Socialism: Legal Plunder Premised on False Philanthropy

a reply to: chr0naut

The right-wingers, however, don't even want to mention the progenitors of their ideas, the Nazi's and the Fascists. They want to claim that they are the moderates and the rationalists, which are precisely the same claims made by the ultra right theorists upon which their philosophy is

I’m not sure you really know which party you are talking about. Gun control ... Nazis ... who is doing that today ? Totalitarian controls and demanding people conform to their ideals you know like animal rights, redistribution of income, excessive taxation parading as social justice... who is doing that ? We’ve seen the rise of liberal fascism as described in Jonah Goldberg’s book Liberal Fascism.

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: TheSteppenwolf

And the other side, the Facists and Nazi's and so many other right wing governments and systems, they never took whatever they wanted from the rightful owners?

I'll call BS on Bastiat, with the evidence of a history he never experienced.

You still beleive NAZI's are right wing? Wow, after all the Social justice in Germany for the Gays and Jews, Oh wait! Their Marxism was hidden at all.

Yes, Nazi's are (and were) extreme right-wing.

They were ultra-nationalists who described those without blond hair and blue eyes as inferior and degenerate. To back this up, they went all-out to purge these people from Germany and Europe, despite the fact that these other races had inhabited Germany in relative peace for over 1,000 years.

To achieve this 'purge' they systematically exterminated many millions of homosexuals, gypsies, and Jews. This they described as "the final solution to the Jewish problem". You might recognize the phrase from Pink Floyd's "The Wall" album where it mentions the "the final solution to strengthen the strain".

None of this is fiction, it is one of the darkest periods of human history and I wonder at how you could have gone through normal schooling, or even watching "The History Channel" without learning about it.

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
a reply to: chr0naut

The right-wingers, however, don't even want to mention the progenitors of their ideas, the Nazi's and the Fascists. They want to claim that they are the moderates and the rationalists, which are precisely the same claims made by the ultra right theorists upon which their philosophy is

I’m not sure you really know which party you are talking about. Gun control ... Nazis ... who is doing that today ? Totalitarian controls and demanding people conform to their ideals you know like animal rights, redistribution of income, excessive taxation parading as social justice... who is doing that ? We’ve seen the rise of liberal fascism as described in Jonah Goldberg’s book Liberal Fascism.

Nazi gun control argument From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Nazi's were ultra-right wing.

Adolf Hitler was a totalitarian dictator.

Adolf Hitler was an ultra-nationalist.

The Nazi party were ultra-nationalist.

The Nazi party was extremely racist, to the point of killing millions of people, not because the people had done anything wrong, but for the random accident of being born to a non-German race.

The Nazi's were anti-Communist.

The Nazi's were pro Fascist.

The book "Liberal Fascism" is not historically accurate or true. It's like where people say that God is the bad guy and the Devil is good, or that black is white, or talk about the World Series (which isn't). It is just contrarian and untrue.

Read some real history and find out.

“Think how we think or we’ll attack you”

The very definition of fascism.

Also the very mantra of the left today.

Nazis are bad but somehow Islam is ok????? How the hell does that work??

Don a hijab to show solidarity with Islam, what kind of pathetic failure of a leader would do something like that?? Oh that’s right. The most pathetically inept ‘leader’ in the world today, that’s who.
I wonder if she’d don a swastika arm band if the attack was in a skinhead gang-pad?

a reply to: chr0naut

Read some real history and find out.

Here's some "real history" right from the horses mouth:

Thus we can see the two great differences between races: Aryanism means ethical perception of work and that which we today so often hear – socialism, community spirit, common good before own good. Jewry means egoistic attitude to work and thereby mammonism and materialism, the opposite of socialism.

"Why We Are Anti-Semites," August 15, 1920 speech in Munich at the Hofbräuhaus.

Because it seems inseparable from the social idea and we do not believe that there could ever exist a state with lasting inner health if it is not built on internal social justice, and so we have joined forces with this knowledge.

"Why We Are Anti-Semites," August 15, 1920 speech in Munich at the Hofbräuhaus.

Since we are socialists, we must necessarily also be antisemites because we want to fight against the very opposite: materialism and mammonism… How can you not be an antisemite, being a socialist! (Hear, hear) There comes a time when it will be obvious that socialism can only be carried out accompanied by nationalism and antisemitism. The three concepts are inseparably connected. They are the foundations of our program and therefore we call ourselves National Socialists. (Cheers)

"Why We Are Anti-Semites," August 15, 1920 speech in Munich at the Hofbräuhaus.

We are convinced that socialism in the right sense will only be possible in nations and races that are Aryan, and there in the first place we hope for our own people and are convinced that socialism is inseparable from nationalism. (Loud applause)

"Why We Are Anti-Semites," August 15, 1920 speech in Munich at the Hofbräuhaus.

Hitler was always a socialist, through and through.

originally posted by: Breakthestreak
“Think how we think or we’ll attack you”

The very definition of fascism.

Also the very mantra of the left today.

Nazis are bad but somehow Islam is ok????? How the hell does that work??

Because Islam is mostly against terrorism, like Christianity is mostly against Nazism.

Don a hijab to show solidarity with Islam, what kind of pathetic failure of a leader would do something like that?? Oh that’s right. The most pathetically inept ‘leader’ in the world today, that’s who.
I wonder if she’d don a swastika arm band if the attack was in a skinhead gang-pad?

Has it ever occurred to you that the allegations that Trump was collaborating with the Russians is saying that they thought he was a Commie - a leftist?

originally posted by: TheSteppenwolf
a reply to: chr0naut

Read some real history and find out.

Here's some "real history" right from the horses mouth:

Thus we can see the two great differences between races: Aryanism means ethical perception of work and that which we today so often hear – socialism, community spirit, common good before own good. Jewry means egoistic attitude to work and thereby mammonism and materialism, the opposite of socialism.

"Why We Are Anti-Semites," August 15, 1920 speech in Munich at the Hofbräuhaus.

Because it seems inseparable from the social idea and we do not believe that there could ever exist a state with lasting inner health if it is not built on internal social justice, and so we have joined forces with this knowledge.

"Why We Are Anti-Semites," August 15, 1920 speech in Munich at the Hofbräuhaus.

Since we are socialists, we must necessarily also be antisemites because we want to fight against the very opposite: materialism and mammonism… How can you not be an antisemite, being a socialist! (Hear, hear) There comes a time when it will be obvious that socialism can only be carried out accompanied by nationalism and antisemitism. The three concepts are inseparably connected. They are the foundations of our program and therefore we call ourselves National Socialists. (Cheers)

"Why We Are Anti-Semites," August 15, 1920 speech in Munich at the Hofbräuhaus.

We are convinced that socialism in the right sense will only be possible in nations and races that are Aryan, and there in the first place we hope for our own people and are convinced that socialism is inseparable from nationalism. (Loud applause)

"Why We Are Anti-Semites," August 15, 1920 speech in Munich at the Hofbräuhaus.

Hitler was always a socialist, through and through.

Were the Nazis Socialists? - Encyclopedia Britannica

Also, Hitler's repeated confessions of anti-semitism are far worse crimes than suggestions of socialism. His anti-semitism led to the extermination of millions of people.

It's like someone saying that they shouldn't be given a speeding fine because they were sexually abusing an eight yer old child to death at the time.

a reply to: chr0naut

Hitler declared himself a socialist, said it was inseparable from anti-semitism, said it would only work in Aryan countries. He was anti-capitalist. He was anti-liberal.

He was just another in a long line of socialist dictators, duped by his own false philanthropy.

originally posted by: TheSteppenwolf

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: TheSteppenwolf

And the other side, the Facists and Nazi's and so many other right wing governments and systems, they never took whatever they wanted from the rightful owners?

I'll call BS on Bastiat, with the evidence of a history he never experienced.

I don’t think any of this has to do with left and right, rather slavery and freedom.

I see this clearly.

Do what we say or else in a land of freedom is a contradiction.

Do what we equally agree on, using a form of a Republic, is more fair than a Dictator with no balance of power.

These people want us to do what we are told and suffer their unlawful judgement and the kangaroo courts of fake news masquerading as truth.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: ScepticScot

If by real democracy you mean pure democracy, that system is simply tyranny masquerading under another another name. No, there aren't many pure democracies and for good reason.

No I mean democracy in the modern common usage.

Whats the difference anyway...do you not find the modern democracy more a tyranny than the Republic of our Founding Fathers ? Democracy today is being clubbed and jailed because you got someone’s gender wrong .... oh pardon me, I mean misgendering someone...it’s just as barbaric as Game of Thrones. What some don’t understand is that Game of Thrones today just goes by different names but it’s the same barbaric power struggles for control, only today it’s a powerful central government in collusion with powerful corporations. What difference the name? A rose by any other name... Shakespeare was brilliant in his day.

The early United States predominately restricted voting to white male property owners so I would think its safe to say the US is more democratic now.

But those same early founding members of society also set it that we could change with the times if enough people agreed to make the change. Each State would have a say in the change and if they could not agree, then no changes. It seems we changed in a lot of ways, legally. In so doing we used the concept of Free people SHOULD BE ABLE to vote, etc. We grew to include all races and creeds.

Some would take advantage of our kindness in a negative way.

originally posted by: TheSteppenwolf
a reply to: chr0naut

Hitler declared himself a socialist, said it was inseparable from anti-semitism, said it would only work in Aryan countries. He was anti-capitalist. He was anti-liberal.

He was just another in a long line of socialist dictators, duped by his own false philanthropy.

Read a fcking history book? He also promised the Russians peace, why should we trust this mustache and his ramblings now?
Do you know how IGFarben plays into this anti-capitalist theory of yours? No? Me neither.

I'd like to read your take on quantitative easing now. You've got one?

originally posted by: PublicOpinion

originally posted by: TheSteppenwolf
a reply to: chr0naut

Hitler declared himself a socialist, said it was inseparable from anti-semitism, said it would only work in Aryan countries. He was anti-capitalist. He was anti-liberal.

He was just another in a long line of socialist dictators, duped by his own false philanthropy.

Read a fcking history book? He also promised the Russians peace, why should we trust this mustache and his ramblings now?
Do you know how IGFarben plays into this anti-capitalist theory of yours? No? Me neither.

I'd like to read your take on quantitative easing now. You've got one?

Read the words from Hitler’s mouth.

“Since we are socialists, we must necessarily also be antisemites because we want to fight against the very opposite: materialism and mammonism… How can you not be an antisemite, being a socialist!”

a reply to: PublicOpinion

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

You don't like it when Hitler's own words go against what you want to believe about him, so now he cannot be trusted? Own it. The Nazis all believed they were marching the path of socialism. They were creating a socially just state in their image.

Looking around the real world, those cultures that have the best luck with heavily socialist structures or high welfare states are also highly heterogenous which is the kind of state the Nazis were seeking to create.

Looking at most of the communist countries in the world, they use heavy amounts of propaganda and information control to attempt to foster high rates of nationalism. In order to get the people to accept the deteriorating conditions of the state and high level of social sacrifice the central planning creates, the people have to have a reason which usually ends up being sacrifice for the state/leader in opposition to the "other" which usually ends up being another country and/or the world.

So these countries have be nationalist to some degree. Even the EU is trying to pivot to a nationalist stance lately with Merkel starting to beat the drum of Russia, China, and the US being the enemies of the EU. Distract the people from their problems and create a reason why those problems exist in the form of an "other" (btw, the "other" happened to be undesirables like the Jews, gays, Roma, mental/physical defectives and other such social undesirables in Germany).

a reply to: ketsuko

What is it that I should own now, the words of a liar or the fact that he went for socialist unions first?

You see the Night of the Long Knives as some sort of pro-Trumpian anti-antifa coup or what? Sure. Why not! Just gimme a heads up once you're ready for your final solution, I could hook you up with some good plumbing!

a reply to: TheSteppenwolf

Read the words from Hitler’s mouth.

Why? I can't possibly take you seriously when you need to rely on Hitlers lies for your little piece of spin. Just saying... you're probably better off with your further backwards leaning approach from the OP.

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: ketsuko

What is it that I should own now, the words of a liar or the fact that he went for socialist unions first?

You see the Night of the Long Knives as some sort of pro-Trumpian anti-antifa coup or what? Sure. Why not! Just gimme a heads up once you're ready for your final solution, I could hook you up with some good plumbing!

“Socialist unions”? The only socialist union was the German Labour Front.

a reply to: TheSteppenwolf

Nice joke, I'm still laughing.

en.wikipedia.org...

So, back to my quantitative easing question: socialism for the rich or not?

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: TheSteppenwolf

Read the words from Hitler’s mouth.

Why? I can't possibly take you seriously when you need to rely on Hitlers lies for your little piece of spin. Just saying... you're probably better off with your further backwards leaning approach from the OP.

Right, just the socialist part was a lie, the rest about anti-semitism was all true. I like how you get to pick and choose.

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: TheSteppenwolf

Nice joke, I'm still laughing.

en.wikipedia.org...

So, back to my quantitative easing question: socialism for the rich or not?

Yes, a literal socialist union.

a reply to: TheSteppenwolf

He lied about many things, but I don't expect you to blast through the Bollocks when you can't even differentiate between actually socialist worker unions and the later 'Arbeiterfront' under the NSDAP.

Kinda funny though.