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.

 

New Zealand Mass Murderer is a Far Left-winger.

page: 10
68
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 07:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: harold223

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Do you know what Fascism is ?




The government of Nazi Germany was a fascist, totalitarian state. Totalitarian regimes, in contrast to a dictatorship, establish complete political, social, and cultural control over their subjects, and are usually headed by a charismatic leader. Fascism is a form of right-wing totalitarianism which emphasizes the subordination of the individual to advance the interests of the state


remember.org...

I don't think you are educated enough to understand.




This. You can have left-wing totalitarianism, i.e "Stalanist Communism" and right-wing totalitarianism, i.e Facism.




Reading for you.



Adolf Hitler only joined the Nazis after being rejected by another political party, a leading historian has learned





in 1919 the newly formed German Socialist party shunned Hitler, telling him that it did not want him in the party or writing for its paper.





Although also far-right, the German Socialist party was at the time bigger and more successful than the Nazi party. Hitler might have settled for a more minor role and would therefore “have been unlikely to ever come to power


www.theguardian.com...
edit on 22-3-2019 by alldaylong because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 07:03 PM
link   
a reply to: harold223

And we haven't seen the same kind of mentality in "Antifa," or BLM, or other far left-wing groups today which have resorted to violence against anyone who dares not be "left-wing," or anyone who would dare not agree with their ideology?...

As to your "academia" claim... Again...point out how ANY of those policies the nazis implemented were "right-wing..."

There are scholars, philosophers, etc, who disagree with the "left-wing historical revisionism" on who the nazis truly were, and are today...

BTW, I am just curious... Could ANY of you point out where in the ideology of the "right" (not those you all in the left call "far right-wingers") does it say anything about "right-wingers think the white race is superior"?...

Again, take away "race" and the policies which National Socialists, even today, want are all "socialist policies..."

Not to mention the FACT that Republicans and conservatives as a majority do not think "whites are a superior race..." There are millions of Republicans/conservatives who are minorities... There are MILLIONS of hispanics, blacks, women, gays, etc who are in fact Republican/conservative...

As another matter of FACT even in the U.S. those who were "racists" from the start were the left/democrats...



edit on 22-3-2019 by ElectricUniverse because: add comment.



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 07:03 PM
link   
a reply to: alldaylong

The Guardian

Bwahahahahaha!

edit on 22/3/2019 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: alldaylong

Keep on ignoring FACTS... Stop posting "sources which keep on ignoring the actual policies of the nazis..."

I gave you a list of the policies of the nazis, you keep on going around in circles giving sources, which like you, IGNORE the fact that the policies of the nazis were and are "socialist..."


edit on 22-3-2019 by ElectricUniverse because: correct comment.



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 07:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: alldaylong

Keep on ignoring FACTS... Stop posting "sources which keep on ignoring the actual policies of the nazis..."

I gave you a list of the policies of the nazis, you keep on going around in circles giving sources, which like you, IGNORE the fact the policies of the nazis were and are "socialist..."


Sources are so far the dictionary and the extreme left wing Guardian.
History sources of the highest quality




posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 07:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth


That's the "revised version the left wants the world to believe." Meanwhile the left, like many in the left even in these forums, ignore the policies and laws the nazis implemented were all socialist.

BTW, you can even see how wrong that diagram is by claiming that "A king is part of the right" when in a Republic such rulers are seen as authoritarians and not part of the right.

Even wikipedia, a very left-wing source has this to say about a "Republic."


Republic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A republic (Latin: res publica) is a form of government in which the country is considered a “public matter”, not the private concern or property of the rulers. The primary positions of power within a republic are not inherited, but are attained through democracy, oligarchy or autocracy. It is a form of government under which the head of state is not a monarch.
...

en.wikipedia.org...

I even left out the American view on what a Republic is.




edit on 22-3-2019 by ElectricUniverse because: add and correct comment.



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 07:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: alldaylong

Keep on ignoring FACTS... Stop posting "sources which keep on ignoring the actual policies of the nazis..."

I gave you a list of the policies of the nazis, you keep on going around in circles giving sources, which like you, IGNORE the fact the policies of the nazis were and are "socialist..."


Sources are so far the dictionary and the extreme left wing Guardian.
History sources of the highest quality



Your diagram of the left right spectrum is on the money "Facism, Stalinist communism in effect are the same but come from a different direction. One is Right wing gone "postal" and one is left wing gone "postal". Two ends of the extreme.

This is an excerpt in regards to modern terrorism which is particularly relevant to Christchurch in my International Relations text book "An Introduction to International Relations Third Edition - Cambridge Press" (pg. 431)




Typologies of terrorism

Terrorist organisations operating around the world may be categorised by one of four major political motivations: they are left-wing terrorists, right wing terrorists, ethno-nationalist/seperatist terrorists, or religious or 'sacred terrorists. Each motivation is intertwined with major ideologies, with left-wing terrorism associated with Marxism or communism, right wing terrorism associated with facism, ethno-nationalist/seperatist terrorism associated with national or ethnic identity, and religious terrorism associated with spiritual beliefs.

edit on 22-3-2019 by harold223 because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-3-2019 by harold223 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 07:35 PM
link   
a reply to: harold223

Yeah, keep ignoring the SOCIALIST policies in nazism. How convinient...

People lo and behold Socialism = to Right-wing in the crazy revisionist history of the world the left keeps capitulating ...Even though the policies of the nazis were socialist and many of those policies reflect the SAME policies the "left" want implemented today, facts don't matter AT ALL for the left...



edit on 22-3-2019 by ElectricUniverse because: add comment.



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 07:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: harold223

Yeah, keep ignoring the SOCIALIST policies in nazism. How convinient...


They are not socialist policies, they are extreme "Nationalist" policies. Nothing is black and white. You seem to be confusing "Right Wing" with "neoliberalism".




Neoliberalism, ideology and policy model that emphasizes the value of free market competition. Although there is considerable debate as to the defining features of neoliberal thought and practice, it is most commonly associated with laissez-faire economics. In particular, neoliberalism is often characterized in terms of its belief in sustained economic growth as the means to achieve human progress, its confidence in free markets as the most-efficient allocation of resources, its emphasis on minimal state intervention in economic and social affairs, and its commitment to the freedom of trade and capital.

www.britannica.com...
edit on 22-3-2019 by harold223 because: (no reason given)


And just to qualify this. Again, nothing in regards to political and social theory is "black and white" there is always debate and grey areas but basically, neoliberalism would be considered to be "centre-right" on the political spectrum.
edit on 22-3-2019 by harold223 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 07:58 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

So socialism is now right wing? Got it


When is the new edition of Newspeak coming out? I hear that the chocolate ration is increasing!



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 08:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
Well of course the guy who wrote a manifesto called "the great replacement", full of nazi imagery, who was anti-immigration, anti-islam, a self confessed ethno-nationalist who cited Breivik as a hero must be a left-wing terrorist if he also said he wasn't a nazi (so lets belief him) because he cares about the melting ice caps.

What you seem to be ignoring is the very obvious and real risk of this being a purposeful attack with the intent of furthering leftist agendas, similar to the guy who recently hired some dudes wearing MAGA hats to beat him up. Because lets be honest here, no right leaning person with a single brain cell would believe that an attack like this would have any benefit for their side what so ever. It has had completely the opposite effect, a crack down on gun ownership and even talk of yet more social media censorship to prevent the rising threat of far-right extremism. I don't want to read the manifesto but from what I can gather this was basically his plan, to stoke up division and create fear, resulting in a diminishment of liberties and a rise in fascism.


Another tally to the left...or if not that then one erased from the right for the connection either to Podesta or indierctly to a common brotherhood wih Podesta. He had on his gun the ΣΥΜΒΟΛΟ ΤΩΝ ΙΧΘΥΩΝ and number 14 just like Podesta has painted on his palms in that famous creepy picture which was in the Hillary emails. And I believe Podesta was in NZ during the massacre of something?
edit on 3/22/2019 by AlexandrosTheGreat because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 11:09 PM
link   
There should be another thread where a prerequisite of actually READING the manifesto is required to comment.

I was curious so I read it.

He explains in detail how and why he is an ECO-FASCIST.

This man was obviously brain-washed by the left's "CLIMATE CHANGE" scares.

He targeted Muslims because they breed more, and the world is overpopulated.

Overpopulation is the problem. White Europeans breed less.

He didn't want 'whites' to take over the world. He wanted the Arabs/etc/etc to stay out of Europe, so that the population there could dwindle and nature could be restored to its former glory.

This guy wasn't exactly LEFT-WING, although he considers the left to have purposes like creating stricter gun laws, but to him, the RIGHT-WING has no more purpose at all, and is just corporations sucking the life out of people. He is obviously more LEFT-WING, but my opinion after reading his manifesto is that he is what he repeatedly says he is:

an Eco-fascist.

He is most akin to the GREEN PARTY except with admitted racism rather than disguised racism.

The GREEN PARTY wants to stop Africans and other non-white/high-birthrate populations from obtaining cheap and reliable sources of energy, or even clean water to drink, because to stop CLIMATE CHANGE the entire earth needs to de-industrialize and go back in time a hundred or so years, also adding a few solar cells that need minerals from African child labor. Really, the GREEN PARTY wants to kill everyone except for a few wealthy survivors who will have the whole earth as their paradise, with robots doing any work that needs to be done.

Then robots will take over, but I don't need to go on tangents. The guy was definitely NOT a right-winger, somewhat more of a left-winger, but overall, and from his own claims, was just an openly-racist eco-fascist green-party type.



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 03:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: Wide-Eyes
a reply to: ElectricUniverse




To tell you the truth I would rather not even post anything this beast has written, but because the left-wing media will continue lying claiming "he is far right-wing" the truth has to be shown. 


I feel you. I've been reluctant to post anything in the NZ threads because of the sheer ignorance of some of our readers and posters but the writing is clearly on the wall.

The fact that the "far right" angle was even entertained is a stain on the ATS community.


The fact this thread exists to try and blame the far left is a stain on ATS too. His manifesto included beliefs from different political idealogoes not just socialist, fascist and Conservative. You're doing the site as much of a disservice as those you decry.

This guy didn't do what he did because he was a Right Wing Nut Job, this guy didn't so what he did because he's a Loony Liberal Lefty, he did this because of chemical imbalances in his brain.

Ignorance denied....
edit on 23/3/19 by djz3ro because: Swap out a letter....



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 04:42 AM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

It is actually a leftist version of the 'circle' to describe the various politcial ideologies.
This leftist version even has Communism and Facism grouped together - which is correct. They are close relavtives because Facism was born from Marxism.



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 04:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheAiIsLying
a reply to: UKTruth

So socialism is now right wing? Got it


When is the new edition of Newspeak coming out? I hear that the chocolate ration is increasing!


There is no 'wing', left or right, in reality.
There is Freedom and Authoritariansim, with two routes from Freedom that both end up in Authoritarianism. Both Facism and Communism are authoritarian, with socialism close by - far away from Freedom.

edit on 23/3/2019 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 06:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: harold223

They are not socialist policies, they are extreme "Nationalist" policies. Nothing is black and white. You seem to be confusing "Right Wing" with "neoliberalism".
...


Wrong again...they are socialist in nature... Nationalization of infrastructure, confiscation of wealth, land, shops from people without compensation, etc, are socialist policies... Such policies have been used in China, the U.S.S.R., North Korea, Cuba, and lately even in Venezuela...

Puting "the common good before individual good" is a socialist/communist belief, and it's part of the left's belief... You can't simply erase 100 years of history and now claim "socialism is not left-wing..."

edit on 23-3-2019 by ElectricUniverse because: add comment.



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 06:36 AM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

The Nazi's were hard right nationalists. UK Truths spectrum that he posted kind of explains it but not quite, you would almost need a 3D diagram to describe it and even then? Its difficult to put the world in boxes (black and white thinking) If you go far enough either right of left wing you end up at the same place, Totalitarianism. You are calling Nazi economics "left wing" because it is not neo-liberal free market capitalist. Wikipedia explains it ok, I can't really be arsed searching for deeper sources. Nazi's were aggressively Anti Marxist and Anti free market capitalist.

en.wikipedia.org...



Anti-communism

The Nazis claimed that communism was dangerous to the well-being of nations because of its intention to dissolve private property, its support of class conflict, its aggression against the middle class, its hostility towards small business and its atheism.[246] Nazism rejected class conflict-based socialism and economic egalitarianism, favouring instead a stratified economy with social classes based on merit and talent, retaining private property and the creation of national solidarity that transcends class distinction.[247] Historians Ian Kershaw and Joachim Fest argue that in post–World War I Germany, the Nazis were one of many nationalist and fascist political parties contending for the leadership of Germany's anti-communist movement.





Anti-capitalism

The Nazis argued that free market capitalism damages nations due to international finance and the worldwide economic dominance of disloyal big business, which they considered to be the product of Jewish influences.[246] Nazi propaganda posters in working class districts emphasised anti-capitalism, such as one that said: "The maintenance of a rotten industrial system has nothing to do with nationalism. I can love Germany and hate capitalism".[261]


Nazi Germany was Nationalist and considered by experts in the field of political science and historians to be of the right wing ilk of nationalists. There is such a thing as left wing nationalism too as seen at times in the Soviet Union.
edit on 23-3-2019 by harold223 because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-3-2019 by harold223 because: add link



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 06:45 AM
link   
a reply to: harold223

You are simply insane, like the rest of the left.
Nationalization of infrastructure is not right-wing...
Confiscation of land, private property, or wealth without compensation and without merit is not right-wing...
The common good before the individual good is not right-wing...
The creation of a strong central authority and the unconditional authority by the political central parliament of the whole State and all its organizations, is not right-wing...

RACISM itself is not right-wing... As a matter of fact DEMOCRATS/the LEFT voted against most of the Civil RIghts Acts that REPUBLICANS tried to pass for 200 years, and even in the 1964 Civil Rights Act democrats only voted ~60% in favor of the CRA, meanwhile REPUBLICANS voted over 80% in favor of the CRA...

But of course, as you have shown, and most left-wingers as well, you don't care for facts.



edit on 23-3-2019 by ElectricUniverse because: correct comment.



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 06:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Wide-Eyes




That isn't true though is it. Hitler embraced the Arab nations with whom he considered the strongest of their particular "breed". Learn more.

Hitler only embraced the Arabs because he needed them to die and work for the glorious 3rd Reich. At some point, he would have put them in the ovens along with everyone else who didn't fit the mold.



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 06:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: harold223

Anti-communism

The Nazis claimed that communism was dangerous to the well-being of nations because of its intention to dissolve private property, its support of class conflict, its aggression against the middle class, its hostility towards small business and its atheism.[246] Nazism rejected class conflict-based socialism and economic egalitarianism, favouring instead a stratified economy with social classes based on merit and talent, retaining private property and the creation of national solidarity that transcends class distinction.[247] Historians Ian Kershaw and Joachim Fest argue that in post–World War I Germany, the Nazis were one of many nationalist and fascist political parties contending for the leadership of Germany's anti-communist movement.


Being anti-communism doesn't mean being anti-national socialism... Hitler/the nazis were against any form of left-wing government that was not like theirs... Same for Lenin and Stalin, both hated each other and Stalin wanted Lenin and Trotsky dead...
Same for the castro brothers... Camilo Cienfuegos was a more popular "socialist" but the castro brothers didn't like the fact that Camilo was more popular than they were... Same for the "other socialists" that the castro brothers ordered executed who saw communists being infiltrated by the castro brothers into the "socialist revolution..." You simply don't know what in the world you are talking about. History is full of socialists and communists who murdered and hated other socialists and communists because they all see/saw each other as threats...

Heck, Hitler killed MANY NAZIS TOO...


...
When we think of Nazi killing, genocide immediately comes to mind, particularly that of "6,000,00 Jews." But they also murdered for reasons other than race or religion. For one, the Nazis slew those who opposed or hindered them, whether actually or potentially. This was why Hitler assassinated hundreds of top Nazi SA's (Sturmabteilung)4 in June and July 1934, who under Ernst Rohm were becoming a strong competitor to the SS (Schutzstaffel); or executed perhaps 5,000 Germans after the 1944 plot on his life and attempted coup d'etat. Indeed, it is why critics, pacifists, conscientious objectors, campus rebels, dissidents, and others throughout the twelve-year history of the regime in Germany, were executed, disappeared, or slowly died in concentration camps. The Nazis thus killed some 288,000 Germans, not counting Jews, homosexuals, and those forcibly "euthanized." If these are included, then the Nazis murdered at least 498,000 Germans, probably 762,000. As shown in table 1.2, this was one out of every hundred Germans.
...

www.hawaii.edu...

I guess that must mean he wasn't a nazi, according to your logical fallacy...


As for the "claim" that private property existed in nazi Germany?... How is that true when THE GOVERNMENT controlled all private property?...


...
To put it quite clearly: we have an economic programme. Point No. 13 in that programme demands the nationalisation of all public companies, in other words socialisation, or what is known here as socialism. … the basic principle of my Party’s economic programme should be made perfectly clear and that is the principle of authority… the good of the community takes priority over that of the individual. But the State should retain control; every owner should feel himself to be an agent of the State; it is his duty not to misuse his possessions to the detriment of the State or the interests of his fellow countrymen. That is the overriding point. The Third Reich will always retain the right to control property owners. If you say that the bourgeoisie is tearing its hair over the question of private property, that does not affect me in the least. Does the bourgeoisie expect some consideration from me?… Today’s bourgeoisie is rotten to the core; it has no ideals any more; all it wants to do is earn money and so it does me what damage it can. The bourgeois press does me damage too and would like to consign me and my movement to the devil.

Hitler's interview with Richard Breiting, 1931, published in Edouard Calic, ed., “First Interview with Hitler, 4 May 1931,” Secret Conversations with Hitler: The Two Newly-Discovered 1931 Interviews, New York: John Day Co., 1971, pp. 31-33. Also published under the title Unmasked: Two Confidential Interviews with Hitler in 1931 , published by Chatto & Windus in 1971

www.reddit.com...

Again, to point out your fallacious argument about "but people retained the right to private property in nazi Germany..."

BTW, i can quote wikipedia too...


...
But the State should retain control; every owner should feel himself to be an agent of the State; it is his duty not to misuse his possessions to the detriment of the State or the interests of his fellow countrymen. That is the overriding point. The Third Reich will always retain the right to control property owners. If you say that the bourgeoisie is tearing its hair over the question of private property, that does not affect me in the least. Does the bourgeoisie expect some consideration from me?

en.wikiquote.org...


edit on 23-3-2019 by ElectricUniverse because: correct and add excerpt.



new topics

top topics



 
68
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join