purposes.

Perhaps those systems would all fit In the same general category of "totalitarianism", much like apples, pineapples and grapes are in the category of "fruit."

But I ask you, would you toss a pineapple in the air and catch it in your mouth as you would a grape?





Totalitarians are different apples, not different fruit.

A connoisseur of totalitarianism might savor the differences.

Consider the death tolls.



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 11:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: xuenchen



None generally accepted as fact.


We will throw out the dictionaries and history then?


The "sources" for your wikis are Left Wing Academic book authors.

Probably well paid for their "opinions".

They did a good job of convincing the acceptors.




posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 11:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
The political class has obviously obfuscated the political lexicon.

Those who want to lump things together so they can speak in absolutes don't help either.


The political class turned the term Liberal into its opposite.

And now conservatives favor the Progressive foreign policy.

Politicians and pundits did that.



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 11:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Semicollegiate

Maybe in the US. Still doesn't change my point about those who lump things together not helping.



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 11:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: MrSpad
Well Hitler certainly though he was on the right and hated everything to do with the left. He eliminated socialist and leftist parties in Germany and jailed its supporters, he attacked labor unions, harassing and jailing leadership until they had a Nazi Party official places in control, obviously the leftist ideal of equality was the exact opposite of what Hitler stood for, and welfare for the weak and sick? Nope. Death for them. Fascist regimes being called far left would be like calling Communist far right.


Meh. Who has time for history nowadays when we can be told by a blog how to think?..



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 11:28 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

I think the question was about sources other than wiki.
edit on 24-8-2015 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 11:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
If centralized government didn't happen, the rich would have invented it.

This is the very reason anarcho-capitalism wouldn't work and why minarchism is just a stepping stone.



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 11:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: xuenchen

I think the question was about sources other than wiki.


actually ....

www.abovetopsecret.com...



check the authors of the books


edit on Aug-24-2015 by xuenchen because: [hoora]2765



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 11:46 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

The post you responded to said dictionaries and history.

You can cross check wiki with other sources.
edit on 24-8-2015 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 11:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: xuenchen

The post you responded to said dictionaries and history.

You can cross check wiki with other sources.


His response was to my response to the link I gave you.

That's why you haven't directly quoted it.

My response had nothing to do with dictionaries or history.



Do some research on those authors. It really is interesting on a different level.




posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 11:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
If centralized government didn't happen, the rich would have invented it.

This is the very reason anarcho-capitalism wouldn't work and why minarchism is just a stepping stone.


An once of prevention is worth a pound of cure -- Benjamin Franklin

The truth about economics would be enough to prevent centralization, once it is gone away.

Basically, don't expect the government to save you.

Life is a lot easier now than it was through out the vast majority of history. That improvement is from economics, not from politics.

Whatever brain space your environment has assigned to politics should have been assigned to economics instead. IMO.

And that applies to everybody.




top topics



 
23
<< 32  33  34    36  37  38 >>

log in

join