Meet the Philosopher Whom Invented Fascism. Giovanni Gentile.

originally posted by: EvilAxis

It's 'who', not 'whom'. Your grammar's as wonky as your politics.

First of all, English is not my first language, but my grammar is better than most who claim that the nazis were/are right-wing. Even the nazis of today still want mostly socialist policies. Second of all, try to discuss the points being made and the evidence being shown. Otherwise all you are doing is deny what is right in front of your nose.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

I apologise for being rude. Most native English speakers avoid 'whom' for this reason.

The recurring ATS 'Nazis are lefties' theme seems fruitless and silly to me. Yes, they called themselves national socialists and individual rights were subjugated to the national cause, just like in Communist Russia, China, North Korea, etc.

As undemocratic, totalitarian regimes, they're similar, but supremacy of the Aryan race, like white supremacy, is not, and never was a left wing cause.

A system that gave individuals the right to do anything, regardless of their effect upon others, would be as terrible as one which conferred no individual rights.

There has to be a middle way between right and left.

Above all humans are social creatures. That's why we hang out here, and why we create societies.

To live a pleasant life in society we have duties to each other which, given the vicissitudes of human nature, have to be regulated and enforced by some kind of state apparatus. We are required to make reasonable sacrifices for the good of the society. Others benefit from this, and we in turn benefit by creating a better society to live in.

originally posted by: EvilAxis

I apologise for being rude. Most native English speakers avoid 'whom' for this reason.

Actually that's okay, because now I learned how to use it properly. I went to another side and researched it. I like learning new things.

originally posted by: EvilAxis
The recurring ATS 'Nazis are lefties' theme seems fruitless and silly to me. Yes, they called themselves national socialists and individual rights were subjugated to the national cause, just like in Communist Russia, China, North Korea, etc.

As undemocratic, totalitarian regimes, they're similar, but supremacy of the Aryan race, like white supremacy, is not, and never was a left wing cause.
...

If it is not why is it that democrats, and most if not all in the left to this day see Margaret Sanger as an idol? She was into racial purity, and she argued that to purify the race (she only speaks of one race) it is needed to get rid of whom she called (see? I learned how to use it properly) human waste/weeds, which in her mind included black people, alongside disabled people, and children with health problems or some other "defect." Hitler and the nazis argued the same thing as Margaret Sanger. Yet to this day we have almost 80% of Planned Parenthood abortion clinics in "minority neighborhoods" continuing the racist legacy of Margaret Sanger, and people in the left cheer this legacy.

What's more, this time around the left are kowtowing to the radicals, and agreeing with targeting people based on their race, and based on their political affiliation. Aren't "whites" a race? Even within the democrat party you will find most democrats denigrade what they call "white supremacy", which for the most part doesn't exist in the U.S. and other western nations, and this time around "white supremacy" is the excuse that the radicals are using "to get rid of us/including political opponents of any race."

So you see, your argument is easily debunked. To this day the arguments made by the left is to target yet again people by their race, and their political opposition, just like the nazis did.

One more thing. In case you didn't know the progressives/socialists/communists of the world want to implement fascism, unless the marxists win.

Democratising Global Governance:

The Challenges of the World Social Forum

by

Francesca Beausang


ABSTRACT

This paper sums up the debate that took place during the two round tables organized by UNESCO within the first World Social Forum in Porto Alegre (25/30 January 2001). It starts with a discussion of national processes, by examining democracy and then governance at the national level. It first states a case for a "joint" governance based on a combination of stakeholder theory, which is derived from corporate governance, and of UNESCO's priorities in the field of governance. As an example, the paper investigates how governance can deviate from democracy in the East Asian model. Subsequently, the global dimension of the debate on democracy and governance is examined, first by identification of the characteristics and agents of democracy in the global setting, and then by allusion to the difficulties of transposing governance to the global level.

www.unesco.org...

Socialism derived from corporate governance = FACISM

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
...why is it that democrats, and most if not all in the left to this day see Margaret Sanger as an idol?

An idol? I don't think so.
There is much in her ideas and influence to admire, but her eugenic leanings are universally reviled.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
She was into racial purity, and she argued that to purify the race (she only speaks of one race) it is needed to get rid of whom she called (see? I learned how to use it properly) human waste/weeds, which in her mind included black people...

Can you substantiate that claim with regard to black people? I don't believe she ever made it. As Ellen Chesler said,

Margaret Sanger was never herself a racist, but she lived in a profoundly bigoted society, and her failure to repudiate prejudice—especially when it was manifest among proponents of her cause—has haunted her ever since

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
Hitler and the nazis argued the same thing as Margaret Sanger.

In personal correspondence she expressed her sadness about the aggressive and lethal Nazi eugenics program, and donated to the American Council Against Nazi Propaganda.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
Yet to this day we have almost 80% of Planned Parenthood abortion clinics...

She was not in favour of abortion.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
Aren't "whites" a race?

No more than blacks are. Race is a social construct, not a scientific reality like species or ethnicity. Eugenicists tried to give it scientific respectability from the 1930s onwards, but the category is meaningless to modern genetics.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

I believe you're also confused by the term, 'corporate governance'.
What does the way a firm or corporation is governed by its stakeholders have to do with with facism? What does stakeholder theory (derived from corporate governance) have to do with facism?

Did you think they meant corporate government? That is what to a large degree you already have in America. I would agree that is a facist tendency.

originally posted by: EvilAxis

An idol? I don't think so.
There is much in her ideas and influence to admire, but her eugenic leanings are universally reviled.

LOL, are you living in a parallel world in another dimension?... Most people in the left, the large majority, are in favor of Margaret Sanger's ideas. Abortion was Margaret Sangers way to convince mostly minority women to kill their unborn, and to this day almost 80% of all Planned Parenthood clinics are in minority neighborhood. How is this evidence that the left reviles MArgaret Sanger "racial purity ideas"?

originally posted by: EvilAxis
Can you substantiate that claim with regard to black people? I don't believe she ever made it. As Ellen Chesler said,

Lies, she was a racist. Called blacks as "ignorant, and superstitious."



ATS member Loam made a close up showing Sanger's racism and eugenic goal.



libex.smith.edu...

originally posted by: EvilAxis
She was not in favour of abortion.

Yes she was. She was also in favor of forcefully sterilizing and even getting rid of disabled people, including the deaf, blind and mute.



She mentions "elimination and extinction" of whom she called "defective stock."



Margaret Sanger even published in her magazine "Birth Control Review" the eugenics plan of Ernst Rudin. The main mastermind behind Hitler's holocaust.



archive.org...

Margeret Sanger frequently went to KKK rallies to speak with white women there. Why do you think they kept inviting her?


In one of her books, "The Pivot of Civilization" on page 19 she wrote the following about her belief of what charity is, and I quote:

...
Statistics now available also inform us that more than a million dollars are spent annually to support the public and private institutions in the state of New York for the segregation of the feeble−minded and the epileptic. A million and ahalf is spent for the up−keep of state prisons, those homes of the «defective delinquent.» Insanity, which, we should remember, is to a great extent hereditary, annually drains from the state treasury no less than $11,985,695.55, and from private sources and endowments another twenty millions. When we learn further that the total number of inmates in public and private institutions in the State of New York−− in alms−houses, reformatories, schools for the blind, deaf and mute, in insane asylums, in homes for the feeble−minded and epileptic−− amounts practically to less than sixty−five thousand, an insignificant number compared to the total population, our eyes should be opened to the terrific cost to the community of this dead weight of human waste.
...

Link

This book is still widely available in sites such as Amazon.
The Pivot of Civilization

As you can see she called and saw anyone with any form of illness or health problem including the deaf, mute, and/or blind, or women with epilepsy among other people she called/deemed "deficients" as "dead weight of human waste."

Why is it that the large majority, 79%, of PP clinics are in minority communities?...

...
But to the contrary, in contemporary America, the rate of pregnancy among black women is almost three times as high as it is for white women and, though they make up less than 13% of the female population, black women have about 37% of the abortions. In other words, the family planning lobby’s argument that they concentrate their facilities in minority communities because that is where the need is, cannot be reconciled with their long espoused claim about the connection between contraception, pregnancy and abortion. Seeing that they had painted themselves into this corner, their options were to either abandon the assertion that contraception is the way to reduce abortion rates, or reverse field and start denying that their facilities are disproportionately placed into minority neighborhoods. They chose the latter.

Virtually overnight, they went from claiming that they target minority communities with noble intentions to claiming that they don’t target them at all. Then, to support this revised strategy, they began quoting a new report by the Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI)showing that only one in 10 Planned Parenthood clinics is located in a minority community.

Next, the media began publishing articles citing these stats in which AGI was routinely characterized as an independent entity. This was obviously done to give the stats an aura of credibility. It was also done despite the fact that the American media is fully aware that AGI is not an independent agency but is, instead, the research arm of Planned Parenthood and receives funding from Planned Parenthood. In fact, Alan Guttmacher was once the president of Planned Parenthood and vice-president of the American Eugenics Society.
...

Racial Targeting and Population Control

As a matter of fact the conclusion of the research states, and I quote:

...
analysis & conclusion
...
The fact is that even a cursory scan of those column stakes the allegations of racial targeting made in Maafa 21 and transforms them into an observable and undeniable reality. The numbers are staggering. As just one example,consider Texas which has 94 Zip codes with at least one population control facility. Of those, only 22 are not disproportionately black and/or Hispanic. As the charts demonstrate, similar patterns are found across the country and they do not vary appreciably by the size of the state. In Connecticut – a state thoroughly dissimilar from Texas in size, culture and geography – there are 21 Zip codes in which population control facilities are located and only six are not disproportionately black and/or Hispanic.
...

Racial Targeting and Population Control

So you see, contrary to your claims and those of PP they do disproportionately target minorities, and most PP clinics and subsidiaries are in fact found in minority neighborhoods.

originally posted by: EvilAxis
No more than blacks are. Race is a social construct, not a scientific reality like species or ethnicity. Eugenicists tried to give it scientific respectability from the 1930s onwards, but the category is meaningless to modern genetics.

So now race "is a construct"?...
Sorry to rain in your parade, but democrats for the most part are hating "whites" even if they themselves are whites. They have sided with the Marxists of BLM and Antifa, and the idiots whom are anarchists are helping them.

a reply to: EvilAxis

Sanger wanted concentration camps for the disabled, and those she called "feebleminded, idiots, etc." Perhaps you didn't know this but eugenicists had such names for black people whom for the most part could not get an education.

BTW, hitler and the nazis first sought to put Jewish people, and those they deemed lesser and unfit, in concentration camps. The idea to exterminate those people came later. Most Germans had no idea exactly what was happening in concentration camps. There were rumours, but only rumours.

...
Those who would be labeled as dysgenic, according to Sanger, should have two choices and only two choices: segregation or sterilization. What does she mean by that? The dysgenics would be removed from society if they didn’t undergo sterilization. Where would they go exactly? Sanger has an idea:

(g) there would be farm lands and homesteads where these segregated persons would be taught to work under competent instructors for the period of their entire lives.

Meaning, these people would be sent to work camps and would not imprisoned there for their entire lives. She summarizes her proposal like this:

The first step would thus be to control the intake and output on morons, mental defectives, epileptics.

What Sanger is calling the “first step” is a plan that would remove anyone with a disability, who she classifies as “morons, mental defectives, (and) epileptics.”

Then she wishes to control a second group she named “the unemployables.” Examples of which being: prostitutes, addicts, criminals, and uneducated people. Sanger’s very suggestion of segregation, camps, and sterilization shows that she sees the disabled and “the unemployables” as burdens that need to be cut loose. Her entire speech doesn’t offer a hint of compassion for those she labels as “dysgenics.” Instead, it only outlines how to rid society of them.

Sanger goes on to state that “coralling” these people, presumably against their will, is justified, because it’s all about “defending the unborn against their own disability.” She wraps up eugenics in a pretty package, saying her plan is all about healthcare, not punishment. All the while, she is really just coming up with reasons to label less productive members of society as sub-human.
...

Margaret Sanger’s Beliefs about Disability & Eugenics

Sanger's friend Doctor C. J. Gamble, a rich and very influential man whom used his fortune to implement Margaret Sanger's and his ideas. Gamble was also director of Margaret Sanger's "American Birth Control League," which later became known as "Planned Parenthood."

...
Gamble was a heir to the Proctor and Gamble fortune and a major financial backer of Sanger’s.

Gamble was also a director of Margaret Sanger’s American Birth Control League, which later changed its name to Planned Parenthood.
...
In 1947, Gamble called for the expansion of North Carolina’s State’s sterilization program saying that for every feeble minded person sterilized, 40 more were polluting and degrading the bloodlines of future generation with their defective genes.

Research from North Carolina’s Winston-Salem Journal reveals a long history of abuses in the N.C. sterilization program — abuses that Gamble consistently glossed over. According to the Journal, “Gamble wanted sterilizations to increase rather than decrease, and increase they did.”

But merely wanting the sterilizations to happen was not enough for this Margaret Sanger supporter. Clarence Gamble put his money where his eugenics views were and actually funded the North Carolina Eugenics Board that sterilized many blacks, including 14 year old Elaine Riddick.
...

Link

Sanger never repudiated Gamble for this because gamble's ideas coincided with Sanger's ideas.

If any of you had watched the movie Maafa 21 you would have found that words like "feebleminded," "unfit," "imbecile", etc were code words used originally by eugenicists to describe black people.

Below is the story of one of the black people whom was forcefully sterilized at 14 years old, Elaine Riddick, because of Gamble and Sanger. Riddick became pregnant after being raped when she was 13 years old. When her son was being delivered they sterilized her at the same time.

What's more, the eugenicists told Elaine's grandmother, whom Elaine states was illiterate and didn't understand what the eugenicists were talking about, that if she didn't sign with an x a consent form she would not receive anymore any supplements or welfare. Elaine's grandmother had no choice but to sign the document with an x and Elaine was sterilized.

Below is part of the horror story that Elaine was put through by eugenicists, and which is linked directly to Margaret Sanger and Clarence Gamble.



Elaine narrates that she didn't know she had been sterilized until she was 19 years old, and then she asked the "State of North Carolina" and they told her that she was sterilized because she was feebleminded, that she would never learn how to tie her shoes and she would be incompetent.

So you see, when Margaret Sanger, Gamble and other eugenicists were talking about the "feelbeminded," the "imbecile" etc, they are/were describing mostly black people, which is why Sanger talks so much about "race betterment," or the "betterment of THE race."

BTW, there were other code words used by eugenicists whom were worried about what races were coming from certain places in Europe, and the word "moron" was first conceived "as an insult" by an eugenicist, Henry H. Goddard, to describe certain Italians, and other Europeans whom had undesirable race traits.

I asked you to substantiate your claim that Sanger's eugenics targeted blacks as inferiors. I don't believe that part of her letter you quoted does that (although I know others have tried to claim it does).

Out of context, her remark in a personal correspondence, "We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members,” could look sinister. However, this wasn't the private revelation of a secret mission of extermination, but an inelegant voicing of the preposterous allegations she feared her family planning clinics might encounter.

She published nothing advocating eugenics for blacks (although others did at the time). Her work was favourably received by many in the black community and lionised by Martin Luther King.

Her comment about blacks being 'ignorant and superstitious' was the kind of racist generalisation most white people of that period were making.

I don't think you've shown that all the evils of eugenics should be laid at her door. More to the point though, are eugenics, as you suggest, part of a left-wing agenda? Can you name any present day lefties who advocate it?

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
So now race "is a construct"?...

It always was. Are you suggesting it has a scientific basis? Remember those eugenicists?

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
Sorry to rain in your parade, but democrats for the most part are hating "whites" even if they themselves are whites.

I can't speak for them, but your statement sounds outlandish.

“The unnatural and increasingly rapid growth of the Feeble-Minded and Insane classes, coupled as it is with a steady restriction among all the thrifty, energetic and superior stocks, constitutes a national and race danger which it is impossible to exaggerate.”

“I do not admit... that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia... by the fact that a stronger race, a higher grade race... has come in and taken its place.”

“I think we shall have to take the Chinese in hand and regulate them… The Aryan stock is bound to triumph”.

The words of a right wing figure who, if not idolised, is still greatly admired, not least for his role in saving the world from the Nazis.

As an enthusiastic advocate of eugenics and (unlike Sanger) outspoken racist, presumably Churchill was also part of this progressive/socialist/communist conspiracy?

a reply to: EvilAxis


It actually does, as it does the fact that several blacks were targeted by Sanger and Gamble's goal and were sterilized by force in the U.S.

These days people like Bill Gates and Melinda Gates, among other liberals/left-wingers, have been behind the sterilization by force, and forced abortion agendas in third world nations despite them trying to deny it.

UK aid helps to fund forced sterilisation of India's poor
This article is more than 8 years old
Money from the Department for International Development has helped pay for a controversial programme that has led to miscarriages and even deaths after botched operations

Tens of millions of pounds of UK aid money have been spent on a programme that has forcibly sterilised Indian women and men, the Observer has learned. Many have died as a result of botched operations, while others have been left bleeding and in agony. A number of pregnant women selected for sterilisation suffered miscarriages and lost their babies.
...

www.theguardian.com...

The Gates Foundations has worked with the UK government’s Department for International Development on several issues, but while they claim to be fighting "poverty, bad nutrition, etc" they have actively forced women to abort, and have forcefully sterilized people in third world countries. The agenda of Sangers, and the nazis continue with the help of progressives like Bill and Melinda Gates.

...
Our work in this area is significantly co-financed by the UK government’s Department for International Development.
...

Link

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
It actually does,

Does what?
Proves that Churchill was part of a leftist eugenics conspiracy?

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
Bill Gates and Melinda Gates, among other liberals/left-wingers...

In what universe is Bill Gates left-wing?

Citing the left-leaning Guardian newspaper's 2012 editorial about the UK government’s Department for International Development doesn't support your thesis either.

The Department was under a right-wing government at the time (as its successor is now), and the working paper informing its policy was written in 2010, early in David Cameron's tenure.

It has parallels to the more overt population reducing ambitions of the United States National Security Council's Kissinger Report, drawn up in 1974 by the CIA, USAID and the US Departments of State, Defense and Agriculture under right-wing ideologue Henry Kissinger.