Who are the Fascists?

page: 24
32
<< 21  22  23    25 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 02:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
I have read bits and pieces of the commie manfesto don't like anyone who supports "theres no problem government can't solve.


And that is how you get things confused. Take sections out of context and they can be interpenetrated incorrectly.

The main problem is people thinking the state is a permanent part of communism. It isn't, it was just the political route to communism. Not all communist were Marxists, some were anarchists who apposed the political route to communism.

Again the goal of all left-wing ideology is free association. The difference is the path to get there. Marxism is a path to get there, using the political system, not communism itself. Anarchism is a way to get there that advocates direct action, and apposes the political route. But the final goal is the same thing...


In the anarchist, Marxist and socialist sense, free association (also called free association of producers or, as Marx often called it, community of freely associated individuals) is a kind of relation between individuals where there is no state, social class or authority, in a society that has abolished the private property of means of production. Once private property is abolished, individuals are no longer deprived of access to means of production so they can freely associate themselves (without social constraint) to produce and reproduce their own conditions of existence and fulfill their needs and desires.

en.wikipedia.org...

Did you not read that part, or did you just not understand it's meaning? It is well explained in the Manifesto.

“the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all”

Chapter II. Proletarians and Communists

This explains how the Marxist state system is temporary, called the transition period, the period between capitalism and free association.


(1) The communist (proletarian) revolution, far from being a simple seizure of power by the proletariat, is a secular process. In his famous 1859 "Preface" Marx speaks of the "beginning" of an "epoch of social revolution." The period of transition between the capitalist society and the society of free and associated producers is included within this revolutionary process which Marx calls, in the Gothakritik, the "period of revolutionary transformation" during which the capitalist society is revolutionized towards communism. During this whole period the immediate producers remain proletarians (whence the "dictatorship of the proletariat") and, as Marx insists in his critique of Bakunin, the "old organization of society does not yet disappear" (1874-75), (1973c: 630). Marx affirms the same idea in his address to the International on the Paris Commune. "The working classes know that the superseding of the economical conditions of the slavery of labour by the conditions of free and associated labour can only be a progressive work of time. They know that the present 'spontaneous action of the natural laws of capital and landed property' can only be superseded by the 'spontaneous action of the laws of the social economy of free and associated labour' in a long process of development of new conditions, as was the 'spontaneous action of the economical laws of slavery' and the 'spontaneous action of the economical laws of serfdom"' ("First outline") (Marx 1976b: 156-57).

libcom.org...

Bakunin, as the representative of the anarchists within the Communist League, wanted the organization of society to be changed immediately by direct action. Marx was for the political route, which was more popular within the Communist League.

So once again communism is not state control, and the misunderstanding comes from taking sections of text out context. This is what the MSM does, in order to slant a story without lying, they just mislead and confuse.

edit on 4/26/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 05:47 AM
link   
I would like to know if there is any place else in the world (besides the United States as at seems) where fascism (and especially Nazis) are not categorized as the extreme right-wing but as an outgrowth of the left-wing.
Any clarification would be appreciated.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by ColCurious
I would like to know if there is any place else in the world (besides the United States as at seems) where fascism (and especially Nazis) are not categorized as the extreme right-wing but as an outgrowth of the left-wing.
Any clarification would be appreciated.


No, America is the only place where Hitler is considered left-wing. It was a lie perpetuated by the American right conservatives after WWII to distance themselves from Naziism. Just like they appropriated left-wing terms like libertarianism, and associated capitalism with 'free-markets' (which capitalism isn't). Just check a few sources.

This is another good article explaining why Hitler was right-wing, and not a socialist...

JJ Ray: Hitler was a socialist debunked. Part one "The context of Nazism"

Again it all comes down to taking stuff out of context, quote mining, which leads to misunderstandings.


...The primary basis for this claim is that Hitler was a National Socialist. The word "National" evokes the state, and the word "Socialist" openly identifies itself as such.

However, there is no academic controversy over the status of this term: it was a misnomer. Misnomers are quite common in the history of political labels. Examples include the German Democratic Republic (which was neither) and Vladimir Zhirinovsky's "Liberal Democrat" party (which was also neither). The true question is not whether Hitler called his party "socialist," but whether or not it actually was.
In fact, socialism has never been tried at the national level anywhere in the world. This may surprise some people -- after all, wasn't the Soviet Union socialist? The answer is no. Many nations and political parties have called themselves "socialist," but none have actually tried socialism. To understand why, we should revisit a few basic political terms....

www.huppi.com...

As I said before, a persons actions does not define the label they call themselves.

edit on 4/26/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 09:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by ColCurious
I would like to know if there is any place else in the world (besides the United States as at seems) where fascism (and especially Nazis) are not categorized as the extreme right-wing but as an outgrowth of the left-wing.
Any clarification would be appreciated.


As if OPINION constitutes fact... That is the problem of people like you. You actually think that OPINION makes fact... IT DOESN'T... FACTS/EVIDENCE MAKE FACTS, and all the evidence shows Hitler was a socialist, albeit he wanted national socialism, just like Lenin wanted NATIONAL COMMUNISM on the U.S.S.R. only...



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 09:19 PM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 


ANOK is nothing but another socialist/communist perpetrating lies so that his "utopia" can be tried again meanwhile the lives of millions of people are lost AGAIN...

Yes socialism and communism has been tried and over 120+ million lives were lost in 80 years as socialist/communist ideas were implemented in several nations around the world...

ANOK, and others like him want to try to make people forget this fact, but what he doesn't know is that there are millions, if not billions of people like me who have survived socialism/communism and would rather die than see socialism/communism control us again.

ANOK, you and your brethen try to bring socialism/communism again and you will find yourself against millions of people, like me, pointing our weapons right at your face for trying to subjugate us again to the disease that is socialism/communism.

You keep trying and see what happens.

edit on 26-4-2012 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 09:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

No, America is the only place where Hitler is considered left-wing. It was a lie perpetuated by the American right conservatives after WWII to distance themselves from Naziism. ...


And like always socialists/communists like to claim they have the voice of the entire world... ANOK you speak for the world now again?...


BTW, you are no socialist/communist because you make capital/money... Right?...



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 12:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
reply to post by ColCurious
 


Oh really? so because there are differences in Hitler's National Socialism it doesn't make it socialism?...

Do YOU even understand that there are MANY different branches of socialism?...

Don't be claiming I know not the history of Europe when I lived there for 10 years and studied there.

Hitler was a socialist, despite him wanting different things than other socialists...

There are many branches of socialism because different people have wanted, or want different forms of socialism. The fact that there are SOME differences does not make them any less socialist...

Heck, another example of "in-fighting" between socialists was Lenin, Stalin, and Trosky. Stalin wanted national communism, and Lenin wanted international communism. Stalin, as well as other socialists and communists, went so far as to seek the death of other communists like Trosky because their ideas on communism were different from his own and he saw that as a threat...

Hitler, and his NAZIs were the same. They wanted their own version of National Socialism, which differs from other versions of socialism. Because there were differences Hitler saw the other versions of socialism which had some power as a threat... But that didn't make Hitler any less socialist than he was...

edit on 24-4-2012 by ElectricUniverse because: add comment and for errors.


You really just don't know when you shut your mouth about things you don't understand, DO YOU?



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 12:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by xuenchen
Sounds like a classic alright !!


1. Never admit you are wrong. Even when proven wrong, throw in a straw man argument to deflect the other person's attention from the fact that you don't have a clue. Then call him or her a racist teabagger.

2. Anyone that says anything bad about Obama is a racist. Anyone that says anything good about Obama is a true patriot.

3. Include any of the following in every OP you write: right wing extremists, anti-American, wingnuts, Republicraps, tea baggers and teahadists.

4. After including those words, insist that anyone slightly right of center who thinks differently than you is a racist who likes violence. Remember, the standards you have apply to everyone else, not to you.
Left Wing Debate Handbook



and some more liberal tricks --> The Left Hook

1) Attack The Messenger: Instead of addressing the argument that has been made, people using this method attack the person making it instead. This is particularly easy for many delusional people on the left who believe that almost everyone on the right is a racist, sexist, homophobic, Fascist who longs for the return of the Confederacy and is planning to start throwing leftists in prison camps if they let their guard down for five minutes. The charge made doesn't even have to be accurate, in fact it's better in some ways if it's off target. That's because the more whacked out the charge is, the more compelled your opponent will feel to spend his time defending himself while you continue to make your points.



Look for all these tactics to counter all Un-Left and Left-Over discussions and counter points


This is a real laugh!!!

Now right-wingers are pretending they're the victims and that the left is most guilty of the above-mentioned things... when the VAST MAJORITY of debate I've ever seen shows that right-wingers commit these faults 5 times more often than left-wingers. Without a doubt.

There's something to be said about all the multitude of studies showing that conservative thinking stems from ignorance, short-term thinking, reactionary fear, and general closed-mindedness/stupidity.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 12:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
 


The NAZIS advocated a STRONG SOCIALIST CENTRAL GOVERNMENT? really? and that is "rightwing"?...

The world is going down a dangerous path, and we won't avoid it because of people like you who do not want to face the FACTS about socialism...

It is because of this DENIAL by leftwingers that we are going down this dangerous path. I don't deny that many so called RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) have been bought by the SOCIALIST GLOBAL ELITES, and they also are to blame for what is happening...

But it is this DENIAL by leftwingers to see what is right in front of their faces that is allowing the SOCIALIST GLOBAL CABAL to realize their long wet dream of INTERNATIONAL SOCIALISM...

Unless leftwingers, and people in general wake up and accept the facts, we are going to have the worse SOCIALIST dictatorship ever created...

The following website explains CLEARLY the problem. Whether the solution they claim will work is something we will have to see. What really matters is that people WAKE UP ONCE AND FOR ALL that giving all power to the state, and consolidating all power to a few, even if they claim to be "the workers" or to "represent the workers" is a bad idea since then there is NOTHING to stop them because THEY HAVE ALL THE POWER...


SOCIALISM & CENTRAL BANKING

SOCIALISM has been the issue of the bloody twentieth century. The greatest slaughter in all human history was the consequence of the effort to settle this issue _ whether it was the bureaucratic form as in Communism or the special-law or fiat kind as in Naziism. The Nazi (National Sozialist) kind died first as the result of World War II. The Communist form (seen in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) died when it could no longer match American military production, and it became clear to all that the Soviets were being out-produced in both the kinds and quality of armaments they would need to maintain the threat that they had used for so many long years during the Cold War.

The last years of the twentieth century are witnessing the death of the welfare state, the present form of socialism, which is socialism with a democratic face. The cause of its death is the exhaustion of the capital reserve of the world, accumulated by its peoples through centuries of saving, which has been taxed away and wasted by the bureaucracies of the welfare states in the various countries.

What will follow is what we are already threatened with, the last and most evil form of socialism. Nothing approaching it has been seen in the whole history of man. This international form of socialism would be administered by the world banking system in the name of international bodies such as the United Nations.

...



How many times must this be said to you??

THE NAZIS DID NOT PRACTICE ACTUAL SOCIALISM.

WHATEVER LIMITED ASPECTS THE NAZIS PRACTICED OF STATE-SOCIALISM, IT WAS SURELY A PERVERTED AND EXPLOITED VERSION OF IT.

The Nazis EXPLOITED Socialist rhetoric to GAIN POPULARITY, because naturally, sane/rational people GRAVITATE towards Socialism because it offers BENEFITS for workers rights/freedoms/wages/dignity/safety/lives/etc.

Once Hitler and the Nazi party gained power, they ABANDONED THEIR PROMISES and gutted the unions, perverted Socialism, seized dictatorial control, and implemented MOSTLY RIGHT-WING TOTALITARIANISM which included hunting down communists, socialists, gays, liberals, minorities, gypsies, artists, activists, and so on.

For you to be so willfully ignorant of reality because you prefer to live in some voodoo fantasy world where everything right-wing is squeaky clean constitutes COMPLETE REVISIONISM and delusional/unscientific/unhistoric thinking. Give it up or you'll be rightfully labelled a troll/propagandist.
edit on 27-4-2012 by NoHierarchy because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 12:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Originally posted by ANOK

No, America is the only place where Hitler is considered left-wing. It was a lie perpetuated by the American right conservatives after WWII to distance themselves from Naziism. ...


And like always socialists/communists like to claim they have the voice of the entire world... ANOK you speak for the world now again?...


BTW, you are no socialist/communist because you make capital/money... Right?...


What are you talking about? That is history, it has nothing to do with what I support. You really would do yourself a service if you actually read some history, because all you're doing now is repeating the misunderstandings created by the media.

No I don't make money, I don't work due to being disabled from serving in the military for six years, and being used as a guinea pig, now I can't work and live on next to nothing, but thanks for asking.

As long as they are not exploiting someone else by hiring labour, a socialist can make as much money as they want.

Making money is not capitalism. Money is not capitalism. Capitalism is when people use their capital, land, buildings, machinery, to make money from exploiting labour. Under capitalism workers have to produce more than they are paid for in order for the capitalist to make money. Socialism can use money and markets. Socialism is truly free-market, because there is no state restrictions on production, or restrictions on the means to produce. People can produce what they need. The biggest problem with capitalism is that it works on artificial scarcity, underproduction, in order to create desire, which increases value, which increases prices, which creates inflation as workers demand better pay to keep up. Overproduction causes capitalists to lose money, and when capitalists lose money, we all suffer.

So they have us screwed both ways. Under capitalism we will never solve the problem of poverty and starvation because capitalism will never produce enough to meet needs. If it did the capitalists would lose money, and remove their contribution to the economy, and people lose, again.


In the anarchist, Marxist and socialist sense, free association (also called free association of producers or, as Marx often called it, community of freely associated individuals) is a kind of relation between individuals where there is no state, social class or authority, in a society that has abolished the private property of means of production. Once private property is abolished, individuals are no longer deprived of access to means of production so they can freely associate themselves (without social constraint) to produce and reproduce their own conditions of existence and fulfill their needs and desires.

en.wikipedia.org...

Again socialism is the workers ownership of the means of production. Once production is increased to the point everyone's needs are met money becomes irrelevant.

And I don't understand why you keep insisting socialism is government? Socialism is an economic system. I have shown you over and over again that anarchism is a form of socialism, and obviously does not support a central government. I have shown you that Marxism supports a temporary state system, and that Marxism is not socialism but the POLITICAL path to communism, and that the goal of all left-wing ideologies is free association. I'm guessing you have no desire to understand this?

edit on 4/27/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 03:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
As if OPINION constitutes fact... That is the problem of people like you. You actually think that OPINION makes fact... IT DOESN'T... FACTS/EVIDENCE MAKE FACTS, and all the evidence shows Hitler was a socialist, albeit he wanted national socialism, just like Lenin wanted NATIONAL COMMUNISM on the U.S.S.R. only...

I never said opinion constitutes fact.
You don't know me nor people like me and please don't tell me what I think.
I asked a simple question, because the point of view you presented here is very "special", and was interested if this is a solely american point of view.


Originally posted by NoHierarchy
There's something to be said about all the multitude of studies showing that conservative thinking stems from ignorance, short-term thinking, reactionary fear, and general closed-mindedness/stupidity.

Wow, generalizing much?
Don't judge conservatives in general merely from the bad example ElectricUniverse is presenting here, if he even consideres himself as conservative.
I know quite a few conservatives presenting themselves in the exact opposite manner you described.
Oh and fyi, the Nazis also prosecuted conservatives during the 3rd Reich.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 03:22 AM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


From the OP Obama is not a fascist. He is a Rawlism, a fascist would have to be more like Hitler was which was more aggressive while speaking. Hitler used a lot of rhetoric/propaganda which Obama really doesn't show that, but Obama speaks more from a Rawlism point of view when it comes to his political agenda...So you could say Obama is aggressive as much as Hitler was, but the views are totally different from a philosophical stand point...Obama is just good at hiding it...
edit on 27-4-2012 by KonquestAbySS because: (no reason given)
edit on 27-4-2012 by KonquestAbySS because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 03:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

ANOK you speak for the world now again?...


I know very well having lived in Europe for 25 years, and now living in the US for almost as long, that America is unique and 'special' when it comes to it's understanding of the economic and political terms. America is, arguably, the most socially controlled nation on the planet. You just don't realise it because you accept it all as normality.

If someone is claiming Hitler was a leftist, I can bet you they'll be an American. I know you're American, or at least grew up there, without even asking you.

I'm not speaking for anyone, this is not about opinion, when I say only in America are economic and political terms so misunderstood.

Not everyone outside of the US understands what socialism and fascism is, but they do know which one is 'left' and which one is 'right'.

This is not about opinion, it's historical fact. You are making claims about European history based on your American misunderstanding of terms, and European history. You are the one speaking for other countries, while not having the slightest clue about those countries.

What do they teach you about European history in American schools? Or is all your education from teh net?

edit on 4/27/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by NoHierarchy

You really just don't know when you shut your mouth about things you don't understand, DO YOU?


Wow, yeah, and who is going to make me shut up?... an ignorant fool like yourself? i understand socialism/communism BETTER than you because I lived it, meanwhile you haven't... You have been brainwashed by the pretty words and empty promises that socialist/communists ALWAYS use to lure the ignorant [snipped]
Why don't you all go to an island and set up your utopia there amongst yourselves?... Leave the rest of us alone and to do as we wish instead of trying to FORCE us to do your will...
edit on 27-4-2012 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 08:53 AM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 


You should know by now that I was born in Cuba and lived there until I was 8 years old, lived in Spain until I was 17 and came to the U.S. My family and I came to the United States to escape socialism/communism, and people like you want to bring it here...

Why don't you just go to one of the socialist/communist dictatorships that already exist?.. And don't give me that LIE that "it hasn't been tried"... YES IT HAS, and there are plenty of socialist/communist dictatorships already. If you love it so much move there. I can even set you up to live with my family in Cuba as long as you pay them for being there... That way you can see first-hand exactly what your "utopia" is all about...

You seem to claim to be a socialist yet you make money/capital, have all the luxuries that the middle class can ask for, and which doesn't exist in socialist/communist dictatorships which you claim "are the perfect utopia"...

BTW, wth does it matter if I am an American living in the U.S.?.. Whether or not you are an American you have been living here for 25 years and I have been living here for 23 years... There are leftwingers in the United States so don't give me that ignorant crap that "he only sees Hitler as a leftwinger because he is an American"...

That only shows how ignorant you are. Hitler was not only socialist by name, but by deed...and so was Mussolini, but people like you can't stand the truth because it shows what your ideology really does to the nation and people that embrace it completely...

edit on 27-4-2012 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 09:58 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 06:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Originally posted by NoHierarchy

You really just don't know when you shut your mouth about things you don't understand, DO YOU?


Wow, yeah, and who is going to make me shut up?... an ignorant fool like yourself? i understand socialism/communism BETTER than you because I lived it, meanwhile you haven't... You have been brainwashed by the pretty words and empty promises that socialist/communists ALWAYS use to lure the ignorant like yourself...

Why don't you all go to an island and set up your utopia there amongst yourselves?... Leave the rest of us alone and to do as we wish instead of trying to FORCE us to do your will...
edit on 27-4-2012 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)


Hah... and somehow CUBA is a proper example of working Socialism??

Socialism is a VERY BROAD SOCIO-ECONOMIC TERM. Yes... dictatorships like Cuba employ some aspects of Socialism, but NOT ALL. There is also Anarcho-Socialism which is DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED to dictatorships and governments in general. There is also SOCIAL-DEMOCRACY like you see in modern Germany, France, Scandinavia, etc. which are some of the most advanced, freest, healthiest, happiest, richest, and most equal countries on the planet... all while providing ample social safety nets and relatively balanced budgets.



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


You know that capitalism does not guarantee freedom either, and in fact is not freedom for workers.

Cuba, whatever you call it, is not a good example of socialism, it is a dictatorship. True socialism is the workers control over the means of production, is that true in Cuba? If the workers owned the means of production why would they allow themselves to be controlled by a dictator?

But the system they have now is still better than the Batista regime, wouldn't you agree?

But again, as has been explained a billion times, socialism is an economic system, not a political system. This is the mistake you keep making. It can have a government, and it can be anarchist.

Again anarchism is a form of socialism. Socialism is an economic system, not government. The whole idea of socialism was to break down the class structure, and authority of capitalism. Thinking Cuba is socialist just shows a lack of understanding.

"Anarchism is stateless socialism", Mikhail Bakunin.

Cuba socialist paradise or Castro's fiefdom?

The problems Cuba has is nothing to do with socialism. It's the 50 years of the American embargo. Blaming it on socialism is simply American propaganda.

edit on 4/28/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 03:29 PM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 


Anok, Cuba is absolutely a socialist economy.

Cuba is also a very good example of a fascism dictatorship existing within a socialist framework.

Sorry but fascism is not exclusive to either a right or left paradigm.



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Drunkenparrot
reply to post by ANOK
 


Anok, Cuba is absolutely a socialist economy.

Cuba is also a very good example of a fascism dictatorship existing within a socialist framework.

Sorry but fascism is not exclusive to either a right or left paradigm.


No it isn't. The workers in Cuba do not own the means of production. Unless that is the case then it is not socialism.

State ownership is nationalism.


Nationalization (British English spelling nationalisation) is the process of taking an industry or assets into government ownership by a national government or state.[1] Nationalization usually refers to private assets, but may also mean assets owned by lower levels of government, such as municipalities, being transferred to the public sector to be operated and owned by the state. The opposite of nationalization is usually privatization or de-nationalization, but may also be municipalization.

en.wikipedia.org...

Don't be confused over 'public ownership' in this context. Public ownership, as owned by the state, is not socialism, worker ownership is.

Now Marxism, the political path to communism, free association, calls for temporary nationalization as a transitional step from capitalism to communism, free association. It is that idea that the anarchist disagreed with.


The economy of Cuba is a largely centrally planned economy dominated by state-run enterprises overseen by the Cuban government, though there remains significant foreign investment and private enterprise in Cuba.

en.wikipedia.org...

Private enterprise being capitalism. Cuba is a mix of nationalism and capitalism. Unless you can find evidence of worker owned companies there is no socialism. There is more socialism in the US as we have worker owned companies.

So Cuba is not socialist. Their government is not even left-wing because they are not actively changing to a socialist economy. They have a right-wing, pro state, government. Socialism would put Castro out of power.


The original political meanings of ‘left’ and ‘right’ have changed since their origin in the French estates general in 1789. There the people sitting on the left could be viewed as more or less anti-statists with those on the right being state-interventionists of one kind or another. In this interpretation of the pristine sense, libertarianism was clearly at the extreme left-wing.

www.la-articles.org.uk...

I will link this again, maybe you will read it this time?

Cuba socialist paradise or Castro's fiefdom?

edit on 4/28/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
32
<< 21  22  23    25 >>

log in

join