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.

 

Meet the new nazis . . . . same as the old nazis

page: 2
36
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 6 2019 @ 10:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: Lumenari

National socialists... and a very specific political party.
Who is running as national socialists in America today?


We call them Democrats down here in America.

Although they were nice enough to change the name to Democratic Socialists.

Seems to sell better to the useless eaters.

And before you get butthurt about that term, that's what the Democratic leadership calls its voting base.

Kissinger, to be exact.




edit on 6-7-2019 by Lumenari because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 7 2019 @ 07:57 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

They're socialist because you've been sucked into the aoc and other radical Democrat social media fiasco. And to top it all off extremely biased right wing news outlets like to show off guys like bernie and aoc as the face of the democratic party.

As I said. There is no nazi party running anywhere in America. And no national socialist will take the top seat. The media is just loving the outrageous attention they get.

But hey who cares about logic and reason and facts. Who needs those? I'm just a dumb communist - socialist - nazi - fascist - anti constitution... ah whatever I'm everything now it seems.

dont believe the hype



posted on Jul, 7 2019 @ 08:31 AM
link   
a reply to: strongfp

Yes because we dont have independent video evidence of people being beat up while being called nazis. ClownWorld.



posted on Jul, 7 2019 @ 09:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: BoscoMoney
a reply to: strongfp

Yes because we dont have independent video evidence of people being beat up while being called nazis. ClownWorld.


They're no bodies who don't hold any sort of merit in politics. If you are comparing them to the 1930s Nazi's its apples to oranges. Just like them calling people on the opposite side Nazi's is a false statement as well.



posted on Jul, 7 2019 @ 09:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
iotwreport.com...

twitchy.com...



When is the left going to denounce this? I mean seriously. When? Sure, we see the "pearl clutchers" going "tsk-tsk" when they try to kill gay Asian journalists.

But when are you on the left going to publicly denounce them?

Just LOOK AT THEIR RULES FOR THE MEDIA!



Not that it matters much. The media never will denounce. Politicians never will denounce. They are the Brownshirts of the new Nazi Party, The Left.

Below is their site. Still reading it, but am disturbed all the same.
itsgoingdown.org...


They aren't Brownshirts. The Brownshirts were formed as a response to Communist groups in Germany.

Antifa are COMMUNISTS. Full stop.

Their methods and ideology are full on Communist, let's start using the correct labels for these cockroaches please.



posted on Jul, 7 2019 @ 09:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: xuenchen

Yea and they'll never win. They are just a small part of the democrat coalition. They are basically a labor party.


The Communists started as a small group in Russia.

The Nazis started as a small group in Germany.

The Maoists started as a small group in China.

Etc
Etc
Etc.

To dismiss them because they are at the moment a small group is historically illiterate.

Even the Founding Fathers started as a small group rebelling against the Brits



posted on Jul, 7 2019 @ 09:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: DBCowboy

Yea Clinton was running of a socialist platform... not even close. Keep that gigantic brush of yours to make broad strokes painting the Democrats as a whole as socialists.


Socialist democrats are running. The only reason they add "democrat" to socialist is because they still have to get elected somehow. They haven't figured out a way to get anointed yet.

If you want to ignore the rampant and utter fascism going on then that's your problem.

I already know how you lean and it aint Constitutional.


You do understand that socialism and fascism are different right?

You also know that Democratic Socialism involves the Democratic process in order to enact laws and policy right?

Democratic Socialism is like the 3 musketeers....
All for one and one for all.

Fascism and totalitarianism do not involve the Democratic process.



posted on Jul, 7 2019 @ 10:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lucidparadox

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: DBCowboy

Yea Clinton was running of a socialist platform... not even close. Keep that gigantic brush of yours to make broad strokes painting the Democrats as a whole as socialists.


Socialist democrats are running. The only reason they add "democrat" to socialist is because they still have to get elected somehow. They haven't figured out a way to get anointed yet.

If you want to ignore the rampant and utter fascism going on then that's your problem.

I already know how you lean and it aint Constitutional.


You do understand that socialism and fascism are different right?


Yes...
But we also understand socialism is a conduit that fascism is attracted to. All socialist systems become authoritarian and fascists given enough time.

Point out one that hasn't.
Without using a small European country with low population and diversity as an example.



posted on Jul, 7 2019 @ 10:23 AM
link   
a reply to: JohnS23

They didn't have the US constitution in their way. And also, the US isn't in shambles because of war. People seem to forget that the Bolsheviks revolution started because the Tsars entire workforce was nearly decimated, and well the story behind Nazi Germany is similar. I don't see a weak workforce or a nation oppressed at all in America right now.

Besides, most Democrats don't like the progressives that are barging their way in.



posted on Jul, 7 2019 @ 10:31 AM
link   
a reply to: JohnS23

You make a valid point.




posted on Jul, 7 2019 @ 10:35 AM
link   
What's sad is they could have written those rules in such a way as to both accomplish their goals and not come off as fascists. They are ether not intelligent or they want people to be afraid of them and their fascist ways.



posted on Jul, 7 2019 @ 11:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: JAY1980

originally posted by: Lucidparadox

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: DBCowboy

Yea Clinton was running of a socialist platform... not even close. Keep that gigantic brush of yours to make broad strokes painting the Democrats as a whole as socialists.


Socialist democrats are running. The only reason they add "democrat" to socialist is because they still have to get elected somehow. They haven't figured out a way to get anointed yet.

If you want to ignore the rampant and utter fascism going on then that's your problem.

I already know how you lean and it aint Constitutional.


You do understand that socialism and fascism are different right?


Yes...
But we also understand socialism is a conduit that fascism is attracted to. All socialist systems become authoritarian and fascists given enough time.

Point out one that hasn't.
Without using a small European country with low population and diversity as an example.


How am I supposed to respond to that?

Do you know how that comes across?

It sounds like
"Give me a working real life example of Socialism, but omit all the working examples"

There is no working proof that it would not work in our country.

The difference between our country and the others countries that have tried and failed, is that we have a way more advanced infrastructure, educates population, and an established time tested government system in place.

Not to mention.. we have crazy libertarians and republicans with guns making the rise of a fascist system here very unlikely.

It is very likely we can keep.our freedom, and democracy, yet still establish a more socialist type government here.

The only real difference to what we have know is the realization that the future of our population is urban based, so policies and laws will slant heavily towards urban living.



posted on Jul, 7 2019 @ 11:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Lucidparadox

Socialism is anti-Constitutional since it would increase the size and scope of government and our Constitution was designed to limit the size and scope of government.

But that's all beside the point.

Still haven't seen a single leftist condemn Antifa or their tactics, so that says a lot in itself.



posted on Jul, 7 2019 @ 12:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Lucidparadox

Socialism is anti-Constitutional since it would increase the size and scope of government and our Constitution was designed to limit the size and scope of government.

But that's all beside the point.

Still haven't seen a single leftist condemn Antifa or their tactics, so that says a lot in itself.



I guess I'm confused by your stance on this.

We are already half the way there.

-We already have social security
-We already have welfare
-We already have Medicare
-We already use Federal funding for schools K-University

The programs are already in place and they aren't against our constitution. We are already half way socialist. All we would be doing is expanding those programs to encompass everyone/cover the total.



posted on Jul, 7 2019 @ 01:14 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy


the public whom participate in the demonstrations...are being protected by these requested 'Rules-of-behavior-by-journalists'

Are the Antifa foot-soldiers attempting to protect citizens from being arrested After demonstrations took place...with using News coverage of events being reviewed by a Militarized/Police-State using the expertise by the DHS & FBI augmented local Police Force ?

sure Antifa is dastardly in many ways...but these listed Recommendations to Journalists is not 'NAZI' tactics, to my mind.
sure, maybe Antifa is like the old SDS or Weathermen in the late 60's-early 70's who tried to protect and help out the demonstrators/protestors/civil disobedient anti-establishment types that might Riot (if threatened)…. But trying to keep peaceful demonstrators out of jail is not anything like 'Nazi' tactics...

thwarting the Police-State thugs in DHS & the fewer, Iron-Fisted, FBI Units from trampling over the legal rights of protestors with video/camera footage as 'evidence' to prosecute the masses...is not a crime or even Illegal activity


Many Antifa actions, policies don't wash with me, but that OP list of 'recommended' protocols is Fine in my book



posted on Jul, 7 2019 @ 01:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Lucidparadox


T'is often why I am critical of our government.

We're already too socialist.


We're well on the way to the road of ruin and people think it's a road trip to the mall for more free stuff.



posted on Jul, 7 2019 @ 01:24 PM
link   
a reply to: St Udio


*shrugs*

To each their own I suppose.

I think it reminds me more of Stazi tactics, communist tactics, Brownshirt tactics.



posted on Jul, 7 2019 @ 01:38 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

I left school in the 90's with the ambition of being a journalist but the sensationalism required and hounding people aren't my style (and besides I'd accidentally started a successful Rock Club) stopped me.

While doing the N.C. Communications course required to get into the Uni course I wanted, i did a module on journalism and journalistic integrity in which we were given different missives like this, from different events, laying out the kind of rules they are given in different scenarios.

This seems fairly standard and not really sure why you have issue with it...



posted on Jul, 7 2019 @ 01:41 PM
link   
a reply to: djz3ro


If the Trump administration sent out a memo stating that the press will not report anything that would make the administration look bad, you'd be okay with it.





top topics



 
36
<< 1   >>

log in

join