another one bites the dust

[smurphy]

in theory, what you guys are saying can be rationalized. but what's the point? it seems that you are trying to equate nazi germany with democrats or liberals of modern day american politics. that's where you end up sounding like a complete lunatic.

...but i promised myself no acknowledging of freeze posts until he finally defined liberal. i really must give up. better things to do....

 

[dr. freeze]

good grief

liberals believe that government should have more power

conservatives believe that government should have less power

the farther you go to the left, the more a government looks like a totalitarian regime

the farther you go to the right, the more a government looks like an anarchy


however differing worldviews will give individuals different beliefs on different issues

for example, my worldview dicatates to me that the government should protect life of unborns despite wanting less government power whereas another worldview dictates to them that the governmet should stay out of censorship despite being a left winger

 

[smurphy]

see - there's no comparison to today's politics. liberals believe in less government control on pot, media, abortion, marriage rights, speech, etc etc etc. conservatives want less government control protecting the environment, enforcing liveable wages, collecting taxes from corporations, etc etc etc. pick and choose the issue to decide who resembles hitler more. there's just no relevant comparison at all.

 

[dr. freeze]

you are confusing worldviews with government systems

 

[redsfann]

you are the only bozo around here, Freeze.

What part of all of these examples of Hitler being a far right winger do you not understand?

Never mind...you are WAY too stupid to understand ANY of this, but I thought I'd toss it out here anyway....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#Nazism_and_fascism

Fascism, which was not afraid to call itself reactionary... does not hesitate to call itself illiberal and anti-liberal."
_Benito Mussolini


Fascism and right-wing politics
Despite the important differences from other right-wing ideologies, fascism is almost universally considered to be a part of "the right". This is somewhat parallel to the customary inclusion of state communism (and, in particular, that of the Stalinist Soviet Union and Maoist China) in "the left." Nonetheless, fascism differs significantly from other politics that are usually classified as right wing, and most right-wingers (even many far right groups) reject any association with it, just like most left-wingers (even many communists) reject any association with Stalinism and Maoism.

Many of the creators of Italian Fascism had originally been supporters of the political left, but eventually turned against their old ideas (for various reasons) and tried to develop a right-wing alternative instead. Philosophers such as Robert Michel, Sergio Panunzio, and Giovanni Gentile were originally syndicalists, a group normally identified with the left and whose tactical propensity for direct action became an element in Italian Fascism. Benito Mussolini himself was originally a socialist, though he had ceased even to claim to be one by the time he was leading the fascist party (and, indeed, many of his old comrades were the first targets of his political police). In the treatise Doctrine of Fascism (written by Gentile but approved by Mussolini); fascism is identified as being of the right and it is declared that the 20th century will be the "century of the right".

David Schoenbaum argued in his book Hitler's Social Revolution: Class and Status in Nazi Germany, 1933-1939 that Nazism contained certain revolutionary and socialist aspects (although more in rhetoric than in reality), and it was no coincidence that the Nazis often found themselves in a struggle with the Communists for the same constituency (although this can be seen as a typical left/right struggle in elections, albeit involving more radical versions of the two sides, and there is no evidence of voters transferring their support from the KPD to the Nazi party or vice versa, while the Nazis mainly took votes from the DNVP and the DVP). However, it is a historical truth that the DAP, which later became the Nazi Party, was formed in response and in opposition to a brief Communist revolt in Bavaria. While the Nazis opposed individualism and laissez faire capitalism, vigorous opposition to socialism was a founding and continuing tenet of Nazi fascism. Consequently, one of the key motivations behind World War II was Hitler's desire to exterminate communism.


In contemporary politics, neofascists and neonazis are said to be far-right. Authoritarian conservatives such as supporters of the former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet or supporters of the military juntas that ruled much of Latin America in the 1970s are also said to be far-right.

 

[dr. freeze]

lmao fascist nazi is not a whole lot different than communism in Russia

totalitarian states which oppressed people

on the far right we have anarchy

how again does fascism compare to anarchy if both are considered far-right?

 

[redsfann]

NOW we are getting somewhere....


You are correct when you take a look at the extremes of the far right and the far left. As you say, how different are the two extremes when the 'far-right' of Nazi Germany are responsible for 7 million deaths and the 'far-left' of Lenin/Stalin are responsible for 20 million deaths? The bluring of the lines is quite considerable once you move to the extremes of either end of the political spectrum.

The truth is you really can't. But for purposes of studying the effects of extremism, we put labels on them so that we may compare and contrast the various political idiologies.

One way of determining whether or not a regime is far right or far left is their treatment of religion. With your far left regimes, atheism is the official party line, thus "godless communism"

On the far right, such as in Hitler's case, he wanted to exterminate the Jews, but he looked the other way in regards to christians. Contrary to manys' beliefs, Hitler was not an athist.

Hitler seeking power, wrote in Mein Kampf, "... I am convinced that I am acting as the agent of our Creator. By fighting off the Jews. I am doing the Lord's work." Years later, when in power, he quoted those same words in a Reichstag speech in 1938.

Three years later he informed General Gerhart Engel: "I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so." He never left the church, and the church never left him. Great literature was banned by his church, but his miserable Mein Kampf never appeared on the index of Forbidden Books. He was not excommunicated or even condemned by his church. Popes, in fact, contracted with Hitler and his fascist friends Franco and Mussolini, giving them veto power over whom the pope could appoint as a bishop in Germany, Spain, and Italy. The three thugs agreed to surtax the Catholics of these countries and send the money to Rome in exchange for making sure the state could control the church.

Those who would make Hitler an atheist should turn their eyes to history books before they address their pews and microphones. Acclaimed Hitler biographer John Toland explains his heartlessness as follows: "Still a member in good standing of the Church of Rome despite the detestation of its hierarchy, he carried within him its teaching that the Jews was the killer of god. The extermination, therefore, could be done without a twinge of conscience since he was merely acting as the avenging hand of god. ..."

Hitler's Germany amalgamated state with church. Soldiers of the vermacht wore belt buckles inscribed with the following: "Gott mit uns" (God is with us). His troops were often sprinkled with holy water by the priests. It was a real Christian country whose citizens were indoctrinated by both state and church and blindly followed all authority figures, political and ecclesiastical.

Hitler, like some of the today's politicians and preachers, politicized "family values." He liked corporeal punishment in home and school. Jesus prayers became mandatory in all schools under his administration. While abortion was illegal in pre-Hitler Germany, he took it to new depths of enforcement, requiring all doctors to report to the government the circumstances of all miscarriages. He openly despised homosexuality and criminalized it.

In the end, does it really matter if Hitler was on the far left or the far right? Just like Mao, Lenin, Stalin, Mussolini and a host of other despots both past and present, he was evil personified and the world is a better place with him, and them, gone.

 

[IntenseOperator]

GW

I have two trains of thought on the AIDS thing.

1- This thing has been around, and in the air, for as long as we have been on this planet. Something, could have been the length of a day, overall temperature, (whatever), mutated it a millimeter enough to evolve into what it has become. There are many germlike things in our environment everywhere. Everyone is exposed to them. Only some people are negatively impacted.

2- AIDS and many other nasty things are in remote pockets. Whether it's origin is some dark jungle, frozen chunk, deep water, or from space, it was somehow exposed to an environment not prepared for it's existence. I don't think this is the last one. The Ebola virus is another one that comes to mind. I don't think that has anything to do with one's sexual preferences.