Gorfias: But that action shouldn't include the basic take-over of society. The government shouldn't be running car companies and attacking the nation's healthcare system, etc.
"Attacking"? Are you for real? As opposed to some people I could name, your current administration is trying to change it for the better, so that people who need coverage actually get that coverage. You know, in a public healthcare system your health is a concern, in a private healthcare system it's a problem.
Sure, a government should not run car companies, but comparing health to cars is just...well, it sours the taste in my mouth. Excuse me.
Fairly mainstream conservative thought is that the USA Left's healthcare agenda has nothing to do with making things better, but is about power and control. Scares the hell out of us.
That's because "fairly mainstream conservative thought" is bugfuck insane. The utter intellectual bankruptcy of the American right wing these days is simply astonishing. Completely. Bonkers.
North Korea might not be a "right-wing" state, but it certainly isn't a "left-wing" one.
Gorfias: Can we agree that if Hayek or Gus Savage or National Review Magazine or Ann Coulter or the Heritage Foundation or the Center for Economic Freedom agree that the National Socialists were materially no different in practice from the Khmer Rouge, than, that thought is not fringe among conservatives?
No.
Earlier, a list was posted of the factors that make up what the left would describe as fascist.
Correction: it is what everyone who does not make money demonizing liberals would describe as fascist.
I thought I did a good job of showing most of what was listed fits a leftist totalitarian state as well.
No you didn't. You used the dogma paradigm of asserting that because you could find an exception to a rule (at least as you imagined it), and this you believe invalidates the whole.
Probably can't do that: the column was written way before the interent. Are you writing I'm bullshit and making up that there was a column, or that the column was bullshit and wrong?
Sounds like the column was bullshit.
You and I both agreed that financial disaster provided the opportunity for Communists and the National Socialists to come to power.
Well at least you're finally making a distinction between communists and Nazism. Except the faction wasn't called The Communists with capitals. It was the Bolsheviks. There were several other communist factions in Russia at the time who were much less extreme than Lenin and his followers and they got the crap kicked out of them when the Bolsheviks took over.
And we agreed on nothing. I simply explained that politicians are prone to exploiting fears in current events to leverage themselves into power. I thought that was the general definition of a politician.
I am concerned that without major changes in how our government and society function, we will, as the CBO predicts, go bankrupt. If and when the USA goes bankrupt, the same sort of people will get this sort of opportunity again. Not something I want happening.
You are assuming that they would have the resources, propaganda, leaders, and strategy to succeed at doing so. Right now it's mostly the Democrats and Republicans. The biggest problem we have to worry about with Democrats is that the spineless wussies will win a majority and still kowtow to the Republicans. And the worst we have to worry about from the Republicans is already happening thanks to those Tea Party buffoons.
But that action shouldn't include the basic take-over of society. The government shouldn't be running car companies and attacking the nation's healthcare system, etc.
I'd take that more to heart were they actually doing either.
Add insult to injury, the biggest problem this nation faces, insolvency, is caused by government. We should Amend the constituion: Representatives are ineligable for re-election unless they pass balanced budgets. Our budget crisis would be over in a day.
Well then anyone reading this will understand that you can't even answer a simple question on the subject.
Anyone reading this will note I asked you to start a thread on this unrelated topic where you and I currently have no controversy and I'd be happy to post. If you think a simple answer such as "debts exceed assets" is a full answer to what can be a very complex topic... really? Not really. Your spoiler suggest you have some idea of the complexity of this issue.
I don't doubt you did study this and that in the vast majority of academic circles, Hitler and the Nationalist Socialists are considered right wing.
Why don't you put any weight behind academia?
I mean for fuck sake, Ian Kershaw has been studying the Nazis for getting on FIFTY YEARS.
[b]
Wow. 50 years of getting it wrong! I put little weight behind Academia for a number of reasons, much of it having to do with group think. Good book on the topic is "The Closing of the American Mind". "Bloom argues that the social and political crises of contemporary America are part of a larger intellectual crisis: the result of a dangerous narrowing of curiosity and exploration by the university elites." Kershaw, no doubt, lives a comfortable life with a comfortable mind surrounded by people that think just like him, spouting off sophmoric convention rather than being truly curious and analytical.
The left's 'Healthcare Agenda' is basically this:
They look around the USA, and note:
1. We don't have full coverage. 2. Coverage doesn't often cover it all anyway. 3. It costs loads.
The agenda I write of has to do with those leading and actually governing for the Left. I don't doubt the average leftist citizen wants better healthcare for all. I think there are 2 ways to do that: 1) Single Payer 2) A much freer, more market driven health coverage/care system.
While I'd prefer 2, I can see why you would want 1. What did we get? A 2000 page plus rube goldberg scheme that is likely unconstitutional, and from what I'm reading, makes things worse, while invading my privacy and giving more power to centralized planners.
I mean for fuck sake, Ian Kershaw has been studying the Nazis for getting on FIFTY YEARS.
[b]
Wow. 50 years of getting it wrong!
And this is the problem with the conservative mind in a nutshell: "The experts are wrong, since they don't blame everything bad in the history of ever on liberals!"
The gist of your argument seems to be, "He's wrong because Anne Coulter said so." Am I far off?
Kershaw, no doubt, lives a comfortable life with a comfortable mind surrounded by people that think just like him, spouting off sophmoric convention rather than being truly curious and analytical.
And none of the people you revere are like that? You really think you're a good enough liar to convince me of that? Try it and see what happens.
It seems to me that the sole reason you distrust academia is because they're telling you things you don't like to hear. So you go and make experts out of frauds, charlatans, and private think tanks because they've made an entire industry out of telling you what you want to hear.
You accuse academia of being a victim of group think, but you're still thinking in lockstep with a group yourself, just one that's more palatable to you.
The gist of your argument seems to be, "He's wrong because Anne Coulter said so." Am I far off?
Kershaw, no doubt, lives a comfortable life with a comfortable mind surrounded by people that think just like him, spouting off sophmoric convention rather than being truly curious and analytical.
And none of the people you revere are like that? You really think you're a good enough liar to convince me of that? Try it and see what happens.
It seems to me that the sole reason you distrust academia is because they're telling you things you don't like to hear. So you go and make experts out of frauds, charlatans, and private think tanks because they've made an entire industry out of telling you what you want to hear.
You accuse academia of being a victim of group think, but you're still thinking in lockstep with a group yourself, just one that's more palatable to you.
That's a pretty great description of both the goal and the target audience of National Review.
DrVornoff: It seems to me that the sole reason you distrust academia is because they're telling you things you don't like to hear.
Game, set, match. This is EXACTLY the general right-wing problem with academia. Anything that does not completely fall in line with their worldview simply must be dismissed, simply because of the average conservative's almost pathological need for self-affirmation. This kind of anti-intellectual nonsense is what allows them to believe things that are false on an almost metaphysical level.
I mean for fuck sake, Ian Kershaw has been studying the Nazis for getting on FIFTY YEARS.
[b]
Wow. 50 years of getting it wrong!
And this is the problem with the conservative mind in a nutshell: "The experts are wrong, since they don't blame everything bad in the history of ever on liberals!"
The experts are wrong because they ignore the obvious or build intellectual fortresses with which to sheild their fantasy world from intrussion of reality.
Your polarizing statement notwithstanding, I understand right wingers have caused evil in human history. I just don't count Hitler among them: he was a leftist, or at least used leftism to get to power.
And this is the problem with the conservative mind in a nutshell: "The experts are wrong, since they don't blame everything bad in the history of ever on liberals!"
The experts are wrong because they ignore the obvious or build intellectual fortresses with which to sheild their fantasy world from intrussion of reality.
Your polarizing statement notwithstanding, I understand right wingers have caused evil in human history. I just don't count Hitler among them: he was a leftist, or at least used leftism to get to power.
The idea that Hitler was "a leftist" is patently absurd.
And this is the problem with the conservative mind in a nutshell: "The experts are wrong, since they don't blame everything bad in the history of ever on liberals!"
The experts are wrong because they ignore the obvious or build intellectual fortresses with which to sheild their fantasy world from intrussion of reality.
Your polarizing statement notwithstanding, I understand right wingers have caused evil in human history. I just don't count Hitler among them: he was a leftist, or at least used leftism to get to power.
The idea that Hitler was "a leftist" is patently absurd.
To be fair you are quoting someone that has just also stated that experts are wrong because they ignore reality. It is one of the funniest things I have read in a while.
Remember you have to look at it from the right wing point of view. Hitler was evil, therefore Hitler was a liberal. It makes perfect sense, any evidence against this view is a liberal conspiracy from all those damn liberal historians who only tried to make Hitler look right wing.
I just don't count Hitler among them: he was a leftist, or at least used leftism to get to power.
You're wrong. Wronger than I ever thought it was possible to get it wrong. Now, for the sake of my own sanity I shall assume that you're in fact trolling, because believing just for a second a human being can be this obtuse, this self-absorbed, this willingly ignorant, will make me start wishing Marvin the Martian comes by and succeeds in his Earth-shattering kaboom.
If this is the face of american conservatism, "stupid" is an understatement along the lines of "A tactical nuclear strike can be somewhat noisy." Because nothing, nothing is stupider than willingly disregarding people with expertise in their field and saying they're wrong because your uncle and some charlatan disagree with them. Now excuse me, I need to get a spatula and scrape up the remnants of my intestinal tract that I threw up when I read the last page and a half of this discussion.
PS: Hitler got to power through election. You know, people voted for him.
I just don't count Hitler among them: he was a leftist, or at least used leftism to get to power.
1) I shall assume that you're in fact trolling, because believing just for a second a human being can be this obtuse, this self-absorbed, this willingly ignorant,.....
2) willingly disregarding people with expertise....
3) PS: Hitler got to power through election. You know, people voted for him.
1) Err, um... I know you are but what am I? *confused look... does rasberry* 2) You ever hear of that study where, through simulation, they get their test subjects to think they've murdered someone upon orders of someone that appeared to be an expert (the testers wore lab coats and held clip boards. The subjects gave increasingly powerful electric shocks to someone in another room till he died... they were lead to believe.) I hope I am never at your mercy under such conditions. Expertise is great, but you have to think for yourself too. 3) And what was he promising to get elected. Socialism....
"His concern for social betterment ('true Socialism') as a necessary prerequisite to the acceptance of his ideals by the masses."
Argh. This thread is about "low thinking" from Conservatives. I don't think we're the ones saying, "just be sheeple, believe and do what the "experts" say... baaaah baaaah, baaaah."
Remember you have to look at it from the right wing point of view. Hitler was evil, therefore Hitler was a liberal. It makes perfect sense, any evidence against this view is a liberal conspiracy from all those damn liberal historians who only tried to make Hitler look right wing.
More ignoring reality. You write this after quoting my statement acknowledging that there have been right wingers in human history that have done evil. I don't know much about Pinochet, but am advised he was one. There is plenty of work on the topic that Hitler was a leftist. Most of it is common sense. Unfortunately, low thinkers cling to hiearchy, unthinkly cling to status quo thinking, obeying their percieved place in the intellectual order, supine to intellectual "authorities". Pathetic.
1) Did you just...you did. That one might have sounded witty to me about 23 years ago.
2) Awww, Stanley Milgram, how cute. Yes, I'm quite familiar with that experiment. Actually watched footage from it for an assignment somewhere along the path of my education. An interesting case, really. Too bad you haven't the slightest clue what it was about and how it was done.
3) Quoting out of context? Yes, nothing new. *cough*His violent animosity to Marxian Socialism as in essence opposed to his ideal of a nationally minded people and a racial state.*cough*
1) Did you just...you did. That one might have sounded witty to me about 23 years ago.
2) Awww, Stanley Milgram, how cute. Yes, I'm quite familiar with that experiment. Actually watched footage from it for an assignment somewhere along the path of my education. An interesting case, really. Too bad you haven't the slightest clue what it was about and how it was done.
3) Quoting out of context? Yes, nothing new. *cough*His violent animosity to Marxian Socialism as in essence opposed to his ideal of a nationally minded people and a racial state.*cough*
1) only reasonable response to your hissy fit. 2) Really? I don't think you understood it at all. 3) I understand North Korea is also no longer "Marxist". They have their own brand of super centralized leftist authoritarian regime of misery and tyranny.
2) Really? I don't think you understood it at all.
You know, a parallel could be made between that experiment and the behavior of one "Gorfias" at the behest of a self-proclaimed authority known as "Ann Coulter", for example.
Ah, I understood the thing well enough if my professor for that subject is to be believed-
-wait what am I talking about, he's an expert in the field, of course he's full of shit.
2) Really? I don't think you understood it at all.
You know, a parallel could be made between that experiment and the behavior of one "Gorfias" at the behest of a self-proclaimed authority known as "Ann Coulter", for example.
.
Really? Of the two of us, I'm not the one aghast that someone would dare question authority. I'll write this much, at least your analogy of me and Ann shows some understanding of that experiment. My advise, and I give it freely... study it some more.
Gorfias: 2) You ever hear of that study where, through simulation, they get their test subjects to think they've murdered someone upon orders of someone that appeared to be an expert (the testers wore lab coats and held clip boards. The subjects gave increasingly powerful electric shocks to someone in another room till he died... they were lead to believe.) I hope I am never at your mercy under such conditions. Expertise is great, but you have to think for yourself too.
So you heard of the Milgram experiment in passing and the lesson you took away from it was, "Experts want to kill me."?
It has been pointed out, but it's a bit disingenuous of you to accuse us of following experts blindly, except that's what you do. The difference is that the experts we listen to have actual qualifications in their field, and the people you listen to are self-proclaimed experts who's real area of expertise isn't no much politics, history, science, culture, or sociology. They're just really good at talking.
And yes, independent thought is a great thing. Which begs the question why you're letting a fat drug addict tell you what your opinions are?
Gorfias: 2) You ever hear of that study where, through simulation, they get their test subjects to think they've murdered someone upon orders of someone that appeared to be an expert (the testers wore lab coats and held clip boards. The subjects gave increasingly powerful electric shocks to someone in another room till he died... they were lead to believe.) I hope I am never at your mercy under such conditions. Expertise is great, but you have to think for yourself too.
So you heard of the Milgram experiment in passing and the lesson you took away from it was, "Experts want to kill me."?
It has been pointed out, but it's a bit disingenuous of you to accuse us of following experts blindly, except that's what you do. The difference is that the experts we listen to have actual qualifications in their field, and the people you listen to are self-proclaimed experts who's real area of expertise isn't no much politics, history, science, culture, or sociology. They're just really good at talking.
And yes, independent thought is a great thing. Which begs the question why you're letting a fat drug addict tell you what your opinions are?
See, this is what worries me. Hitler radically centralized power by promising people he would do things like, make sure a centralized government made sure the "right kind of people" would get government sponsered health care. I don't listent to "my" experts I just use reason: this guy was a leftist that bribed people into surrendering their liberty for "a bowl of rice" and used the power they gave him to murder millions. Using my G-d given reason, I make distinctions. Others, simply listen to "experts" and shut off their brains so that they can engage in low level thinking and just follow conventional thinking. The road to Hell isn't just paved by good intentions, but by such low level thinking.
Gorfias: 2) You ever hear of that study where, through simulation, they get their test subjects to think they've murdered someone upon orders of someone that appeared to be an expert (the testers wore lab coats and held clip boards. The subjects gave increasingly powerful electric shocks to someone in another room till he died... they were lead to believe.) I hope I am never at your mercy under such conditions. Expertise is great, but you have to think for yourself too.
So you heard of the Milgram experiment in passing and the lesson you took away from it was, "Experts want to kill me."?
It has been pointed out, but it's a bit disingenuous of you to accuse us of following experts blindly, except that's what you do. The difference is that the experts we listen to have actual qualifications in their field, and the people you listen to are self-proclaimed experts who's real area of expertise isn't no much politics, history, science, culture, or sociology. They're just really good at talking.
And yes, independent thought is a great thing. Which begs the question why you're letting a fat drug addict tell you what your opinions are?
See, this is what worries me. Hitler radically centralized power by promising people he would do things like, make sure a centralized government made sure the "right kind of people" would get government sponsered health care. I don't listent to "my" experts I just use reason: this guy was a leftist that bribed people into surrendering their liberty for "a bowl of rice" and used the power they gave him to murder millions. Using my G-d given reason, I make distinctions. Others, simply listen to "experts" and shut off their brains so that they can engage in low level thinking and just follow conventional thinking. The road to Hell isn't just paved by good intentions, but by such low level thinking.
Hitler. Was. Not. A. Fucking. Leftist. This is well-established historical fact, and the fact that you are simply dismissing it because it doesn't fit nicely into your "liberals are the source of everything evil" pigeonhole is HILARIOUS. You really have no idea what you're talking about.
Gorfias: See, this is what worries me. Hitler radically centralized power by promising people he would do things like, make sure a centralized government made sure the "right kind of people" would get government sponsered health care.
Did my first warning about zombie Godwin not take?
We've been through this before. Hitler was a conservative in practice. An extremely flawed, fringe radical school of conservatism, yes, but a conservative all the same. But the problem is that you are insisting that Hitler was a liberal, and that means liberalism is evil. Everyone else is saying that Hitler was a conservative, but that doesn't make conservatism itself bad. I trust you to see where the problem lies.
Others, simply listen to "experts" and shut off their brains so that they can engage in low level thinking and just follow conventional thinking. The road to Hell isn't just paved by good intentions, but by such low level thinking.
When is the last time you vetted your sources? That's a serious question. When was the last time you checked where Coulter or Limbaugh were getting their information? As much as I like Thom Hartmann, I Google the things he talks about whenever I can to make sure his information is legit. Do you do the same?
Hitler. Was. Not. A. Fucking. Leftist. This is well-established historical fact, and the fact that you are simply dismissing it because it doesn't fit nicely into your "liberals are the source of everything evil" pigeonhole is HILARIOUS. You really have no idea what you're talking about.
DrVornoff: [ I Google the things he talks about whenever I can to make sure his information is legit. Do you do the same?
Neither of you two are making anything approaching an argument. An argument re: was Hitler a leftist might be, No, he wasn't into radically centralizing government, power, authority, taking away from individual liberty and self determination. The problem is, in regards to Hilter and the National Socialists is, such an argument is asinine.
Gorfias: An argument re: was Hitler a leftist might be, No, he wasn't into radically centralizing government, power, authority, taking away from individual liberty and self determination.
Those are not "leftist" positions or tactics. They're not "rightist," either. They are the tactics of TOTALITARIANS.
And the argument of Hitler not being a "leftist" is that virtually every single person who has studied the man has said that he wasn't. But you know those experts, they don't know shit! Let's listen to Jonah fucking Goldberg instead.
Gorfias: An argument re: was Hitler a leftist might be, No, he wasn't into radically centralizing government, power, authority, taking away from individual liberty and self determination.
Those are not leftist things to do. Jesus man, do you really believe the right has no totalitarian regimes to its name at all? Why are you continuing to deny that authoritarianism is not the same thing as either liberalism or conservatism?
Gorfias: An argument re: was Hitler a leftist might be, No, he wasn't into radically centralizing government, power, authority, taking away from individual liberty and self determination.
Those are not leftist things to do. Jesus man, do you really believe the right has no totalitarian regimes to its name at all? Why are you continuing to deny that authoritarianism is not the same thing as either liberalism or conservatism?
Because authoritarianism is bad; ergo, authoritarianism is "leftist." Once you understand the thought process, those kind of questions become unnecessary.
Gorfias: Neither of you two are making anything approaching an argument. An argument re: was Hitler a leftist might be, No, he wasn't into radically centralizing government, power, authority, taking away from individual liberty and self determination. The problem is, in regards to Hilter and the National Socialists is, such an argument is asinine.
This is painful. How about these? I'll mark the ones I deem especially rightist in the context of the Nazis:
- Ultranationalistic and racist. - Corporatist, made private companies and individuals even richer. - Provided forced labour for those private companies. - Removed leverage of labour groups, destroyed unions! - Built on a framework of so-called "German traditions", using imagery of Germania, calling back to the Empire. - Hunted down Social Democrats, Socialists and Communists, put them in forced labour and concentration camps or just had them murdered directly. - Declared Communism a Jewish plot to undermine Germany! - Were opposed by the Social Democratic and the Communistic party (until the Communistic party was forced to dissolve, of course; at that point there were only the Social Democrats left to oppose them) while the center party dissolved itself due to pressure.
The Nazis were anti-left to the point that they murdered them. They were right-wing extremists of the worst degree.
This whole ridiculous notion of Nazis supposedly being left-wing is based on the lie that American Conservatives are spinning: That everything big government = left, everything small government = right, while at the same time arguing in favour of and actually installing increasingly gianormous government encroachments on private citizens, be they for the sake of moral policing or for supposed gains of safety over liberty (especially since 9/11). The hypocrisy is unbelievable.
Look at a political compass for once, Gorfias. There isn't just one axis. Even the most primitive of political compasses acknowledge more than one, usually a right/left and a authoritarian/libertarian axis.
Seriously, people need to stop lying about the Nazis. Learn some history and don't learn it from American Conservative pundits but from an actual history textbook. You're insulting a whole generation of left-wingers, quite many of whom fought back, were persecuted and often even died at the hands of these right-wing radicals.
Finally, because I like to use it to point out the idiocy of the argument: Here, have a concentration camp badge. There. Isn't that nice. The badge used for political enemies, including (but not limited to) Social Democrats, Socialists and Communists. I like triangles. Seriously, though, learn about this stuff!
Gorfias: An argument re: was Hitler a leftist might be, No, he wasn't into radically centralizing government, power, authority, taking away from individual liberty and self determination.
Those are not leftist things to do. Jesus man, do you really believe the right has no totalitarian regimes to its name at all? Why are you continuing to deny that authoritarianism is not the same thing as either liberalism or conservatism?
Those are not leftist things to do. Jesus man, do you really believe the right has no totalitarian regimes to its name at all? Why are you continuing to deny that authoritarianism is not the same thing as either liberalism or conservatism?
Because authoritarianism is bad; ergo, authoritarianism is "leftist." Once you understand the thought process, those kind of questions become unnecessary.
Extreme right might be authoritarian or not, libertarian or not. Right wingers are not about intruding into the market place. That is a leftist thing to do. I do not think you can have a totalitarian right winger as that increases government discretionary spending, not decrease it.
Skeleon: everything big government = left, everything small government = right
One cannot be a left wing right winger on any political compass. You can have a big authoritarian right wing government. Coming to power saying your going to take care of the right people womb to tomb is not a right wing thing to do.
One cannot be a left wing right winger on any political compass. You can have a big authoritarian right wing government. Coming to power saying your going to take care of the right people womb to tomb is not a right wing thing to do.
It doesn't fucking matter what Hitler SAID, it matters what he DID. And what he DID was NOT left-wing by any stretch of the imagination. It's like talking to a fucking wall.
Gorfias: Right wingers are not about intruding into the market place. That is a leftist thing to do.
And that's a complete load of shit that I can't imagine you typed with a straight face. Are you utterly fucking delusional? "Right-wingers" intrude into the marketplace all the time.
Gorfias: One cannot be a left wing right winger on any political compass. You can have a big authoritarian right wing government. Coming to power saying your going to take care of the right people womb to tomb is not a right wing thing to do.
So, instead of adressing a single point I made about right-wing aspects of Nazism, you're just going to ignore everything and re-state the falsehood. You even go so far as to cut that one bit out of my post while snipping the very next sentences that contradict the notion of the "right = small government"-myth. Well, at least you're upfront about the fact that there's no point in arguing with you. But please don't tell people that they're not providing arguments, when you simply don't want to hear any in the first place.
Anyway, just for completions sake, here's the already very simplistic political compass I was referring to.
See how there's Libertarian Left and Authoritarian Right? Two quadrants that your one-axis spectrum does not account for. The bit from your post that I bolded? That's a contradiction born out of the mistake you continue to make equating the left wing with authoritarianism or big government.
One cannot be a left wing right winger on any political compass. You can have a big authoritarian right wing government. Coming to power saying your going to take care of the right people womb to tomb is not a right wing thing to do.
It doesn't fucking matter what Hitler SAID, it matters what he DID. And what he DID was NOT left-wing by any stretch of the imagination.
Radically expanding the size and scope of the centralized government is a long way from what the extreme right (anarchist) would do.
Gorfias: Right wingers are not about intruding into the market place. That is a leftist thing to do.
And that's a complete load of shit that I can't imagine you typed with a straight face. Are you utterly fucking delusional? "Right-wingers" intrude into the marketplace all the time.
You could not be more correct. My bad, sorry. A right wing extremist (anarchist)wouldn't do that but I agree, a moderate right winger would subidize preferred industries.
Skeleon: you continue to make equating the left wing with authoritarianism or big government.
Wrong. I have POSTED that you can have an authoritarian right wing government. Right wingers can be brutal and even evil. But as you move to the right on your posted compass, you move towards anarchy (not a good thing), not the hyper-over organized society of the Nazis.
I did kind of like this perspective:
"Hitler was a fascist. And fascism, if placed onto a traditional political spectrum with anarchism representing the far-right and communism representing the far-left, fascism would fall squarely between capitalism and socialism, as it involves a significant amount of government interference in the private sector but not a complete takeover.
A Communist would refer to Hitler as right-wing, and a laissez-faire capitalist would refer to Hitler as left-wing. Both their opinions would be valid because, from their own political standpoints, that is how Hitler appears. You could even dare to call Hitler, politically and economically speaking, a "moderate"."
I would still write the Nazis are at the authoritarian extreme on your chart, slightly to the left.
You would be wrong. On the political compass Hitler is right of centre and about as Authoritarian as you can get, a bit below the 'n' on the axis label. Being right of centre makes you a conservative.
Sure Hitler was not as conservative as you, but he was still a conservative. You can't call someone a liberal just because they are only right wing instead of far right wing.
Gorfias: Wrong. I have POSTED that you can have an authoritarian right wing government. Right wingers can be brutal and even evil. But as you move to the right on your posted compass, you move towards anarchy (not a good thing), not the hyper-over organized society of the Nazis.
You're doing it again. In case you didn't know, anarchism is a left-wing ideology, a communal government-less state. What you might be talking about is anarcho-capitalism. No, anarchy/lack of government is not inherently rightist. And no, you continue to ignore my argumentation on rightist aspects of the Nazis. Feel free to adress them whenever you drop this charade.
I would still write the Nazis are at the authoritarian extreme on your chart, slightly to the left.
And you would still be wrong, as plenty of murdered Social Democrats, Socialists and Communists would tell you. Oh, wait. They were murdered. They can't tell you anything.
One cannot be a left wing right winger on any political compass. You can have a big authoritarian right wing government. Coming to power saying your going to take care of the right people womb to tomb is not a right wing thing to do.
It doesn't fucking matter what Hitler SAID, it matters what he DID. And what he DID was NOT left-wing by any stretch of the imagination.
Radically expanding the size and scope of the centralized government is a long way from what the extreme right (anarchist) would do.
Gorfias: Right wingers are not about intruding into the market place. That is a leftist thing to do.
And that's a complete load of shit that I can't imagine you typed with a straight face. Are you utterly fucking delusional? "Right-wingers" intrude into the marketplace all the time.
You could not be more correct. My bad, sorry. A right wing extremist (anarchist)wouldn't do that but I agree, a moderate right winger would subidize preferred industries.
Skeleon: you continue to make equating the left wing with authoritarianism or big government.
Wrong. I have POSTED that you can have an authoritarian right wing government. Right wingers can be brutal and even evil. But as you move to the right on your posted compass, you move towards anarchy (not a good thing), not the hyper-over organized society of the Nazis.
I did kind of like this perspective:
"Hitler was a fascist. And fascism, if placed onto a traditional political spectrum with anarchism representing the far-right and communism representing the far-left, fascism would fall squarely between capitalism and socialism, as it involves a significant amount of government interference in the private sector but not a complete takeover.
A Communist would refer to Hitler as right-wing, and a laissez-faire capitalist would refer to Hitler as left-wing. Both their opinions would be valid because, from their own political standpoints, that is how Hitler appears. You could even dare to call Hitler, politically and economically speaking, a "moderate"."
2) You ever hear of that study where, through simulation, they get their test subjects to think they've murdered someone upon orders of someone that appeared to be an expert (the testers wore lab coats and held clip boards. The subjects gave increasingly powerful electric shocks to someone in another room till he died... they were lead to believe.) I hope I am never at your mercy under such conditions. Expertise is great, but you have to think for yourself too.
Gorfias, you're the guy whose favorite political party tried (and succeeded) at bringing back REAL torture. Milgram's authoritarianism studies do NOT reflect well on your self-chosen tribe.
I feel sorry for the rest of you - Gorf is reminding me of this:
some SubGenius on alt.slack: Trying to discuss real-world politics with someone who can only see it in terms of 'right' and 'left' is like trying to talk color theory with someone who insists there are only two colors: "Red", by which they actually mean orange, and "Hot", which is a sort of reddish-purple.
Hey, Gorf, for your next trick, how about 'proving' the Ku Klux Klan is "Liberal"? How about Tomas de Torquemada and Genghis Khan?
Gorfias: Right wingers are not about intruding into the market place. That is a leftist thing to do.
Which is why Liberals are so keen on the War On Drugs and banning pornography! Wait...
Wow. 50 years of getting it wrong! I put little weight behind Academia for a number of reasons, much of it having to do with group think. Good book on the topic is "The Closing of the American Mind". "Bloom argues that the social and political crises of contemporary America are part of a larger intellectual crisis: the result of a dangerous narrowing of curiosity and exploration by the university elites." Kershaw, no doubt, lives a comfortable life with a comfortable mind surrounded by people that think just like him, spouting off sophmoric convention rather than being truly curious and analytical.
As opposed to that fearless intellectual pioneer, Rush Limbaugh?
(And keep in mind that this was posted by one of those filthy hippies at the Cato Institute - when THOSE guys think the American right-wing has a groupthink problem, it's a pretty good bet the patient already has a flat EEG.)
The agenda I write of has to do with those leading and actually governing for the Left. I don't doubt the average leftist citizen wants better healthcare for all. I think there are 2 ways to do that: 1) Single Payer 2) A much freer, more market driven health coverage/care system.
Dood, "Market driven" healthcare is what got us the clusterfuck we have now. And your argument is that we need MORE of it? I feel like I broke my leg and got taken to a medieval doctor. "The patient is bleeding! APPLY MORE LEECHES!"
That's because "fairly mainstream conservative thought" is bugfuck insane. The utter intellectual bankruptcy of the American right wing these days is simply astonishing. Completely. Bonkers.
North Korea might not be a "right-wing" state, but it certainly isn't a "left-wing" one.